Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T04:37:55.757Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Comparative Analysis of Public Support for Developing Regional Regime in East Sea Rim (Sea of Japan) Region

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2014

JUNG HYOUN KIM
JUNG HYOUN KIM*
Affiliation:
Kyung Hee University, Global Campus, Yong In city, Gyeong-gi province, South Koreajkimfirst@yahoo.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The East Sea (or Sea of Japan) (ESR/SOJ) Rim region, in which five countries – Japan, China, Russia, and North and South Korea – have their own coastal areas, is complex and dynamic, with many emerging regional security concerns. In this paper, the author tries to show that there is the possibility of a maritime regional regime in the ESR/SOJ region by investigating the level of public support, in Japan and South Korea, for the formation of a regional regime. Based on the theoretical assumptions of constructivism, the author analyzes what kinds of individual's social position factors influence the level of support for regional regime formation by conducting a nested regression model of survey datasets. The results of the statistical analysis suggest that people with a high level of national pride in South Korea are more likely to support a regional regime in the ESR/SOJ region. In contrast, for Japanese people, there is no relationship between people's national pride and the level of support for regional regime formation. The economic recession in Japan since the early 1990s has made public concern more about domestic policy than about foreign policy issues. Based on strong support of the bottom, public opinion towards regional regime formation, the South Korean government may play a leading role in developing a regional regime in the ESR/SOJ region (when the process of negotiation begins) as in the case of Japan in nineteenth century.

Type
Research Article
Information
Japanese Journal of Political Science , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , March 2014 , pp. 131 - 152
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adler, Emanuel (1997), ‘Seizing the Middle Ground: Constructivism in World Politics’, European Journal of International Relations, 3 (3): 319–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexander, Lewis M. (1983), ‘Ocean Enclosure Movement: Inventory and Prospect’, The San Diego Law Review, 20: 561–94.Google Scholar
Allen, Patrick Michael (1997), ‘Testing Hypothesses in Nested Regression Model’, in Understanding Regression Analysis, London: Springer, pp. 113–17.Google Scholar
Barnett, Robert W. (1984), Beyond War: Japan's Concept of Comprehensive National Security, Washington, DC: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Billig, Michael (1995), Banal Nationalism, London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Calichman, Richard (2008), Overcoming Modernity: Cultural Identity in Wartime Japan, New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Chicago Council on Global Affairs and World Public Opinion, (2007), 14 March.Google Scholar
Fort, Bertrand and Webber, Douglas (2006), Regional Integration in East Asia and Europe: Convergence or Divergence? New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gabel, Matthew (1998), Interests and Integration: Market Liberalization, Public Opinion, and European Union, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilpin, Robert (1971) ‘The Politics of Transnational Economic Relations’, International Organization, 25 (3): 398–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gowa, Joanne (1989), ‘Rational Hegemons, Excludable Goods and Small Groups: An Epitaph for Hegemonic Stability Theory’, World Politics, 41: 307–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gowa, Joanne (1994), Allies, Adversaries and International Trade, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hjerm, Mikael (1998), ‘National Identities, National Pride and Xenophobia: A Comparison of Four Western Countries’, Acts Sociology, 41: 335–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jervis, Robert (1983), ‘Security Regimes’, in Krasner, Stephen, International Regime, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Kahler, Miles (1992), ‘Multilateralism with Small and Large Numbers’, International Organization, 46 (3): 681–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keohane, Robert O. (1984), After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Economy, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert, Nye, Joseph, and Hoffmann, Stanley (1993), After Cold War: International Institutions and States Strategies in Europe, 1989–1991, Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Korea Herald (1999), ‘Lessons from Fisheries Now’, 23 March.Google Scholar
Krasner, Stephen D. (1983), ‘Structural Causes and Regime Consequences: Regimes as Intervening Variables’, in Krasner, Stephen D, International Regimes, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, pp. 1–21.Google Scholar
Lake, David A. (1993), ‘Leadership, Hegemony, and the International Economy: Naked Emperor or Tattered Monarch with Potential?’, International Studies, 37: 459–89.Google Scholar
Marks, Gary (2004), ‘Conclusion: European Integration and Political Conflict’, in Marks, Gary and Steenbergen, Marco, European Integration and Political Conflict, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 235–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, Lisa (1992), ‘Interests, Power, and Multilateralism’, International Organization, 46 (4): 765–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKeown, Timothy (1983), ‘Hegemonic Stability Theory and 19th Century Tariff Levels in Europe’, International Organization, 37 (1): 73–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLaren, Lauren (2006), Identity, Interests and Attitudes to European Integration, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, Joseph R., and Valencia, Mark J. (1992), Atlas for Marine Policy in East Asian Seas, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Ruggie, John G. (1992), ‘Multilateralism: The Anatomy of an Institution’, International Organization, 46 (3): 561–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, A. (1994), ‘The Problem of National Identity: Ancient, Medieval and Modern’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 17 (3): 375–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snidal, Duncan (1991), ‘Relative Gains and International Cooperation’, American Political Science Review, 1991: 701–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snidal, Duncan (1985), ‘The Limits of Hegemonic Stability Theory’, International Organization, 39 (4): 579–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stein, Arthur (1993), ‘Coordination and Collaboration: Regimes in an Anarchic World’, in Baldwin, David (ed.), Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate, New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Valencia, Mark J. (2000), ‘Regional Maritime Regime Building: Prospects in Northeast and Southeast Asia’, Ocean Development and International Law, 31: 223–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viner, Jacob (1950), The Customs Union Issue, New York: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.Google Scholar
Weeks, Stanley B. (1995), ‘Law and Order at Sea: Pacific Co-Operation in Dealing with Piracy, Drugs, and Illegal Migration’, The CSCAP Working Group on Maritime Cooperation, Kuala Lumpur, pp. 1–15.Google Scholar
Wendt, Alexander (1995), Social Theory of International Politics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Young, Oran R. (1983), International Co-operation for Natural Resources and the Environment, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Zehfuss, Maja (2002), Constructivism in International Relations: The Politics of Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar