Hinterlands and Hypertrophies: Assessments of the Viability of Empires and Nation-States in Central and Eastern Europe, 1900 - 1930s

腹地与肥大：1900-1930 年代中欧和东欧帝国和民族国家的生存能力评估

• 批准号: AH/P008739/1
• 负责人: Klaus Richter
• 金额: $ 24.39万
• 依托单位: University of Birmingham
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Research Grant
• 财政年份: 2017
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2017 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=AH%2FP008739%2F1
• 关键词: Hinterlands; Hypertrophies; Assessments; Viability; Empires

The proposed project analyses the origins, development and impact of the concept of "viability" and its practice in the early 20th century. Viewing a state through the lens of "viability" (from German: Lebensfähigkeit, literal translation "the ability to live") meant interpreting it as a living organism. Transnational expert networks disseminated this approach to statehood throughout Central and Eastern Europe. States whose "viability" was doubted, resisted and adapted to the concept which in turn altered international approaches to "viability". We want to investigate how the circulation of knowledge and practices associated with "viability" lent the concept a dynamic character that changed over time. We will examine how claims to scientific objectivity associated with the concept of "viability" contributed to a broader international "science" of statehood that influenced international politics, economies, and state building over the 20th century. We examine networks of practitioners focused on Central and Eastern Europe and base our analysis on a broad range of published and archival sources.We maintain that "viability" emerged over the late 19th century to become a central principle of statehood in the 20th century, especially during and after the First World War. The assessment of a polity's "viability" meant subjecting it to an allegedly rigorous scientific analysis that interpreted state, nation and territory as organisms. Due to their underdeveloped economies, their supposedly low degree of state power over incoherent territories and the allegedly low level of education and social stratification of their populations, the Russian and Habsburg Empires as well as their successor states were criticised as failing or "unviable" organisms. The project aims to investigate the impact such assessments on the basis of "viability" had on state dissolution and formation, modernisation projects, population policies, international investment, and international politics. The analysis focuses on the discourse of "viability" and its interaction with state building projects. Transnational networks of practitioners, such as academics (geographers, economists and sociologists), politicians, journalists and businessmen, will be at the centre of attention. "Viability" emerged alongside social science disciplines, particularly political geography, sociology and political economy. These disciplines provided many of the experts within the network that deployed the concept of "viability" to assess states. The project investigates the boundaries of participation in the debate, how networks and expertise requirements changed, and how experts positioned themselves vis-à-vis the geopolitical order. "Viability" experts questioned the survivability of empires and the durability of newly created nation states. These "experts" emphasized that coherence in a social, political, and ethnic sense, not territorial expanse, determined state power. World War I raised the profile of these experts. From the perspective of state assessment, the years of intense political turmoil from 1917 to 1923 do not constitute a break, but a point of increased flow and interchange that linked the fates of empires and their successor states. The project will be based on sources in libraries and national archives in Central and Eastern Europe, the UK, and USA. The sources include writings of social scientists, political economists and geographers, as well as reports from the public and private sector that guided economic, demographic and infrastructural projects and transformed "viability" into policy.An examination of "viability" in Central and Eastern Europe promises insights that will resonate beyond the historical project. It will provide insight into the origins of contemporary debates on "failed states" and nation building that shape international politics today.

拟议的项目分析了“生存能力”概念及其在20世纪初期的实践的起源，发展和影响。通过“生存能力”（来自德语：Lebensfähigkeit，Lintel Translation“ The Live the Live”）来查看一个状态，意味着将其解释为一个生活组织。跨国专家网络在整个中欧和东欧都传播了这种国家地​​位。 “生存能力”受到怀疑，抵制和适应该概念的州，反过来又改变了国际方法的“生存能力”。我们想研究与“生存能力”相关的知识和实践背景如何使概念随着时间的流逝而变化。我们将研究与“生存能力”概念相关的科学目标的主张如何促进了一项更广泛的国际国家科学”，该国际科学影响了20世纪的国际政治，经济和国家建设。我们研究了专注于中欧和东欧的从业者网络，并以广泛的出版和档案资源为基础。我们坚持认为，在19世纪后期出现了“生存能力”，成为20世纪的中央国家原则，尤其是在第一次世界大战期间和之后。对政体的“生存能力”的评估意味着将其进行涉嫌严格的科学分析，将国家，国家和领土解释为组织。由于其经济欠发达，他们预期的国家对不一致领土的国家权力程度较低，据称其人口的教育水平和社会分层较低，俄罗斯和哈布斯堡帝国及其后继国家至关重要，因为失败或“不可行”的组织至关重要。该项目旨在根据“生存能力”对国家解散和形成，现代化项目，人口政策，国际投资和国际政治的影响进行调查。该分析重点是“生存能力”及其与国家建设项目的互动的论述。学者（地理学家，经济学和社会学家），政治学家，记者和商人等从业者的跨国网络将成为关注的核心。 “生存能力”与社会科学学科，尤其是政治地理，社会学和政治经济学一起出现。这些学科为网络中的许多专家提供了部署“可行性”来评估国家的概念的专家。该项目调查了参与辩论的边界，网络和专家要求如何改变以及专家如何相对于地缘政治秩序的定位。 “生存能力”专家质疑帝国的生存以及新创建的民族国家的持久性。这些“专家”强调，在社会，政治和种族意义上的连贯性，而不是领土上的国家，确定了国家权力。第一次世界大战提高了这些专家的知名度。从国家评估的角度来看，从1917年到1923年，严重的政治动荡年份并不构成休息时间，而是流动和互换增加的点，与帝国及其后继国家的命运联系在一起。该项目将基于中欧和东欧，英国和美国的图书馆和国家档案馆的来源。这些资料包括社会科学家，政治经济学和地理学家的著作，以及公共和私营部门的报道，指导经济学，人口统计和基础设施项目，并将“可行性”转化为政策。对中欧和东欧的“可行性”的审查会诺言会促进超越历史项目的洞察力。它将洞悉当代关于“失败国家”的辩论的起源，并建立塑造国际政治人士的国家。

项目成果

Trieste and Danzig after the Great War: Imperial Collapse, Narratives of Loss, Reconfigured Globalization

第一次世界大战后的里雅斯特和但泽：帝国崩溃、损失叙述、全球化重构

• DOI: 10.1086/726394
• 发表时间: 2023
• 期刊: The Journal of Modern History
• 作者: Bresciani M

The Catastrophe of the Present and That of the Future: Expectations for European States from the Great War to the Great Depression

当前和未来的灾难：从第一次世界大战到大萧条对欧洲国家的期望

• DOI: 10.1017/s096077732200100x
• 发表时间: 2023
• 期刊: Contemporary European History
• 影响因子: 0.8
• 作者: Richter K

Economic empowerment in empires and nation states: East Central Europe from the 19th century to today

帝国和民族国家的经济赋权：19世纪至今的东中欧

• 发表时间: 2021
• 期刊: Baltic Worlds
• 作者: Richter K

Fragmentation in East Central Europe: Poland and the Baltics, 1915-1929

东中欧的分裂：波兰和波罗的海国家，1915-1929 年

• 发表时间: 2020
• 作者: Richter

International Law and the Transformation of War, 1899-1949: The Case of Military Occupation

国际法与战争的转变，1899 年至 1949 年：军事占领案例

• 发表时间: 2018
• 期刊: Journal of Modern History
• 影响因子: 0.5
• 作者: Gumz J