Page 160 - 《国际安全研究》2020年第5期

Journal of International Security Studies
governance models are no longer appropriate for the rapid development of synthetic
biology that has brought disruptive changes to science and technology. In order to
explore a proper model of risk management in the field of synthetic biology, it is
necessary to take into consideration the status quo and trends of synthetic biology
development, objectively and effectively analyse the ensuing safety and security
issues as well as their evolutionary trends. Further efforts can be made to explore a
comprehensive and dynamically adjusted risk governance model of biosafety and
biosecurity issues in the field of synthetic biology, taking into consideration of state
laws and regulations, government supervision, self-regulation of the scientific
community, and international cooperation and dialogue among governments and
communities.
[Keywords] synthetic biology, biosafety, biosecurity, governance
[Author] PENG Yaojin, Associate Research Fellow, Institute of Zoology, Institute
for Stem Cell and Regeneration, Chinese Academy of Sciences (Beijing, 100101).

58 Geographical Intervention and Institutional Embedding: the US
Diplomatic Strategy for Water Security in the Asia-Pacific Region

YU Hongyuan and LI Kunhai
[Abstract] Based on geographical interests demands (offensive/defensive) and water
governance performance in transboundary river basins (instrumental/institutional),
“water security diplomacy” can be defined as game behaviors of states and relevant
actors focusing on issues of cross-border water resources security. Water security
diplomacy can be categorized into four broad types: conflict-preventative diplomacy,
hegemony-oriented diplomacy, water diplomacy featuring apathetic interaction and
the one highlighting post-modern governance. The US diplomatic strategy for water
security, being hegemony-oriented, aims at consolidating its global hegemony
through global governance of water. It is mainly manifested in two aspects:
safeguarding its strategic interests through major power geographical intervention
and maintaining the legitimacy and effectiveness of its water diplomacy through
institutional embeddedness and reconstruction of the regional water governance
system. The United States promotes the formulation of its water security foreign
policy and strategy through four diplomatic paths, namely, alliance and
agenda-setting, coordination with major water diplomacy powers, embedding
international organizations, networked partnership. The dynamic mechanism both at
home and abroad has played an important role in the advancement of US water
diplomacy. By virtue of water security diplomacy, the United States is able to
expand its geographical interests in the Asia-Pacific region, implement the principles
and norms of water governance advocated by American values, embed the water
security governance system with the United States as its core, and curb the voice of
major regional powers, especially China, in the water discourse. The ultimate goal
of the US is to achieve a balanced strategic advantage in the regional water-energy-
food nexus security.
[Keywords] water diplomacy, water security, water governance, geographic
intervention, institutional embeddedness, U.S. security strategy
[Authors] YU Hongyuan, Research Fellow and Director of Institute for
Comparative Politics and Public Policy, Shanghai Institutes for International Studies
(SIIS) (Shanghai, 200233); LI Kunhai, Ph.D. Student at Law School of Shanghai
University of Finance and Economics (Shanghai, 200433).

· 158 ·