|
|
|
| A Knowledge Mapping Analysis of Research Discourse in the Studies on China’s Non-traditional Security: A Visualization Approach Based on CiteSpace |
| Chen Yumei1,2,3, Fu Huan4 |
1.School of Public Administration / School of Emergency Management, Jinan University, Guangzhou 510632, China
2.Emergency Management Research Center, Jinan University, Guangzhou 510630, China
3.Center for Government Big Data Open & Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship (OGDSE), Jinan University, Guangzhou 510632, China
4.Shenzhen Insurance Association, Shenzhen 518046, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Under the globalization background, there have emerged many insecure factors of various forms directly threatening all countries and human beings. Therefore, non-traditional security research and non-traditional security crisis response have become the top priority of academic planning and decision-making in countries around the world. Through a comprehensive comparison and analysis of the evolution of “research discourse” in the domestic and foreign literature on China’s non-traditional security research in the past 20 years, research hotspots and trends can be intuitively extracted, thus enabling better understanding and guidance in the construction and development of the theoretical research framework of China’s non-traditional security. In this study, China’s non-traditional security and related topics were used as keywords to search in the Chinese full-text journal database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), from which 3,064 Chinese documents of the past 20 years were retrieved. Meanwhile, the retrieval formula “SU=security study+China+Chinese” was used to search in the English literature database Web of Science, and 939 English journals were obtained. After a total of 4,003 documents were imported into the document analysis software CiteSpace, macro- and micro-quantitative researches on the interdisciplinary scope, research hotspots, discourse evolution and development trends of China’s non-traditional security were conducted in multiple dimensions such as the distribution of disciplines, research institutions and authors’ cooperation networks, keywords co-occurrences and clustering clusters, and burst terms from the research fronts. A comprehensive comparison with international non-traditional security research theories was also done at the same time.In the past 20 years, China’s non-traditional security research has shown an obvious growth trend in quantity. It reached its climax in 2014, after China put forward the “overall national security outlook”. Domestic research is more comprehensive and is led by Chinese and international politics researches, showing an interdisciplinary nature. Foreign research is more specific and can be refined into various non-traditional security areas such as economics and environmental ecology. At present, domestic research institutions are mainly located at Zhejiang University, Fudan University, University of International Relations, etc. Most journals are written by YU Xiaofeng, LIU Yuejin, XU Huabing, etc. However, there is still a lack of in-depth integration and cooperation among researchers from different institutions. An effective academic exchange and cooperation mechanism has not yet been formed. Most of the research institutions and scholars contributing to the relevant English literature are mainly domestic, mostly from the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Zhejiang University and other institutions.Nine clustering clusters were formed according to the co-occurrence and hierarchical cluster analysis maps, including security cooperation, overall national security outlook, non-traditional security, human security, non-combat military operations, North America, international cooperation, fields, and higher education. In the analysis of burst terms from the research fronts, 57 burst terms were obtained from all keywords and nominal terms. They have roughly gone through three stages from 1999 to the present. Globalization, cultural security, overall national security outlook, and the Belt and Road Initiative have become popular keywords at each stage. After comparing the development of international theories on non-traditional security research and the most frequently used keywords in the foreign literature such as “China”, “security”, and “food security”, this article summarizes four evolution paths: (1) high-level political security research focusing on “globalization”; (2) low-level political security research focusing on “environmental security” and “social security”; (3) soft security research focusing on “cultural security” and “network security”; and (4) the security paradigm and security field research based mainly on “the Belt and Road Initiative” and “overall national security outlook”.
