國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
15
• Dependent Variable: Regional Institutionalization
Empirically observed through institution-building efforts and creation of regional governance in East Asia.
Understood as 'ideal types' as well, the conceptualization and operationalization of both variables follows King, Keohane and Verba’s (1994) approach to qualitative research.
They suggest using specific indicators when an abstract concept cannot be measured directly. These indicators shall be more observable and for which data are available.
These authors have set up the most important foundations for qualitative research following a scientific approach for the field of IR and IPE. Indeed, they propose using a similar approach to scientific inquiry as in quantitative research. Hence, they insist in the use of terminology such as 'variables,' although instead of independent variable they prefer the term 'explanatory' since in qualitative research everything is related, and thus there is no real independent variables. This is how they put forward their methodology for qualitative types of research that allows the operationalization of these often 'intangible variables' into more observables indicators. Indeed, King, Keohane and Verba's approach for qualitative research is the most valid and commonly used for this type of research. Accordingly, the analytical conceptualization of the two main variables is carried out in chapter II, where several aspects that are related to these main concepts are also taken into consideration to better understand their relationship and the processes embedded in them. Their discussion allows later – in chapter III – their operationalization as variables, the building of the theory and the formulation of hypotheses for this research.
1.3. Research Contributions
This study hopes to make both practical and theoretical contributions. Considering the main purpose of this project is to determine to what extent South Korea’s foreign policy behavior towards the region has shown a leadership role as a middle power; and how this has affected the processes oriented towards the institutionalization of regional cooperation in order de build a normative framework and ultimately an East Asian Community; the outcomes of this dissertation suggest improved practical understanding of regionalism in this part of the world, and more specifically the strategies for a country like Korea in these processes. In addition, the literature on middle powers does
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
16
not often consider direct and specific applications to regionalism, a process which is usually advanced and led by great regional powers and where middle size countries normally have a less relevant role. Thus, as most of scientific research, through a process of inference from a particular case - the experience of South Korea in East Asian regionalism - this project is expected to contribute to the building of new theory by assessing the real impact a middle power can have when displaying a role of leadership in the processes associated to regionalism in a context in which the great regional powers are often unable to cooperate in order to move regional institution-building forwards.
Indeed, this research expects to show how and why a middle power like South Korea should be considered as a key player in the processes of regional institutionalization in East Asia. The practical significance to study this case of active commitment with regional institution and community-building, while determining its actual contributions can serve as learning process for other countries in this region and middle powers in other parts of the world. In particular for East Asian countries, to learn from this experience could help them better manage the several regional trends occurring and the challenges for the future – like the so called ‘Rise of China’ or the North Korea issue – not just in economic terms but especially in political ones. In turn, this work hopes to shed some light on the pursuing of an ideal that prevails in policy-makers and regional elites: that of an East Asian Community as ultimate goal where norms, values, a sense of common destiny and possibly a common identity are all elements agreed upon amongst its members. Ultimately, this research hopes to become not just an analysis of South Korea’s role in East Asian regionalism in the last decade - although this is its main focus - but also a policy recommendation for the future challenges the region as a whole faces in regards to the institutionalization of regional cooperation.
On the theoretical side, there are some specific variables in the processes of East Asian regionalism that are unique and which have not been studied elsewhere. The issue of leadership, as described in the previous sections, is one such variable that has been identified for this project as a key element affecting regional institutionalization and the role a middle power like South Korea has within it. As it is detailed in section 2.3. and 2.4., where the main relationship between regionalism and middle powers is revised from the literature available, this research is certainly not the first one trying to link these two concepts. To be sure, regionalism is often considered as a terrain in
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
17
which middle powers can manoeuvre and display its typical behaviour. However, this study uses a novel and distinctive approach when it argues that in the particular and unique case of East Asian regional institution and community building - especially in the context of Northeast Asia as a subregion - the capacity of a middle power to take the lead can become the missing piece of the jigsaw puzzle in order to advance the regionalist projects, due to the contentious relations among regional powers.
