dc.contributor.author | Batko, Agnieszka | |
dc.contributor.editor | Socha, Marcin | |
dc.contributor.editor | Zaręba, Michał | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-06-15T16:01:37Z | |
dc.date.available | 2022-06-15T16:01:37Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2021 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Batko A., The promise of neo-functionalism beyond Europe: the case of Japan–South Korea relations, [in:] M. Socha, M. Zaręba (ed.), Asia in World Politics: Past, Present, and Future, WUŁ, Łódź 2021, https://doi.org/10.18778/8220-793-4.13 | pl_PL |
dc.identifier.isbn | 978-83-8220-793-4 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/11089/42156 | |
dc.description.abstract | Northeast Asia accounts for one of the most well-developed regions with the
world’s three largest economic powers. However, as former South Korean President
Park Geun-hye described, it also constitutes a “paradox.” On one hand,
states are able to successfully cooperate on the economic basis. On the other
hand, there are a number of obstacles, involving primarily unresolved historical
issues and security concerns, that impede further regional collaboration. The aim
of the article is to analyse the process of regional integration in Northeast Asia,
with particular focus on Japan – Republic of Korea relations, through the lenses
of neo-functionalism. The essay seeks to determine whether this approach
could lead to increasing transnational ties in the region and ultimately improve
international relations on bilateral and multilateral basis. Neo-functional theory
of regional integration has been mostly applied to research on the European integration
process. Consequently, there have been few attempts of testing its assumptions
in other regions. Nevertheless, there seems to be substantial evidence
to perceive neo-functionalism as a promising theoretical approach beyond Europe.
Since neo-functionalists place supranational, transnational and sub-national actors
at the centre of the analysis, the article, apart from the economic dimension,
will elaborate on the potential of existing international structure, namely the
Trilateral Cooperation Secretariat. | pl_PL |
dc.language.iso | en | pl_PL |
dc.publisher | Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego | pl_PL |
dc.relation.ispartof | Asia in World Politics: Past, Present, and Future; | |
dc.rights | Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Międzynarodowe | * |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ | * |
dc.subject | Northeast Asia | pl_PL |
dc.subject | Japan–South Korea Relations | pl_PL |
dc.subject | Neo-functionalism | pl_PL |
dc.title | The promise of neo-functionalism beyond Europe: the case of Japan–South Korea relations | pl_PL |
dc.type | Book chapter | pl_PL |
dc.page.number | 229-245 | pl_PL |
dc.contributor.authorAffiliation | Jagiellonian University | pl_PL |
dc.identifier.eisbn | 978-83-8220-794-1 | |
dc.references | Aggarval, V.K. & Gyo Koo, M. 2005, “Beyond network power? The dynamics of formal economic integration in Northeast Asia”, The Pacific Review, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 189–216. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Aggarval, V.K. & Gyo Koo, M. 2008, “Economic and security institution building in Northeast Asia: an analytical overview” in Aggarval, V.K. [et al.] (eds), Northeast Asia: Ripe for Integration?, Springer-Verland, Berlin & Heidelberg, pp. 1–36. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Börzel, T. 2016, “Theorizing regionalism. cooperation, integration and governance” in Börzel, T. & Risse, T. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Regionalism, Oxford University Press, Oxford. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Cha, V.D. 2000, “Abandonment, entrapment, and neoclassical realism in Asia: the United States, Japan, and Korea”, International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 44, 261–291. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Chiriot, D., Shin, G. & Sneider, D. (eds) 2014, Confronting Memories of World War II: European and Asian Legacies, University of Washington Press, Seattle. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Chungsoo, J. 2001, Perceptions on Free Trade: The Korean Debate Over the Japan-Korea Free Trade Agreement, Brookings Institution, Washington, DC, 1 March, viewed 1 June 2018, https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/kim_01.pdf | pl_PL |
dc.references | Conzelmann, T. 2014, “Neofunctionalism” in Schieder, S. & Spindler, M. (eds), Theories of International Relations, Routledge, New York, pp. 90–106. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Duus, P. 2017, “Introduction: history wars in postwar East Asia 1945–2014” in Lewis, M. (ed.),“History Wars” and Reconciliation in Japan and Korea, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, pp. 1–16. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Gehring, T. 1996, “Integrating integration theory: neo‐functionalism and international regimes”, Global Society, Vol. 10:3, pp. 225–253. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Glosserman, B. & Snyder, S. 2015, The Japan – South Korea Identity Clash: East Asian Security and the United States, Columbia University Press, New York & Chichester. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Grabowski, M. 2015, Rywalizacja czy integracja? Procesy i organizacje integracyjne w regionie Azji i Pacyfiku na przełomie XX i XXI wieku, Księgarnia Akademicka, Kraków. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Haas, E.B. 2001, “Does constructivism subsime neo-functionalism” in Christiansen, T., Jørgensen, K.E. & Wiener, A. (eds), The Social Construction of Europe, Sage Publications, London, pp. 22–31. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Haggard, S. & Noland, M. 2009, “A security and peace mechanism for Northeast Asia: the economic dimension”, The Pacific Review, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 119–137. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Hasegawa, T. & Togo, K. 2008 (eds), East Asia’s Haunted Present: Historical Memories and the Resurgence of Nationalism, Praeger Security International, Westport. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Jongdae, K. 2012, “Global standard of human rights and ‘comfort women’” in Sang Jin, H. (ed.), Divided Nations and Transitional Justice: What Germany, Japan, and South Korea Can Teach the World, Paradigm Publishers, Boulder, pp. 189–194. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Jung, S. 2017, “Japan’s investment in S. Korea hit 57-month high in Q3”, The Business Korea, Seoul, November 16, viewed 1 June 2018, http://www.businesskorea.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=19836 | pl_PL |
