• 
• Journal of East Asian Studies

  JEAS는 동아시아 연구가 ‘지역’ 차원이 아닌 국가 단위에서만 이뤄지고 있다는 문제 의식에서 출발했다.
  한국을 연구하는 ‘한국학’, 중국을 공부하는 ‘중국학’, 일본을 이해하려는 ‘일본학’ 등 개별 국가 단위로만 존재했던 것이다.
  한 국가를 넘어서는 거대한 지역을 연구 단위로 삼아, 역내 국가들의 특수성과 보편성을 함께 살펴보는 유럽 혹은 중남미 지역학과는 달리,
  동아시아 연구는 한 국가 사례에 함몰되어 있었다. 이에, EAI 출판은 동아시아 연구를 국가라는 소단위를 넘어 진정한 지역학으로 키운다는 비전아래 영문저널인 Journal of East Asian Studies (JEAS)를 연간 3회 발간하고 있다.
  2016년부터는 캠브리지대출판사를 통해 본 학술지를 발행하고 있다. JEAS 전문은 캠브지대출판사 웹사이트에서 구독 가능하다

편집위원회

주간	Stephan HaggardUniversity of California, San Diego
서평주간	Yves TiberghienUniversity of British Columbia
운영주간	Juwon SeoEast Asia Institute

Journal of East Asian StudiesCurrent Issue Vol.19 No.2

• 

• 
  

  
  

  The current issue of JEAS shows our commitment to publish scholarship in both international relations and comparative politics, with three contributions coming in the areas of international political economy and institutions. Yong Kyun Kim leads with a controversial look at foreign direct investment in Vietnam. Drawing on provincial level data, he shows that the entry of FDI initially has corruption-reducing effects. However, as more foreign investment flows in, the resources available to provincial leaders also carry temptations. Corruption rises, creating new policy challenges.

  
  
  

  Dennis Patterson and Jangsup Choi pose an equally policy-relevant question. Aid donors are continually buffeted by demands that they respond to shifting priorities. But are these commitments implemented? Looking at policy changes announced by South Korea, and employing a sophisticated selection model, they find a mixed picture. Declaratory policies do matter, but some tradeoffs and continuities are also visible. For example, Korea does appear to be more attentive to questions of poverty, allocating more aid to lower income countries. But this has come at a cost: human rights does not appear connected with aid allocation. Korea also continues to provide more assistance in Asia and to countries that trade with the country as well.

  
  
  

  Matthew Dale Kim’s contribution is exemplary of the trend toward the use of experiments in international relations. Looking at the US-South Korea relationship, Kim is interested in questions of credibility. He finds that Korean respondents are concerned about compliance in one issue area—such as human rights—because they believe it will affect the country’s broader reputation in other issue areas. Yet he also shows that these concerns are somewhat misguided, and that Korea’s reputation does not necessarily carry over to other issues in the eyes of American respondents. The US by contrast, perhaps because of its size, shows less anxiety in these second order beliefs. Kim’s contribution is important because it gets at some of the deep psychological reasons that states, or at least their publics, wish to be seen as credible.

  
  
  

  Our last two contributions get at key questions in the comparative politics of the region, one in an authoritarian setting, the other a democracy. Tony Huiquan Zhang provides a deep dive into the sociology of China’s princelings, the sons and daughters of the top Communist Party leadership. Drawing on biographical information on nearly 300 princelings, Zhang finds that the princelings resemble an affiliative status group. Their advantages stem not just from connections through their parents, but from a broader social milieu. Not only are princelings’ career advantages secured by the party-state’s cadre management system, but education and career choices are intertwined very early with the state’s practical and ideological goals. Moreover, he shows that princelings’ shared life courses strengthen their collective identity. The paper raises important questions about the power exercised by this relatively narrow group.

  
  
  

  Finally, Yoongkyung Lee and Jong-sung You look at the question of class voting in Korea. The absence of class voting—and even “reverse” class voting, where poorer voters support conservative parties—remains a puzzle. However, they show that the reverse class voting finding may be a statistical anomaly. They show that the elderly have a high incidence of poverty and older voters are more conservative. Drawing on data covering elections from 2004–2014, they show that once age effects are controlled, the poor do in fact engage in class voting. They acknowledge that regional and generational cleavages continue to be the most important determinants of partisan competition, but class position—whether measured by income levels or self-identified class status--significantly impact vote choice. The paper has relevance for where partisan cleavages may go in the future.

  
  
  
  

원고기고방법

원고제출하기

구독신청

구독신청하기