This is different from the traditional sources of regional leadership and commitment that the process of regionalism has shown elsewhere, where the great regional powers normally serve as the axis for the advancement of regional institutionalization (e.g. France and Germany in Europe, Argentina - Brazil in South America or the U.S. in North America). Hence, from the particular and unique vantage point that the geopolitical situation in NEA provides, this study attempts to study the plausible leadership role of a middle power in a case where regionalism has not been driven by the most powerful countries in the region. As pointed out, East Asia indeed offers the exceptional regional scenario for doing so. In this process, a theoretical and conceptual framework is built, which can serve as one of those models mentioned earlier that work as analytical constructs to reduce the aspects of empirical reality we want to study into more understandable and manageable ways.
To understand all these specific aspects in the long term contributes to the improvement of theoretical understanding of middle powers and regionalism in general, and the theoretical implications they may have for the study of IR and IPE as disciplines. Consequently, this research intends to advance the study of IR and IPE by specifically adding to the literature of middle powers in its relationship with regionalism by understanding the role Korea has played in East Asian regionalism. As said, the literature on middle powers abundant within IR studies focuses mainly in issues related to human rights, development cooperation and peace keeping operations, and does not often consider middle power activism in regionalism, which is a field that is mainly studied by IPE scholars as it is frequently related to economic integration. By looking at this plausible and particular relationship this research expects to broaden the study of middle powers and regionalism, and in doing so helping to elaborate new theory within these two disciplines by assessing the many possible ways a middle power can assume leadership in regional processes.
Additionally this project also advances East Asian and Asia-Pacific as interdisciplinary area studies, by specifically adding the new perspective of South
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
18
Korea’s plausible leadership role as a middle power in order to facilitate and manage regional institutionalization in this part of the world. For the area study of East Asia in particular, this research helps to underscore the ways regionalism is occurring. Theories trying to explain the different regional processes in the world are often based on Western ideals, in response to the European experience of integration as the paradigmatic example of regional institution-building, where the two regional powers of Germany and France co-led the process of regional integration. Thus, most of these Western-based theories find it difficult to explain East Asian regional trends, while research in this region often focuses entirely on economic integration and Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), leaning towards a more economic level of analysis, forgetting the institutional side. This research hopes to go one step further in the study of regionalism in East Asia, now that its countries have for over a decade begun to institutionalize their deep market-driven regional integration.
Indeed, many implications of regionalism that have commonly been studied in other regions, like institution-building, governance creation, identity and sovereignty issues are still unexplored in East Asia. To understand these aspects in the long term contributes to the improvement of the relations between the countries in East Asia, given by an institutional architecture and normative framework they lack today, in order to promote cooperation, maintaining security and peace and thus promoting development. Academic research can certainly have a positive effect on policy-makers and the ruling elites that make the decisions. This research hopes to do just that.
While the outcome of this study will certainly help to elaborate on the possible scenarios for regionalism in East Asia; it is the particular treatment of the theories this research project possesses what adds the most value to this dissertation. The issue of how this research builds new theory is further developed in following chapters where it will become clearer, particularly in the last section of chapter II and throughout chapter III.
To sum up, the special focus on the relationship among the alleged leadership of a middle power and the regional institutionalization processes as the two main variables of this study serves as novel contribution to the theories that usually dealt with these issues but that have been mainly based on Western experiences, where the countries leading the processes of regionalism are usually the preeminent great regional powers and not small or middle size countries. When this is compared to previous analyses or applied to different settings further creation of new theories is possible, setting a
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
19
precedent that may differ with the traditional explanations based on regional leadership exerted by great powers. It is clear the processes of regional institutionalization are not happening in the same way in East Asia as it is in Europe or The Americas, but how?
and how does this influence the prospects of regionalism both as a field of study and in the objective reality? The relevance of testing the hypotheses put forward by this study arises when trying to give answers to this type of questions that can suggest future prospects for research in less developed parts of the world where regionalism is at an even earlier stage, like Central Asia, the Middle East or Africa. This is how this research expects to push the boundary of existing knowledge about both, regionalism and middle powers.