新时代中国参与中东安全治理的理念与实践

进入新时代以来,中国始终坚持共同、综合、合作、可持续的安全观,倡导构建中东安全新架构。在参与中东传统安全治理、化解地区冲突方面,中国始终推动对话协商,致力于公正合理解决中东热点问题,构筑兼顾各方合理关切的集体安全架构。在改善地区安全环境方面,中国抓住中东地区主要安全矛盾,顺应地区国家寻求缓和与发展的时代潮流,取得了促成沙特与伊朗复交的重大成果。在参与非传统安全治理方面,中国与中东国家共同提高应对非传统安全威胁的能力,共同维护发展中国家的权益。在参与中东安全治理的过程中,中国形成了以共同安全破解独享安全、以综合安全破解分割安全、以合作安全破解竞争安全等理念和经验,在中东安全事务中发挥了重要的建设性作用。     

全球卫生公共产品供给:中国角色与路径

卫生议题正处在当前全球治理的突出位置,其核心是如何更有效地实现全球卫生公共产品供给。作为新兴负责任大国,中国秉持人类命运共同体理念,积极参与全球卫生治理体系变革,成为日益重要的引领者与公共产品供给者。中国通过多边、区域、双边等多元路径实现供给,国内与国际逻辑趋于统一,逐渐形成了自己的鲜明特色;但在供给体制、产品结构等方面也存在一些不足。新时代中国卫生外交需着眼于全球治理趋势,立足于自身实力与责任,通过提供更多全球卫生公共产品来推动全球卫生领域的良好治理,为构建人类卫生健康共同体作出应有贡献。     

新时代家风建设与乡村治理互进研究

家风是传统农业时代维系乡土社会的内生秩序,基于传统社会结构显示独特的伦理约束与治理优化功能。进入新时代,乡村社会生态、主客体等发生结构性变迁,乡村治理模式亟须适应性调整与革新,家风及家风建设也需现代化转型与重构。这种现实情境下,湖州南浔区通过"最美家风+"建设,链接并作用于治理主体、治理方式、治理过程等乡村治理体系的基本要素,推动了家风建设与乡村治理协同互进、乡村善治和乡村振兴同频共振。但从南浔实践看,仍需从构建乡村道德共同体、发挥基层党组织功能、提升治理平台实效性、打造家风指数标准等具体策略上进行统筹,进一步优化家风建设与乡村治理的互进路径。     

Prosecutorial regulation in the Global South: Environmental civil litigation by prosecutors in China compared to Brazil

Brazil's successful prosecutorial civil action against polluters could be a regulatory example for the Global South. This paper analyses whether such regulation could also develop without the major political, institutional, and legal reforms that spurred it in Brazil. To do so, it analyzes China, where similar reforms have so far not occurred, but where prosecutors have recently started to initiate civil litigation against polluters. It finds that prosecutorial civil litigation in China has only a limited regulatory effect or potential. Prosecutors in China are influenced by conflicting incentive structures that reward one‐off lower level test cases with an innovation bonus, while structurally stimulating a focus on general crime fighting. Ironically, as a result of such incentives, the recent legal reform, toward providing standing for prosecutors in public interest litigation, will, in contrast to Brazil, decrease rather than increase the regulatory effect of these cases. These findings have implications for understanding how the interaction between regulatory independence, legal reform, and regime type shapes possibilities for regulatory innovation in the Global South.     

The authoritarian logic of regulatory pluralism: Understanding China's new environmental actors

Over the last decade, Chinese citizens, judges, and prosecutors have started to take action against industrial pollution, pluralizing a regulatory landscape originally occupied by administrative agencies. Regulatory pluralism here has an authoritarian logic, occurring without the retreat of party‐state control. Under such logic, the party‐state both needs and fears new actors for their positive and negative roles in controlling risk and maintaining stability. Consequently, the regime's relation to regulatory pluralism is ambivalent, shifting between support and restriction. This prevents a development of a regulatory society that could bypass the regulatory state. Theoretically, this special edition argues for a subjective definition of regulation in a context of pluralism. Moreover, it finds that regulatory pluralism need not coincide with a decentring of regulation. Finally, it highlights how entry onto the regulatory landscape affects the non‐regulatory roles of new actors, creating unintended consequences for regulatory pluralism.     

