Infrastructural Thinking in China: A Research Agenda (original) (raw)
Related papers
Discourse as infrastructure: How “New Infrastructure” policies re-infrastructure China
Global Media and China
The term “New Infrastructure” has been highlighted in China’s recent policies. It refers to a set of new, and expanding, policies and the discourse surrounding them which support the development of facilities, equipment, and systems derived from the latest technologies, including 5G Internet of Things, AI, cloud computing, and data centers. This article reviews China’s New Infrastructure policies, analyzing their specific discursive ontologies and how they relate to major state projects to “re-infrastructure” China’s economy. It introduces the concept of “discursive infrastructure” and argues that the policies that redefine and recategorize infrastructure themselves serve as a form of infrastructure. Key to the concept is the recognition that discursive infrastructure relies on mutually constitutive material and semiotic dimensions and dialectically reproduces both symbols of progress and positive infrastructural imaginaries. Drawing on an analysis of policy documents and other disc...
Infrastructure and Chinese power
International Affairs, 2020
China’s increasing material capabilities stand at the heart of the US-China power transition debate. The focus on material power reflects a realist definition of power based on the possession of resources. However, material capabilities do not necessarily translate into influence and do not always determine outcomes. Non-material power matters at least as much as material capabilities. This paper argues that China under President Xi Jinping views power differently from previous generations of Chinese leaders. While material power remains important, Xi has paid greater attention to strengthening Chinese non-material power, specifically structural power and discursive power. This paper examines Chinese structural and discursive power, the third and fourth faces of power, through the lens of Xi’s mega-infrastructure vision, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). It argues that power, both material and non-material, is embedded in infrastructure. Chinese structural and discursive power are amply demonstrated in the projects under the BRI. Specifically, the paper uses case studies of Chinese construction of high-speed railways in Laos and Indonesia to illustrate the effects of Chinese structural and discursive power. The cases show that China is relatively successful in wielding structural and discursive power in Laos and Indonesia, despite the differences in the two countries’ political systems, and economic and population size. Exploring the different facets of Chinese power is critical for a proper understanding of how China strives to shape the structure and discourse of the global order.
Construction History, 2023
This paper recounts the competition and interaction between the balanced cantilever bridge and the double-curved bridge in 1964-1978, which was a typical case of interactions between imported technologies and indigenous 'intermediate technologies' in Maoist China. The double-curved bridge began as a design for small rural bridges in 1964, but quickly became the mainstream bridge type in China in the early years of the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976). This was not only due to its better conformity to Maoist ideology, but also because it was employed by the young engineers to challenge the older generation who favoured technologically advanced designs. However, the inability of the double-curved bridge to meet the requirement of national defence during the Cold War led to a series of attempts to combine the features of the two bridge types. At the same time, advanced technologies were more successfully applied to oversea aid projects. The failure of a large double-curved bridge and its replacement by a balanced cantilever bridge in 1973 contributed to the end of politicization in bridge design. This story reveals the complex relationship between technologies and politics in Maoist China and the historical root of contemporary Chinese infrastructural developments.
Infrastructure and the Remaking of Asia
Infrastructure and the Remaking of Asia, 2022
Infrastructure and the Remaking of Asia offers a new understanding of how technological innovation, geopolitical ambitions, and social change converge and cross-fertilize one another through infrastructure projects in Asia. This volume powerfully illustrates the multifaceted connections between infrastructure and three global paradigm shifts: climate change, digitalization, and China’s emergence as a superpower. Drawing on fine-grained analyses of airports, highways, pipelines, and digital communication systems, the book investigates infrastructure both “from above,” as perceived by experts and decision makers, and “from below,” as experienced by middlemen, laborers, and everyday users. In so doing, it provides groundbreaking insights into infrastructure’s planning, production, and operation. Focusing on cities and regions across Asia, the volume combines ten tightly interwoven case studies, from the Bosphorus to Beijing and from the Indonesian archipelago to the Arctic. Written by leading global infrastructure experts in the fields of anthropology, architecture, geography, history, science and technology studies, and urban planning, the book establishes a dialogue between scholarly approaches to infrastructure and the more operational perspective of the professionals who design and build it. This multidisciplinary method sheds light on the practitioners’ mindset, while also attending to the materiality and agency of the infrastructures that they create. Infrastructure and the Remaking of Asia is conceived as an act of translation: linking up related—yet thus far disconnected—research across a variety of academic disciplines, while making those insights accessible to a wider audience of students, infrastructure professionals, and the general public.
The Political Lives of Infrastructure
Radical History Review
This issue explores the historical production of infrastructures as places of resistance and world-building for workers, villagers, and migrants across the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries—a period when narratives about the role of infrastructure as a conduit for modernization, development, and the centralizing capacities of the state had broad purchase. Contributions invite consideration of two questions. First, what struggles do histories of infrastructural power reveal if infrastructures are delinked from master narratives tying them to state and state-backed centralization? While development, nation building, and extraction are often state-sponsored or state-backed projects, the articles here demonstrate that modern states are not the only wielders of infrastructural power. Second, how does this decentering of the state in infrastructural analyses transform the stakes of radical political activity and the work of radical historical actors? In highlighting a different, ...
Infrastructural Fragility, Infra-Politics and Jianghu
ASEAS, 2023
This commentary responds to Tim Oakes' analysis of infrastructural power by examining the inherent fragility of mobility infrastructures and their political ramifications. It emphasizes the human element in creating and maintaining these infrastructures, highlighting the intricate interplay of political will, bureaucratic planning, technological know-how, and specialized skills needed for their implementation. The paper contends that the COVID-19 pandemic has starkly demonstrated the vulnerability of mobility infrastructures to rapid collapse. It further explores the concept of infra-politics, referring to subtle acts of resistance within these networks, which significantly disrupt their efficient operation. The Chinese concept of jianghu, representing a metaphorical space of alterity, is introduced to propose that infra-politics might evolve into alternative relational forms, challenging and potentially subverting the dominance of centralized networks.
History and Technology, 2017
In the early twentieth-century China, the imperial court collapsed and modern cities emerged. How did a new form of governance become materialized, conceivable, and understandable? This article presents a case study of street building Canton (present-day Guangzhou) in the 1920s and 1930s. Drawing on discussions of material power, infrastructures, and governmentality, it attends to the role of material artifacts in creating the modern Chinese city. In particular, it illustrates the entangled emergence and development of modern streets and urban governance, a new form of governance essential to fashioning the Chinese nation-state and Chinese modernity. The unstable, evolving process of creating a new built environment provided specific, material reference points for various stakeholders to imagine and think about the modern city as governable space. This case analysis suggests an alternative perspective to urban history in China, and contributes to the broader discussion on the symbiotic relationship between urban politics and infrastructure.
The techno-politics of big infrastructure and the Chinese water machine
Water alternatives, 2017
Despite widespread recognition of the problems caused by relying on engineering approaches to water management issues, since 2000 China has raised its commitment to a concrete-heavy approach to water management. While, historically, China’s embrace of modernist water management could be understood as part of a broader set of ideas about controlling nature, in the post-reform era this philosophical view has merged with a technocratic vision of national development. In the past two decades, a Chinese Water Machine has coalesced: the institutional embodiment of China’s commitment to large infrastructure. The technocratic vision of the political and economic elite at the helm of this Machine has been manifest in the form of some of the world’s largest water infrastructure projects, including the Three Gorges Dam and the South-North Water Transfer Project, and in the exporting of China’s vision of concrete-heavy development beyond its own borders. This paper argues that China’s approach ...