|
|
Received: 14 February 2019
|
|
|
|
1 余潇枫、李佳： 《非传统安全：中国的认知与应对（1978—2008年）》，《世界经济与政治》2008年第11期，第89-96页。
2 李杰、陈超美： 《CiteSpace：科技文本挖掘及可视化》（第二版），北京：首都经济贸易大学出版社，2017年。
3 王勇： 《论相互依存对我国国家安全的影响》，《世界经济与政治》1994年第6期，第62-67页。
4 王逸舟： 《论综合安全》，《世界经济与政治》1998年第4期，第5-14页。
5 傅梦孜： 《从经济角度谈对“非传统安全的看法”》，《现代国际关系》1999年第3期，第1-47页。
6 王逸舟： 《重视非传统安全研究》，《人民日报》2003年5月21日，第7版。
7 俞晓秋、李伟、方金英等： 《非传统安全论析》，《现代国际关系》2003年第5期，第44-53页。
8 陈悦、陈超美、刘则渊等： 《CiteSpace知识图谱的方法论功能》，《科学学研究》2015年第2期，第242-253页。
9 余潇枫、林国治： 《论“非传统安全”的实质及其伦理向度》，《浙江大学学报（人文社会科学版）》2006年第6期，第104-112页。
10 Price D. J.， “Networks of scientific paper，” Science， Vol. 3683， No. 149 （1965）， pp. 510-515.
11 李凤琴： 《我国人口老龄化研究的热点主题及前沿态势：基于1998—2007年CSSCI刊源论文的知识图谱分析》，《大理大学学报》2019年第11期，第69-76页。
12 Chen C.， “CiteSpace Ⅱ： detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature，” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology， Vol. 57， No. 3 （2006）， pp. 359-377.
13 李文杰： 《我国老年人长期照护研究热点与趋势：基于CiteSpace的可视化分析》，《武汉理工大学学报（社会科学版）》2017年第2期，第81-87页。
14 孟宪生： 《不能忽视整体安全》，《光明日报》2007年6月6日，第11版。
15 刘胜湘： 《西方现实主义国际安全理论及其批判》，《武汉大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2006年第2期，第209-215页。
16 刘胜湘： 《西方自由主义国际安全理论及其批评》，《太平洋学报》2005年第9期，第21-28页。
17 刘中民、桑红： 《西方国际关系理论视野中的非传统安全研究》，《世界经济与政治》2004年第4期，第32-37页。
18 艾喜荣： 《话语与话语之外：安全化理论发展述略》，《世界经济与政治论坛》2016年第6期，第51-69页。
19 Balzacq T.， “The three faces of securitization： political agency，audience and context，” European Journal of International Relations， Vol. 2， No. 11 （2015）， pp. 171-201.
20 英］巴里·布赞、［丹］琳娜·汉森： 《国际安全研究的演化》，余潇枫译，杭州：浙江大学出版社，2011年。
21 余潇枫： 《从危态对抗到优态共存——广义安全观与非传统安全战略的价值定位》，《世界经济与政治》2004年第2期，第8-13页。
22 易佑斌： 《国际关系中的和合主义价值论研究——兼论人类命运共同体思想的价值意蕴》，《邵阳学院学报（社会科学版）》2018年第1期，第43-48页。
23 Weaver O.， “Politics security， theory，” Security Dialogue， Vol. 42， No. 1 （2011）， pp. 465-480.
24 英］巴瑞·布赞、［丹］奥利·维夫、［丹］迪·怀尔德： 《新安全论》，朱宁译，杭州：浙江人民出版社，2003年。
25 Weaver O.， “Ecuritization and desecuritization，” http：//s3.amazonaws.com/prealliance_oneclass_sample/YzKXqlKOp2.pdf， 2019-12-14.
26 新加坡］梅利·卡拉贝若-安东尼、［新加坡］拉尔夫·埃莫斯、［美］阿米塔夫·阿查亚编著： 《安全化困境：亚洲的视角》，段青编译，杭州：浙江大学出版社，2010年。
27 余潇枫、谢贵平： 《“选择性”再建构：安全化理论的新拓展》，《世界经济与政治》2015年第9期，第104-121页。
28 余潇枫： 《中国未来安全的重要议题：质量安全——兼谈总体国家安全观的贡献与完善》，《人民论坛·学术前沿》2018年第4期，第52-60页。
29 陈玉梅、付欢： 《中国非传统安全研究的进展及难题——基于CiteSpace的知识图谱量化分析》，《现代国际关系》2019年第6期，第57-65页。 |
|
|
|
2021, Vol. 51 
