Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-fv566 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T12:29:49.175Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Experiencing Southeast Asian Studies in China: A reverse culture shock

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 June 2021

Kankan Xie
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Southeast Asian Studies (SEAS) in China has experienced significant changes in the past twenty years. China's rising political and economic power has stimulated growing demands for better understanding of the wider world, resulting in the rapid development of area studies in recent years. Although SEAS in China predated the relatively recent notion of ‘area studies’ by at least half a century, the boom in area studies has profoundly transformed the field, most notably by attracting a large number of scholars to conduct policy-relevant research. Not only does the ‘policy turn’ reflect shifts of research paradigms in the field of SEAS, but it is also consistent with some larger trends prevailing in China's higher education sector and rapidly changing society in general. This article shows that SEAS in China has grown even more imbalanced, as indicated by the rapid growth of language programmes, absolute domination of short-term policy research, and further marginalisation of humanistic subjects. To respond, Chinese universities have adopted new approaches to SEAS depending on their distinct disciplinary foundations, language coverage, faculty interests, and local governments’ policy preferences.

Type
Diamond Jubilee Series: Southeast Asian Studies in Asia
Information
Journal of Southeast Asian Studies , Volume 52 , Issue 2 , June 2021 , pp. 170 - 187
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The National University of Singapore, 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The author would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and acknowledge the support of the National Social Science Fund of China for funding his research (20CSS020).

References

1 Wang Gungwu, ‘Two perspectives of Southeast Asian Studies: Singapore and China’, in Locating Southeast Asia: Geographies of knowledge and politics of space, ed. Paul H. Kratoska, Remco Raben and Henk Schulte Nordholt (Singapore: Singapore University Press, 2005); Saw Swee-Hock, ‘A review of Southeast Asian Studies in China’, in Southeast Asian Studies in China, ed. Saw Swee-Hock and John Wong (Singapore: ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute, 2006); Hong, Liu, ‘Sino-Southeast Asian Studies: Towards an alternative paradigm’, Asian Studies Review 25, 3 (2001): 259–83Google Scholar; Park Sa-Myung, ‘Southeast Asian Studies in China: Progress and problems’, in The historical construction of Southeast Asian Studies: Korea and beyond, ed. Park Seung Woo and Victor T. King (Singapore: ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute, 2013).

2 Seah, Leander, ‘Between East Asia and Southeast Asia: Nanyang studies, Chinese migration, and National Jinan University, 1927–1940’, Translocal Chinese: East Asian Perspectives 11, 1 (2017): 31–3Google Scholar.

3 Shiping, Tang and Jie, Zhang, ‘Zhongguo Dongnanya yanjiu xianzhuang: Zhiduhua chanshi [The current state of China's Southeast Asian Studies: An institutional perspective]’, Dangdai Yatai [Contemporary Asia-Pacific Studies] 4 (2006): 5Google Scholar.

4 Chenyang, Li, ‘Guanyu xinshidai Zhongguo tese guobie yu quyu yanjiu fanshi de sikao [Reflections on the paradigm of international and regional studies with Chinese characteristics in the new era]’, Shijie Jingji yu Zhengzhi [World Economics and Politics] 10 (2019): 146Google Scholar.

5 The Chinese government often defines the five ‘core interests’ as: maintaining China's fundamental system and state security; state sovereignty and territorial integrity; stable development of the economy and society; peaceful development; and national reunification. However, the concept is rather vague and constantly subject to different interpretations. See Zeng, Jinghan, Xiao, Yuefan and Breslin, Shaun, ‘Securing China's core interests: The state of the debate in China’, International Affairs 91, 2 (2015): 259–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Zhou, Jinghao, ‘China's core interests and dilemma in foreign policy practice’, Pacific Focus 34, 1 (2019): 33CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Shambaugh, David, ‘U.S.–China rivalry in Southeast Asia: Power shift or competitive coexistence?’, International Security 42, 4 (2018): 86–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 In 2000, the Institute for Chinese Social Sciences Research and Assessment of Nanjing University developed the Chinese Social Sciences Citation Index (CSSCI) database to help libraries manage journal subscriptions. However, university administrators now commonly use the index as essential criteria to identify reputable Chinese-language journals in each discipline and evaluate scholars’ work accordingly. CSSCI problematically categorises area studies journals as belonging to the field of ‘International Studies’, with a heavy emphasis on IR.

8 Yifu, Luo, ‘Zhongguo de Dongnanya yanjiu xianzhuang (2007–2017 nian) [Status of Southeast Asian Studies in China (2007–2017)]’, Zhanlüe Juece Yanjiu [Journal of Strategy and Decision-Making] 9, 5 (2018): 82–91Google Scholar.

