Asian Regionality and Post-2015 Consultation: Donors’ Self-Images and the Discourse
Asian Regionality and Post-2015 Consultation: Donors’ Self-Images and the Discourse
复制标题
亚洲区域性与2015年后磋商：捐助者的自我形象与话语
DOI：
10.1108/s1479-367920140000029015
复制
发表时间：
2016
影响因子：
2.2
通讯作者：
Shoko Yamada
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Shoko Yamada
摘要
本章通过分析日本、韩国、中国、印度和泰国这五个捐助国的政策相关文件，突出了亚洲的特点。它还将审查东南亚教育部长组织和亚洲南太平洋基础教育和成人教育协会等区域机构作为影响各国援助政策的横向渠道所发挥的作用。在分析国家和组织政策的同时，还审查了就2015年后议程建立共识的区域进程，特别侧重于2014年8月举行的亚太区域教育会议。
分析表明，该地区有两个面孔：一个是虚构的，另一个是功能。亚洲捐助者有一个共同的趋势，即提及它们与它们所援助的区域和国家的历史联系以及它们对教育和发展的传统观念。与基于西方价值体系的传统援助原则和方法相比，它们突出了亚洲特色，要么明显，要么以无声的方式。从这个意义上说，具有共同文化根源的亚洲想象共同体被所有政策制定者所理解。
与此同时，在行政方面，该区域作为国家和全球两级之间的一个舞台的重要性在多边全球治理结构中日益得到承认。正如在“全民教育后的全球对话：形成”教育界“共同观点的过程”一章中所讨论的那样，随着参与结构的扩大，本地区在传播全球一级的规范和要求以及收集和总结各国意见方面的预期功能有所增强。
Abstract
This chapter highlights the characteristics of Asia through the analysis of policy-related documents by five donor countries, namely Japan, South Korea, China, India and Thailand. It will also examine the roles played by regional bodies such as the Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization (SEAMEO) and ASPBAE (the Asia South Pacific Association for Basic and Adult Education) as the horizontal channels influencing aid policies in respective countries. Together with the analysis of the national and organizational policies, the regional process of building consensus on the post-2015 agenda is examined, with a particular focus on the Asia-Pacific Regional Education Conference (APREC) held in August 2014.
The analysis reveals that the region has two faces: one is imaginary and the other is functional. There is a common trend across Asian donors to refer to their historical ties with regions and countries to which they provide assistance and their traditional notions of education and development. They highlight Asian features in contrast to conventional aid principles and approaches based on the Western value system, either apparently or in a muted manner. In this sense, the imagined community of Asia with common cultural roots is perceived by the policymakers across the board.
At the same time, administratively, the importance of the region as a stage between the national and global levels is recognized increasingly in the multilateral global governance structure. With this broadened participatory structure, as discussed in the chapter ‘Post-EFA Global Discourse: The Process of Shaping the Shared View of the ‘Education Community’’, the expected function of the region to transmit the norms and requests from the global level and to collect and summarize national voices has increased.