Assessing “Global Lithuania”: the strengths and weaknesses of Lithuanian diaspora engagement strategy

Diasporas participate in the home country’s development through remittances, philanthropy, knowledge transfer, investment, and political engagement. Based on the theoretical perspective of network governance, this paper argues that governments can enhance diaspora contributions by offering incentives to engage with the homeland. The paper then applies this perspective to assess the effectiveness of Lithuania’s diaspora engagement policy. Based on successful strategies adopted by other countries, the paper makes recommendations on how to strengthen the incentives for the diaspora to participate in Lithuania’s political, social, economic, and cultural life, and on how to create a better environment for the diaspora’s contributions.     

South Africa and Japan: maintaining a difficult friendship

Japan's economic and political relationship with South Africa has been characterised historically by ambiguity. Throughout the twentieth century, economic ties were underpinned by mercantilist and strategic considerations. During apartheid, this placed Japan in an uneasy position as it sought to balance a relationship of expediency with wider foreign policy objectives in the rest of Africa and beyond. The demise of apartheid created the space for new forms of engagement centred on the pursuit of cognate goals. This has seen the intensification and deepening of economic ties in particular. Yet relations, especially at the political and diplomatic levels, have also been more complex than anticipated, and in recent years, the rise in Africa of other players from Asia and the Global South has had a bearing on South Africa–Japan ties. In this paper, it is argued that two related dynamics pivoting on policy elites’ changing conceptions (or self-view) of the nature of the state they are running and its place in the wider world order help explain the post-apartheid evolution of the South Africa–Japan relationship. First, there has been an apparent shift in South African foreign policy elites’ self-view, mediated by a changing systemic context. The development and manifestation over time of a stronger Global South self-conception in South African foreign policy, fashioned in juxtaposition to what have been considered in the past key Global North relationships, had direct consequences for South Africa–Japan ties. Second, meso- and micro-level dynamics – the role of the general operations in the diplomatic (i.e. bureaucratic) arena, and the personalities and shifting political preferences of individual executive leaders – had major impacts on how South Africa engaged with Japan in the past two decades.     

Interview with Nathalie Tocci on the Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy

The Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign And Security Policy, “Shared Vision, Common Action: A Stronger Europe”, presented at the European Council on 24 June 2016 by Federica Mogherini, High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice President of the Commission, was drafted by Nathalie Tocci, Deputy Director of the Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI) and co-editor of The International Spectator. 

Given the importance of the document, we asked Nathalie for an interview and 18 foreign policy experts from around the world to comment on it.     

“Empowered patient” or “doctor knows best”? Political economy analysis and ownership

Efforts to incorporate “political thinking” into policy-making and practice in OECD-DAC development agencies have increasingly focused on the use of “political economy analysis” (PEA) frameworks and tools. While recognising the fundamental value of promoting politically informed programming, this article nevertheless highlights how contemporary efforts to this end have largely ignored another central development agenda: the ownership paradigm. Emphasising the highly donor-centric nature of PEA design and methodology, we explore critiques and justifications of this state of affairs, ultimately arguing that donors would benefit from embracing a more flexible and context-specific understanding of ownership.     

International development institutions and the challenges of urbanisation: the case of Jakarta

Urbanisation in the Global South presents numerous challenges for international development institutions. Building from interviews at nine different international development institutions working in Jakarta, Indonesia, this article examines how such institutions approach urban poverty, governance, and collaboration. The case study of Jakarta indicates that urban governance is often fragmented and difficult for such institutions to navigate, making partnership with other, often local, actors and institutions with urban and on-the-ground expertise vital. International development institutions struggle to both address the unique characteristics of distinct urban areas and to develop widely replicable practices, strategies, and platforms for effective partnership and development intervention.