Centrality and Continuity: ASEAN and Regional Security since 1967

Security has undoubtedly been a central and continuous feature of ASEAN since its establishment. While it has modified its basic thinking on security and adapted elements of the attendant principles, aims and ways of operation to meet changed circumstances, the level of consistency is still readily observable. Centrality of a different sort has been evident, too, during the post-Cold War period. ASEAN has consciously sought to position itself at the heart of the developing security architecture in both East Asia and the wider Asia-Pacific. The Association has been largely successful at limiting competition and preventing inter-state conflict among its members and at fostering a stable regional order in Southeast Asia (and an incipient one outside of the boundaries of Southeast Asia). Broadly speaking, this stability has been aided and abetted by the policies of the major external powers in whose interests it has been, up until now. The extent to which a stable regional order remains in the interests of the major powers will be one of the great questions for the next phase of ASEAN??s life.     

Authoritarian populism and neo-extractivism in Bolivia and Ecuador: the unresolved agrarian question and the prospects for food sovereignty as counter-hegemony

ABSTRACT

The new economic flows ushered in across the South by the rise of China in particular have permitted some to circumvent the imperial debt trap, notably the ‘pink tide’ states of Latin America. These states, exploiting this window of opportunity, have sought to revisit developmentalism by means of ‘neo-extractivism’. The populist, but now increasingly authoritarian, regimes in Bolivia and Ecuador are exemplars of this trend and have swept to power on the back of anti-neoliberal sentiment. These populist regimes in Bolivia and Ecuador articulate a sub-hegemonic discourse of national developmentalism, whilst forging alliances with counter-hegemonic groups, united by a rhetoric of anti-imperialism, indigenous revival, and livelihood principles such as buen vivir. But this rhetorical ‘master frame’ hides the class divisions and real motivations underlying populism: that of favouring neo-extractivism, principally via sub-imperial capital, to fund the ‘compensatory state’, supporting small scale commercial farmers through reformism whilst largely neglecting the counter-hegemonic aims, and reproductive crisis, of the middle/lower peasantry, and lowland indigenous groups, and their calls for food sovereignty as radical social relational change. These tensions are reflected in the marked shift from populism to authoritarian populism, as neo-extractivism accelerates to fund ‘neo-developmentalism’ whilst simultaneously eroding the livelihoods of subaltern groups, generating intensified political unrest. This paper analyses this transition to authoritarian populism particularly from the perspective of the unresolved agrarian question and the demand by subaltern groups for a radical, or counter-hegemonic, approach to food sovereignty. It speculates whether neo-extractivism’s intensifying political and ecological contradictions can foment a resurgence of counter-hegemonic mobilization towards this end.     

Innovation and Alliances

Explanations for national success in science and technology typically focus on domestic institutions and policies. However, that line of research has yet to identify any particular set of institutions or policies that explain variation in national innovation rates across cases or over time. This article offers new evidence that the problem with domestic institutions approaches stems from their failure to consider international security factors. Specifically, this article finds a positive effect for U.S. security alliances on innovation. This finding is robust across different specifications and periods of analysis. While countries that ally militarily with the United States are found to realize benefits in economy‐wide, indigenous innovation, such an effect is not observed in military technologies. This suggests that alliances may substitute for being on the frontier in military technologies. Therefore, this article contributes not just to debates over S&T competitiveness, but also to alliance formation.     

Subjective Social Status,Immigrant Generation,and Cannabis and Alcohol Use Among Adolescents

Research indicates that subjective perceptions of socioeconomic status (SES) affect aspects of health and behavior. There has been little research attention to how objective (e.g., education) and subjective aspects of SES may differ in their influence on the substance use of adolescent immigrants. The present study examined whether the associations between subjective SES and substance use, and between parental education and substance use varied by immigrant generation. Data were derived from the 2011 Ontario Student Drug Use and Health Survey, a representative survey of students in the 7th to 12th grade. The sample for this study consisted of 9177 students 12–19 years of age; 48.4 % were female, 66.4 % were White/European, 5.2 % Black/Afro-Caribbean, 16.4 % Asian and 12 % other. Results indicated that subjective SES was more strongly associated with cannabis and alcohol use among first-generation immigrants than among adolescents of other immigrant generations even after adjusting for parental education. First-generation immigrants with low subjective SES had a lower probability of cannabis and regular alcohol use, but there was no difference in use between immigrant generations at high subjective SES. The associations between parental education and cannabis and alcohol use did not significantly vary with immigrant generation. The findings highlight the importance of status beliefs among adolescents, particularly among first-generation immigrants, and suggest that further research attention to such beliefs would enhance our understanding of SES and its links to adolescent health risk behaviors.