9 Similar to their practices with CSSCI, Chinese university administrators use the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), a commercial product of Clarivate Analytics, as the basis to identify reputable international (esp. English-language) journals and evaluate scholars’ outputs.

10 Leo Suryadinata identifies China's first generation of Southeast Asianists as those who were born in Mainland China and completed their academic training before the PRC's establishment. Suryadinata regards the returnees as belonging to the second generation. See Leo Suryadinata, ‘Southeast Asianists in China in the last three decades: A preliminary survey’, in Saw and Wong, Southeast Asian Studies in China, pp. 34–7.

11 ‘Jin 40 nianlai, woguo leiji zhaoshou jin 130 wan ming boshi yanjiusheng’ [In the past 40 years, China has enrolled approximately 1.3 million doctoral students], Zhongguo Jiaoyu Zaixian, https://kaoyan.eol.cn/nnews/201909/t20190924_1684506.shtml (accessed 28 Dec. 2020).

12 ‘Wenkesheng tai duo le, Zhongguo yanghang lunwen yiwai yinfa wenke wuyonglun zhizheng’ [Too many students in the humanities, a working paper of China's Central Bank triggers unexpected controversies], BBC News (Chinese), https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/simp/chinese-news-56800291 (accessed 21 May 2021).

13 Qi, Ning, ‘Shehui xuqiu yu xin wenke jianshe de hexin renwu [Social demand and core tasks in the construction of new liberal arts]’, Shanghai Jiaotong Daxue Xuebao [Journal of SJTU] 28, 2 (2020): 14Google Scholar.

14 Ariel Heryanto, ‘Can there be Southeast Asians in Southeast Asian Studies?’, Moussons 5 (2002): 5–7.

15 Qian Chengdan, ‘Jianshe Zhongguo fengge de quyu yu guobie yanjiu [Develop area studies with Chinese characteristics]’, Quyu Guobie Yanjiu Xuekan [Journal of Area Studies] 1, 1 (2019): i–v.

16 Ren Xiao, ‘Zailun quyu guobie yanjiu [Area studies reexamined]’, Shijie Jingji yu Zhengzhi [World Economics and Politics] 1 (2019): 69–72.

17 Ke, Niu, ‘Diqu yanjiu chuangsheng shi shinian: Zhishi goujian, xueshu guihua, he zhengzhi-xueshu guanxi [The first ten years of area studies: Knowledge construction, academic planning, and the relationship between politics and academia]’, Beijing Daxue Jiaoyu Pinglun [Peking University Education Review] 14, 1 (2016): 37–46Google Scholar.

18 Ziniu, Gao, ‘Zuowei kaxueke sushi de yanjiu zhong xin: Yi Kangnaierdaxue Dongnanya yanjiu zhongxin weili (1950–1975) [Interdisciplinary research centre: A case study of Cornell University's Southeast Asia Program (1950–1975)]’, Beijing Daxue Jiaoyu Pinglun 16, 2 (2019): 116–17Google Scholar.

19 Zhang Yang, Lengzhan yu xueshu: Meiguo de Zhongguoxue (1949–1972) [The Cold War and academics: Chinese Studies in the United States, 1949–1972] (Beijing: China Social Sciences Press, 2019), pp. 156–63.

20 Jisi, Wang, ‘Qiantan quyu yu guobie yanjiu de xueke jichu [The disciplinary foundations of area studies: A brief discussion]’, Quyu Guobie Yanjiu Xuekan 1, 1 (2019): 1–5Google Scholar.

21 Zhang Minyu, ‘Guobie he quyu yanjiu xuekeshi [A history of International and Regional Studies]’, Working Paper, School of Foreign Languages, Peking University, 2020, pp. 4–9.

22 Qi, Ning, ‘Quyu yu guobie yanjiu rencai peiyang de lilun yu shijian: Yi Beijingdaxue weili [Theories and practices for cultivating talents in area studies: A case study of Peking University]’, Wai Yu Jie [Foreign Language World] 3 (2020): 38–42Google Scholar.

23 Li Xiuzhong, ‘Guangxi he Yunnan “jiaojin” 20 nian, shui jiang shi mianxiang Dongnanya de menhu?’ [The 20-year competition between Guangxi and Yunnan, who will be the gateway facing Southeast Asia?], Yicai, 29 Aug. 2019, https://www.yicai.com/news/100313388.html (accessed 17 Dec. 2020).

24 Benedict R. O'G Anderson, A life beyond boundaries (London: Verso, 2018), p. 53.