Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin, 2018, No.2, pp.173-187
UDC: 
911.3 + 327.8

Reconstruction of the world-system theory in the context of the integration processes of modern Eurasia

Obukhov A. A. 1 (Novosibirsk, Russian Federation), Golovko N. V. 2 (Novosibirsk, Russian Federation)
1 Candidate of Economics Sciences, Novosibirsk State University, Center for analysis of integration processes in contemporary Eurasia
2 Novosibirsk State University, Chair of ontology, epistemology and methodology of science
Abstract: 

Introduction. Immanuel Wallerstein's world-system theory is one of the most well-known macrosociological paradigms describing the phenomena and structures of historical dynamics. The article aims to generalize the Wallerstein's results on the basis of the analysis of geopolitical and geo-economic interstate integration within the framework of contemporary Eurasia. The first notion to reconsider is the concept of the "core" of the world system which is analyzed in the context of the "duocentric" model of geopolitics that has been formed in the last few years by the special political role played now by the United States and China.
Materials and Methods. The methodological basis of the study is the concept of the "world-system" by I. Wallerstein. We understand the concept of the "world-system" as a research program by I. Lakatos and analyze its positive heuristics, putting forward auxiliary hypotheses that suggest a "more complex" model of "reality", in order to show the progressive nature of the concept of the "world-system" as a program. As the main "empirical basis", the foundations and prospects for the development of the international political and economic systems are considered, strategically following the three main integration projects in the region, – the development of the Eurasian Economic Union, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, and China’s "One belt, one road" comprehensive project.
Results. The possibility to expand the concept of the "world-system" is demonstrated owing to the concept of the simultaneous existence of several "cores" within the framework of one world system. The new "expanded" model of the world-system is aimed to take into account the gravitation of individual states to these or those global "centers of power" and, according to the authors, is able to more profoundly show, first, that the geopolitical place and strategies of those states that are clearly do not fall into this or that basic category of the "one-core" model (Australia, Switzerland, Scandinavian countries, etc.), and secondly – to present the process of Eurasian integration as a "network project" which takes into account "inter-civilizational" interaction – an interaction between states which are included into the "spheres of influence" by different "centers of power".
Conclusions. The complexity of describing the processes of global integration is related to the fact that each participating state should be represented as a subject of a rather complex ontology. In this sense, the proposed concept of the "n-core" model of the world-system grasps, in our opinion, one of the most important features of the landscape of the described interaction of states – its multipolarity. None of the states, even those which are a part of or solely the core of the world system, are free from being subject of influence from another "center of power", the formation of which can be ensured by the fact that even those states that traditionally make up the "periphery" can organize or be involved in various integration processes.

Keywords: 

New Silk Road; China; Integration Processes; World-System Analysis; Geopolitics; Geo-economics

