GRK 1613: Risk and East Asia

作为一名从制度主义角度出发的社会科学家，我们的研究思路是研究东亚经济、政治和社会机构的风险责任是如何从国家转移到市场、从公共机构转移到私人机构、从集体转移到个人的社会变革过程的。研究训练组将根据学科方面（经济学、政治学、国际关系、社会学和地理学）关于风险和体制的研究状况，以及关于普遍大规模进程对体制变革的影响的研究，对当代体制变革发展一种风险观点。研究思路是从风险的角度研究制度变迁，并在世界上一个制度逻辑以完全不同的方式发挥作用的地区——东亚——进行研究。本研究计划的最终目标是从风险文献中产生新的见解，以推进制度变革的研究，并通过将东亚研究直接带回欧洲关于当代变革的研究辩论和讨论中，建立对变革的更广泛理解。研究培训小组的副主题借鉴了查尔斯·蒂利的比较方法，专注于四个大的过程，（市场化，个性化，分散化和跨国化），其中制度逻辑的转变处于危险之中，东亚内部的差异和相似的证据以及与欧洲国家的比较可以为当代制度变革的理论和研究的进步提供见解。这四个大的过程是推动风险转移的普遍过程，本着蒂利斯比较方法的精神，在特定的国家（也可能是地区）制度体系、偏好和关于谁应该对风险承担责任的信念的背景下发挥作用。究竟是什么变化，什么混合，这是一个需要仔细系统的实证和比较分析的问题，这正是我们在研究培训组的一系列博士和博士后研究项目中打算进行的。

As social scientists working from an institutionalist perspective, our research idea is to examine how large and universal processes of social change are shifting responsibilities for risks in East Asian economic, political and social institutions, from states to markets, from public to private bodies and from collectivities to individuals. The Research Training Group will develop a risk perspective on contemporary institutional change, building on the state of research about risk and institutions in disciplinary perspective (economics, political sciences, international relations, sociology and geography) and research about the impact of universal large-scale processes on institutional change, both generally and in the specific context of East Asia. The research idea is to study institutional change from the perspective of risk, and to do so in a region of the world - East Asia - where institutional logics have played out in quite different ways. The ultimate aim of this research programme is to generate new insights from the risk literature in order to advance the study of institutional change, and to build a broader understanding of changes by bringing East Asian research squarely back into European research debates and discussion about contemporary transformations. The sub-themes of the Research Training Group draw on the comparative methodology of Charles Tilly to focus on four large processes, (marketisation, individualisation, decentralisation and transnationalisation) wherein shifts in institutional logics are at stake, and where evidence of differences and similarities within East Asia and in comparison to European countries can generate insights for the advancement of theories and research on contemporary institutional change. The four large processes are universal processes driving risk shifts, which, in the spirit of Tillys comparative methodology, play out in the context of specific national (perhaps also regional) institutional constellations, preferences and beliefs about who legitimately bears responsibility for risks. Exactly what shifts and what mixes is a question for careful and systematic empirical and comparative analysis, which is exactly what we intend to undertake in a series of doctoral and postdoctoral research projects in the Research Training Group.