To save content items to your account,
please 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 account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items 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 saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved 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.
In Indonesia, swidden practices have been part of traditional rice farming for centuries. Swidden agriculture is a fundamental part of all remaining large tropical forests and provides a critical form of biodiversity-friendly agriculture. Meanwhile, peatland degradation and land conversion for oil palm plantation and agriculture have created an annual transboundary environmental disaster in Southeast Asia. This article adopts a transnational lens to highlight the complex multi-scale interactions that perpetuate recurring transboundary air pollution in the region. Having examined the traditional practices of swidden agriculture in Central Kalimantan and South Sumatra (Indonesia), the article reveals that swidden agriculture has been misunderstood generally, and in particular in international and national law and policy. It argues that existing laws fail to identify the important role that swidden agriculture plays in sustainable ecosystem management and cultural expression. Nuanced understandings of fire use, alongside transnational multi-stakeholder and multi-scale approaches, are required.
Who are the people who, in the face of extreme repression, unexpectedly take to the streets en masse in an authoritarian state? This article aims to answer this question with reference to the case of the Belarusian anti-Lukashenka mass mobilization of 2020. It employs unique data from an original online protest survey among citizens of Belarus who were 18 or older and residing in the country at the time of the protests (Onuch et. al.; MOBILISE 2020 & 2021; n = 17,174), fielded August 18, 2020–January 29, 2021.2 This survey was designed to: (a) capture as many protesters as possible; and (b) capture a large enough sample of non-protesters as a comparative reference group enabling us to better understand how different anti-Lukashenka protesters (n = 11,719) were from non-protesters (n = 5,455). Guided by theoretical and empirical expectations of contentious politics scholarship, we first provide descriptive statistics about the socio-demographic characteristics of the protesters, self-reported protest grievances and claims, and median protester preferences on a range of attitudes and policies. This portrait of the protesters is followed up by regression analysis to test whether these patterns hold at a statistically significant level when comparing protesters and non-protesters.
In the 1910s, guild socialism emerged as a response to the particular social and political problems of Britain and as a radical rebel against the established English socialist movement. From the beginning, guild socialism was characterized by its “Englishness”, and its global influences have largely been neglected. Through the case of Zhang Dongsun, a leading Chinese guild socialist, this article provides a transnational and comparative dimension of guild socialism and examines how its ideas were accepted, reinterpreted, and localized in a non-Western context. While English guildsmen propagated a strong anti-capitalist ideology and highlighted industrial democracy, mass self-government, and direct action, their Chinese comrades were advocating, at least temporarily, domination of the bourgeoisie and seeking to temper the radical social ethos motivated by the October Revolution. Guild socialism in China was deprived of its rebellious and militant elements and transformed into a moderate, wait-and-see theory that could, in Zhang's opinion, strike a perfect balance between elitism and mass democracy. Zhang's elitist interpretation of guild socialism showed his agency and ambition in pursuit of political modernity for China, but ironically it was his active reinterpretation that sealed the fate of Chinese guild socialism.
This paper develops Ramchand’s first phase syntax theory by investigating the Mandarin directional serial verb construction. Specifically, the position of the theme argument in these constructions is investigated, and two major word order variants are identified: the VOV type and the VVO type. The former are argued to be accomplishments, whereas the latter are achievements. The analysis embraces Ramchand’s spirit that three sub-eventive projections (InitP, ProcP, and ResP) exist universally as the basic building blocks in the first-phase syntax, and it proposes that the surface word order alternation and situation type shift is the consequence of the occurrence/absence of the ResP and the different insertion position of the directional morphemes.
I would like to start my response by expressing my profound gratitude to the three commentators for their in-depth engagement with my book, their generous comments, and the rich variety of though-provoking challenges and critiques. Their contributions urge me to refine the theoretical and empirical implications of the book in novel ways. Responding to all of their excellent observations would go beyond the scope of this short essay, but I will address what I identify as the most fundamental arguments, clustered in three main themes, according to which I will structure my response. The first part will address the comments of the reviewers that relate to key definitions and case classifications. The second part focuses on challenges to the theoretical argument, including alternative explanations. Finally, the third part addresses unresolved questions in the book identified by the reviewers, which open up promising avenues for future research.
The article deals with archives of memoryscapes as remembered landscapes of a past society by Hungarian women authors from Yugoslavia. Divided into two separate cycles, it explores how an inhabited geography transgressed from the present into a past, and how it evolved via belletristic practices from the 1990s onward. The archive is therefore assessed as a cumulative development of text-worlds in prose, poetry, and drama by Hungarian women, who either remained in disintegrating Yugoslavia or emigrated to Hungary, both of which led mostly to uprootedness and a misinterpretation of their work. Accordingly, displaced as authors, who remember landscapes that are beyond official memory politics, their archive remained largely unnoticed and marginalised throughout the decades. Emerging in autobiographic writing and literary fiction equally, these memoryscapes are not idiosyncratic but are regulated and systemic representations of a time, a space, and a society. To display such a mnemonic agency, the article integrates the foucauldian notions of the archive with the thirdspace perspective of geocriticism within literary representation, as used in post-colonial thought. Eventually, this enables the exposition of the archive of these female memoryscapes of an ethnic minority not in relation to other “national” archives, or as auxiliary archives of a male perspective, but as a system of thirdspaces and representation in itself.