Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

Security expertise and international hierarchy: the case of ‘The Asia-Pacific Epistemic Community’

  • Björn Jerdén (a1)
Abstract
Abstract

Many states partially relinquish sovereignty in return for physical protection from a more powerful state. Mainstream theory on international hierarchies holds that such decisions are based on rational assessments of the relative qualities of the political order being offered. Such assessments, however, are bound to be contingent, and as such a reflection of the power to shape understandings of reality. Through a study of the remarkably persistent US-led security hierarchy in East Asia, this article puts forward the concept of the ‘epistemic community’ as a general explanation of how such understandings are shaped and, hence, why states accept subordinate positions in international hierarchies. The article conceptualises a transnational and multidisciplinary network of experts on international security – ‘The Asia-Pacific Epistemic Community’ – and demonstrates how it operates to convince East Asian policymakers that the current US-led social order is the best choice for maintaining regional ‘stability’.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Security expertise and international hierarchy: the case of ‘The Asia-Pacific Epistemic Community’
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Security expertise and international hierarchy: the case of ‘The Asia-Pacific Epistemic Community’
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Security expertise and international hierarchy: the case of ‘The Asia-Pacific Epistemic Community’
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Corresponding author
* Correspondence to: Björn Jerdén, Swedish Institute of International Affairs, Box 27035, 10251 Stockholm, Sweden. Author’s email: bjorn.jerden@ui.se
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

David A. Lake , ‘Regional hierarchy: Authority and local international order’, Review of International Studies, 35 (2009), pp. 3558

Steven Lukes , Power: A Radical View (2nd edn, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005 [orig. pub. 1974])

Peter M. Haas , ‘Introduction: Epistemic communities and international policy coordination’, International Organization, 46:1 (1992), pp. 1216

David A. Lake , ‘Rightful rules: Authority, order, and the foundations of global governance’, International Studies Quarterly, 54:3 (2010), p. 609

Michael Beckley , ‘China’s century? Why America’s edge will endure’, International Security, 36:3 (2011/12), pp. 4178

Mark Beeson , ‘Hegemonic transition in East Asia? The dynamics of Chinese and American power’, Review of International Studies, 35:1 (2009), pp. 95112

Aaron L. Friedberg , ‘Ripe for rivalry: Prospects for peace in a multipolar Asia’, International Security, 18:3 (1993), pp. 533

Evelyn Goh , The Struggle for Order: Hegemony, Hierarchy, and Transition in Post-Cold War East Asia (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013)

Christopher Layne , ‘This time it’s real: the end of unipolarity and the Pax Americana’, International Studies Quarterly, 56:1 (2012), pp. 202213

Joseph S. Nye Jr, ‘The twenty-first century will not be a “post-American” world’, International Studies Quarterly, 56:1 (2012), pp. 215217

David L. Shambaugh , ‘China engages Asia: Reshaping the regional order’, International Security, 29:3 (2004/05), pp. 6499

William C. Wohlforth , ‘How not to evaluate theories’, International Studies Quarterly, 56:1 (2012), pp. 219222

Yan Xuetong , ‘The rise of China and its power status’, Chinese Journal of International Politics, 1:1 (2006), pp. 533

Thomas S. Wilkins , ‘ “Alignment”, not “alliance” – the shifting paradigm of international security cooperation: Toward a conceptual taxonomy of alignment’, Review of International Studies, 38:1 (2012), pp. 5376

Robert S. Ross , ‘Balance of power politics and the rise of China: Accommodation and balancing in East Asia’, Security Studies, 15:3 (2006), p. 391

Robert E. Kelly , ‘The “pivot” and its problems: American foreign policy in Northeast Asia’, The Pacific Review, 27:3 (2014), pp. 479503

Jae Jeok Park , ‘The US-led alliances in the Asia-Pacific: Hedge against potential threats or an undesirable multilateral security order?’, The Pacific Review, 24:2 (2011), pp. 137158

Thomas Berger , ‘Set for stability? Prospects for conflict and cooperation in East Asia’, Review of International Studies, 26:3 (2000), pp. 405428

Evelyn Goh , ‘Great powers and hierarchical order in Southeast Asia: Analysing regional security strategies’, International Security, 32:3 (2007/08), pp. 113157

Steve Chan , ‘An odd thing happened on the way to balancing: East Asian states’ reactions to China’s rise’, International Studies Review, 12:3 (2010), p. 390

Detlef Nolte , ‘How to compare regional powers: Analytical concepts and research topics’, Review of International Studies, 36:4 (2010), p. 888

G. John Ikenberry , ‘American hegemony and East Asian order’, Australian Journal of International Affairs, 58:3 (2004), p. 357

Dina A. Zinnes , ‘An analytical study of the balance of power theories’, Journal of Peace Research, 4:3 (1967), p. 271

Timo Kivimäki , ‘East Asian relative peace: Does it exist? What is it?’, The Pacific Review, 23:4 (2010), p. 506

Evelyn Goh , ‘Hierarchy and the role of the United States in the East Asian security order’, International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 8:3 (2008), pp. 364366

William C. Wohlforth , ‘How not to evaluate theories’, International Studies Quarterly, 56:1 (2012), p. 220