dc.references | Kim, S.H. 2017, NAPCI and Trilateral Cooperation: Prospects for South Korea-EU Relations, Instituto Affari Internazionali Working Papers, 8 February, viewed 22 September 2018, http://www.iai.it/sites/default/files/iaiwp1708.pdf | pl_PL |
dc.references | Kingston, J. 2004, Japan’s Quiet Transformation: Social Change and Civil Society in the Twenty-First Century, RoutledgeCurzon, Abingdon & New York. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Kinhide, M. 2015, “Towards recognition of the crime of colonialism. The lesson of Japan’s violent annexation of Korea” in Doh, S. (ed.), One Hundred Years after Japan’s Forced Annexation of Korea: History and Tasks, Peter Lang, Frankfurt am Main and other, pp. 171–187. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, 2018, Press Release on the Launch of the FTA. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic of Korea, 2012, Dokdo: Beautiful Island of Korea, Seoul, viewed 30 June 2018, http://dokdo.mofa.go.kr/eng/index.jsp | pl_PL |
dc.references | Mukoyama, H. 2016, “Can Japan and South Korea build a new economic relationship? Recent changes in the global environment may help to repair relations”, Pacific Business and Industries, Vol. XVI, No. 59, The Japan Research Institute, United, viewed 30 June 2018, https://www.jri.co.jp/MediaLibrary/file/english/periodical/rim/2016/59.pdf | pl_PL |
dc.references | Negotiations among China, Japan and Korea, November 20, viewed 1 June 2018, https://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/press/release/24/11/pdfs/20121120_02_01.pdf | pl_PL |
dc.references | Nye, J.S. & Keohane, R.O. 1971, “Transnational Relations and world politics: an introduction”, International Organization, Vol. 25(3), pp. 329–349. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Oros, A.L. 2017, Japan’s Security Renaissance: New Policies and Politics for the Twenty-First Century, Columbia University Press, New York. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Park, G. 2012, “A plan for peace in North Asia”, World Street Journal, New York, viewed 30 June 2018, https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323894704578114310294100492 | pl_PL |
dc.references | Pollack, J. 2016, Order at Risk: Japan, Korea and the Northeast Asian Paradox, Brookings Institution, viewed 30 June 2018, https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/fp_20160901_northeast_asian_paradox_v2.pdf | pl_PL |
dc.references | Risse, T. 2013, “Transnational actors and world politics” in Carlsnaes, W., Risse, T. & Simmons, B.A. (eds), Handbook of International Relations, Sage Publications Ltd., London, pp. 426–452. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Rosamond, B. 2005, “The uniting of Europe and the foundation of the EU studies: revisiting the neofunctionalism of Ernst B. Haas”, Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 12(2), pp. 237–254. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Saito, H. 2017, The History Problem. The Politics of War Commemoration in East Asia, University of Hawai’i Press, Honolulu. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Schmitter, P.C. & Kim, S. 2005, “The experience of european integration and the potential for Northeast Asian integration”, East-West Center Working Papers, viewed 30 June 2018, https://www.eastwestcenter.org/system/tdf/private/PSwp010.pdf?file=1&type=node&id=32082 | pl_PL |
dc.references | Schneider, C. 2008, “The Japanese history textbook controversy in East Asian perspective”, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 617, pp. 107–122. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Smith, S. 2018, “Can Japan and South Korea handle peace with Pyongyang?”, Council on Foreign Relations, May 9, viewed 30 June 2018, https://www.cfr.org/expert-brief/can-japan-and-south-korea-handle-peace-pyongyang | pl_PL |
dc.references | Strøby Jensen, C. 2003, “Neo-functionalism” in Cini, M. (ed.), European Union Politics, Oxford University Press, Oxford. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Tanaka, Y. 2017, ”Comfort women bashin” and Japan’s social formation of hegemonic masculinity” in Lewis, M. (ed.), “History Wars” and Reconciliation in Japan and Korea, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, pp. 163–182. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Trilateral Cooperation Secretariat, 2011, Agreement on Establishment of the Trilateral Cooperation Secretariat among the Governments of The People’s Republic of China, Japan and the Republic of Korea, viewed 1 September 2018, http://www.tcs-asia. org/pdf/Agreement%20on%20the%20Establishment%20of%20the%20Trilateral%20Coopera.pdf | pl_PL |
dc.references | Trilateral Cooperation Secretariat, 2017, Annual Report FY2016, Seoul. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Trilateral Cooperation Secretariat, 2018, Joint Declaration of the Seventh Japan-China-ROK. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Trilateral Summit, Tokyo, May 9, viewed 1 September 2018, http://www.tcs-asia.org/data/file/summits/2038522331_rgaBP8IE_7th_Trilateral_Summit-Relative_Documents.pdf | pl_PL |
dc.references | Wiegand, K.E. 2015, “The South Korean Japanese security relationship and the Dokdo/ Takeshima islets dispute”, The Pacific Review, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 347–366. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Wirth, C. 2015, “‘Power’ and ‘stability’ in the China–Japan–South Korea regional security complex”, The Pacific Review, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp. 553–575. | pl_PL |
dc.references | Wissenbach, U. 2013, “Barriers to East Asian integration: North East Asia – a nonregion?”, Journal of Global Policy and Governance, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 205–221. | pl_PL |
dc.references | World Bank, World Integrated Trade Solution, viewed 1 June 2018, https://wits.worldbank.org/ | pl_PL |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.18778/8220-793-4.13 | |