References: 
  1. Berger T., Grabert S., Kempa B. Global macroeconomic uncertainty. Journal of Macroeconomics, 2017, vol. 53, pp. 42–56. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmacro.2017.05.005
  2. Woo J. J., Ramesh M., Howlett M., Coban M. K. Dynamics of global financial governance: Constraints, opportunities, and capacities in Asia. Policy and Society, 2016, vol. 35, issue 3, pp. 269–282. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.polsoc.2016.10.002
  3. Batalov E. Ja. World-Politology: an Emerging Sub-Discipline. International Trends, 2014, vol. 12, no. 36–37, pp. 6–19. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=23488858
  4. Sahoo M., Babu M. S., Dash U. Long run sustainability of current account balance of China and India: New evidence from combined cointegration test. Intellectual Economics, 2016, vol. 10, issue 2, pp. 78–91. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.intele.2017.02.002
  5. Kireeva A. A. Great Powers and Power Dynamics in East Asia. International Trends, 2013, vol.  11, no. 34, pp. 95–102. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=21742069 
  6. Malle S. Russia and China in the 21st century. Moving towards cooperative behavior. Journal of Eurasian Studies, 2017, vol. 8, issue 2, pp. 136–150. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euras.2017.02.003 
  7. Butorina O. V. The specifics of the Eurasian model of economic integration. Contemporary Europe, 2016, no. 2, pp. 28–32. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=25984453
  8. Andronova I. V. Eurasian Economic Union: Opportunities and Barriers to Regional and Global Leadership. International Organisations Research Journal, 2016, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 7–23. (In Russian) DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17323/1996-7845-2016-02-07
  9. Anisimov A. M., Popova A. A. A Structural-Topological Analysis of the Relationship between Actors of Multiple Connections: Intercommunication between the European Union and the Eurasian Economic Union. International Organisations Research Journal, 2016, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 140–159. (In Russian) DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17323/1996-7845-2016-02-140
  10. Bratersky M. V. Isolationism versus Geopolitics: The Dual Role of the Eurasian Economic Union in Global Governance. International Organisations Research Journal, 2016, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 58–70. (In Russian) DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17323/1996-7845-2016-02-58
  11. Konarovsky M. A. Russia and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization: Some Elements of Strategy. International Organisations Research Journal, 2016, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 149–161. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17323/1996-7845-2016-04-149
  12. Arapova E. J. Maritime Silk Road vs. Northern Sea Route: Threats and Opportunities. ETAP: Economic Theory, Analysis and Practice, 2014, no. 4, pp. 84–93. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=22156433
  13. Xing Li, Chenxing Wang. China''s Take on the Future of the Eurasian Union. International Trends, 2014, vol. 12, no. 38, pp. 70–82. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=23065141  
  14. Skriba  A. S. The Eurasian Economic Union and the Silk Road Economic Belt: Players, Interests and Implementation Challenges. International Organisations Research Journal, 2016, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 67–81. (In Russian) DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17323/1996-7845-2016-03-67
  15. Makarov I. A., Sokolova A. K. The Eurasian Economic Union and the Silk Road Economic Belt: Opportunities for Russia. International Organisations Research Journal, 2016, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 40–57. (In Russian) DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17323/1996-7845-2016-02-40
  16. Mikhnevich S. V. The Glory of Intelligence: China’s Smart Power and the Implications for Security in the Asia-Pacific Region. International Organisations Research Journal, 2016, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 92–125. (In Russian) DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17323/1996-7845/2016-01-92
  17. Bordachev T. V., Kazakova A. I., Skriba A. S. Institutions for a Peaceful Eurasia. International Organisations Research Journal, 2016, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 24–39. (In Russian) DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17323/1996-7845-2016-02-24
  18. Zuikov R. S. Russia and the Global World of the XXI Century general Systems Theory Analysis. International Trends, 2013, vol. 11, no. 33, pp. 20–36. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=20788159  
  19. Martynov B. F. Multipolar or Multi-Civilizational World?. International Trends, 2009, vol. 7, no. 21, pp. 13. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=16972911  
  20. Derluguian G. Spaces, Trajectories, Maps: Towards a World-Systems Biography of Immanuel Wallerstein. Journal of World-Systems Research, 2015, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 448–459. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5195/jwsr.2015.14
  21. el-Ojeili C. Reflections on Wallerstein: The Modern World-System, Four Decades On. Critical Sociology, 2015, vol. 41, issue 4-5, pp. 679–700. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0896920513497377
  22. Pawłuszko T. Perspectives of Application the World-Systems Analysis Approach in the Study on International Relations in 21st Century. Historia i Polityka, 2017, no. 21 (28), pp. 9–25. (In Polish) DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/HiP.2017.017
  23. Wallerstein I. A World-System Perspective on the Social Sciences. British Journal of Sociology, 1976, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 343–352. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/589620
  24. Fortesque S. Russia's economic prospects in the Asia Pacific Region. Journal of Eurasian Studies, 2016, vol. 7, issue 1, pp. 49–59. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euras.2015.10.005
  25. Dadabaev T. Evaluations of perestroika in post-Soviet Central Asia: Public views in contemporary Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 2016, vol. 49, issue 2, pp. 179–192. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.postcomstud.2016.03.001
  26. Eom G. H. Silk roads again: Revisiting roads connecting Eurasia. Journal of Eurasian Studies, 2017, vol. 8, issue 1, pp. 1–2. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euras.2016.12.002
  27. Kirkham K. The formation of the Eurasian Economic Union: How successful is the Russian regional hegemony?. Journal of Eurasian Studies, 2016, vol. 7, issue 2, pp. 111–128. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euras.2015.06.002
  28. Golobokov A. S. Various forms and mechanisms of Chinese-Russian cooperation in the energy sphere and the role of non-governmental structures. Pacific Science Review B: Humanities and Social Sciences, 2015, vol. 1 (1), pp. 45–48. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psrb.2016.01.002
Date of the publication 30.04.2018