Timo Kivimäki , ‘Sovereignty, hegemony, and peace in Western Europe and in East Asia’, International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 12:3 (2012), p. 440

T. J. Pempel , ‘More Pax, less Americana in Asia’, International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 10:3 (2010), pp. 465490

Adam P. Liff , ‘Japan’s defence policy: Abe the Evolutionary’, Washington Quarterly, 38:2 (2015), pp. 7999

Linus Hagström and Ulv Hanssen , ‘War is peace: the rearticulation of “peace” in Japan’s China discourse’, Review of International Studies, 42:2 (2016), pp. 266286

Charles A. Kupchan , ‘After Pax Americana: Benign power, regional integration, and the sources of a stable multipolarity’, International Security, 23:2 (1998), pp. 6266

Duncan Snidal , ‘The limits of hegemonic stability theory’, International Organization, 39:4 (1985), pp. 579614

Paul K. MacDonald and Joseph M. Parent , ‘Graceful decline? The surprising success of great power retrenchment’, International Security, 35:4 (2011), pp. 744

T. V. Paul , Deborah Welch Larson , and William C. Wohlforth (eds), Status in World Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014)

William C. Wohlforth et al., ‘Testing Balance-of-Power Theory in world history’, European Journal of International Relations, 13:2 (2007), pp. 155185

Cf. Stefano Guzzini (ed.), The Return of Geopolitics in Europe? Social Mechanisms and Foreign Policy Identity Crises (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012)

Cf. Didier Bigo , ‘Pierre Bourdieu and International Relations: Power of practices, practices of power’, International Political Sociology, 5:3 (2011), pp. 225258

Emanuel Adler , ‘The emergence of cooperation: National epistemic communities and the international evolution of the idea of nuclear arms control’, International Organization, 46:1 (1992), p. 107

Emanuel Adler and Peter M. Haas , ‘Conclusion: Epistemic communities, world order, and the creation of a reflective research program’, International Organization, 46:1 (1992), p. 380

Johan Eriksson and Ludvig Norman , ‘Political utilisation of scholarly ideas: the “clash of civilisations” vs. “soft power” in US foreign policy’, Review of International Studies, 37:1 (2011), pp. 422423

Emanuel Adler , ‘The spread of security communities: Communities of practice, self-restraint, and NATO’s post-cold war transformation’, European Journal of International Relations, 14:2 (2008), p. 199

David Martin Jones and Michael L. R. Smith , ‘Is there a Sovietology of South-East Asian studies?’, International Affairs, 77:4 (2001), pp. 843865

Stefano Guzzini , ‘The ends of International Relations theory: Stages of reflexivity and modes of theorizing’, European Journal of International Relations, 19:3 (2013), pp. 521541

Andrew Yeo , Activists, Alliances, and Anti-US Base Protests (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011)

Timothy R. Heath , ‘What does China want? Discerning the PRC’s national strategy’, Asian Security, 8:1 (2012), p. 55

Il Hyun Cho and Seo-Hyun Park , ‘Domestic legitimacy politics and varieties of regionalism in East Asia’, Review of International Studies, 40:3 (2014), pp. 599600

Christopher W. Hughes , ‘The Democratic Party of Japan’s new (but failing) grand security strategy: From “reluctant realism” to “resentful realism”?’, Journal of Japanese Studies, 38:1 (2012), pp. 109140

Andrew Hurrell , ‘Legitimacy and the use of force: Can the circle be squared?’, Review of International Studies, 31 (2005), pp. 1532

David P. Rapkin and Dan Braaten , ‘Conceptualising hegemonic stability’, Review of International Studies, 35:5 (2009), p. 125

David A. Lake , ‘Rightful rules: Authority, order, and the foundations of global governance’, International Studies Quarterly, 54:3 (2010), p. 609

Thomas G. Weiss and Rorden Wilkinson , ‘Rethinking global governance? Complexity, authority, power, change’, International Studies Quarterly, 58:1 (2014), p. 211

Janice Bially Mattern and Ayşe Zarakol , ‘Hierarchies in world politics’, International Organization, 70:3 (2016), p. 623654

Evelyn Goh , ‘The modes of China’s influence: Cases from Southeast Asia’, Asian Survey, 54:5 (2014), pp. 825848

Steve Smith , ‘Singing our world into existence: International Relations theory and September 11’, International Studies Quarterly, 48:3 (2004), pp. 499515

David A. Lake , ‘Why “isms” are evil: Theory, epistemology, and academic sects as impediments to understanding and progress’, International Studies Quarterly, 55:2 (2011), pp. 465480

Johan Eriksson and Bengt Sundelius , ‘Molding minds that form policy: How to make research useful’, International Studies Perspectives, 6:1 (2005), pp. 5171

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Review of International Studies
  • ISSN: 0260-2105
  • EISSN: 1469-9044
  • URL: /core/journals/review-of-international-studies
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Type Description Title
PDF
Supplementary Materials

Jerdén supplementary material
Appendix

 PDF (415 KB)
415 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 56
Total number of PDF views: 542 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 1247 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 19th January 2017 - 24th August 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.