| 廖丹子.中国非传统安全研究40年(1978-2017)：脉络、意义与图景[J].国际安全研究,2018,(4):3-32 |
| 中国非传统安全研究40年(1978-2017)：脉络、意义与图景 |
| Reflections on China’s Non-traditional Security Studies over the Past 40 Years (1978-2017): Theoretical Context, Significance and Prospect |
| 修订日期：2018-05-18 |
| DOI：10.14093/j.cnki.cn10–1132/d.2018.04.001 |
| 中文关键词: 非传统安全研究 总体国家安全 共享安全 安全文明 中国学派 |
| 英文关键词: non-traditional security study, overall national security, shared security, security civilization, Chinese schools |
| 基金项目: |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 2042 |
| 全文下载次数: 1170 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 中国的非传统安全研究已成一门“显学”，且对相关研究、安全现实与安全政策产生了极大影响。中国40年(1978-2017年)的非传统安全研究整体上历经了酝酿与显现、阐释与呼吁、反思与深化、建构与拓展的过程；研究内容丰富且不断出新，逐步形成了较为稳定的研究类型；与国家决策的关系呈现“被忽视——边缘性——中心圈”的发展轨迹；研究驱动包括学理驱动、技术驱动、事件驱动、政策驱动和环境驱动；形成了涵盖组织机构、学生培养、知识传播、政策咨询和学术网络的制度化研究态势。在学术上具备了学派与学科的自觉，推动了安全思想的“范式转型”与“安全文明”的重塑，在政策上牵引着安全治理实践更加综合化与国际化。然而，中国非传统安全研究的理论体系还未形成，专业性、科学性、国际性不足，未来非传统安全研究需要在全球安全的研究格局、元问题与分析框架、理论体系与学派自觉、方法论与量化研究、议题深究与国际对话上有新的持续推进。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Non-traditional security studies (NTSS) in China is becoming increasingly prominent in the field of security studies. It has exerted enormous impact on relevant researches, security realities and security policies. China’s NTSS has undergone a four-stage process of development: conceptualization and preliminary development, further elaboration and asking for more attention, rethinking and in-depth research as well as construction and expansion. Research elements and types were gradually clear and kept updating. In terms of its relations with state policy-making, it was once neglected and marginalized but now has become a top priority on the agenda. The researches in the field of NTSS are mainly driven by scientific principles, technologies, events policies and environments. Furthermore, the institutionalized researches are all-encompassing in that it involves organizations and institutions, students’ nurturing and training, knowledge dissemination, policy consultation and academic networking. Academically, thanks to the school and discipline self-consciousness, China’s NTSS has facilitated the “paradigm shift” of security thinking and the reshaping of “security civilization”. Therefore, in terms of policy-making, it has been able to lead the security governance practices to a more comprehensive and internationalized path. However, it has not yet formulated a theoretical system and been insufficient in its specialization, professionalism or internationalization. In the future, China’s NTSS should forge ahead with research patterns of global security, meta problem and analytical framework, theoretical system and disciplinary self-consciousness, methodology and quantitative studies, in-depth exploration of issues and concerns as well as dialogues in the international arena. |
|
查看全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|