Hegemony and Power Transitions: Using an Adapted World-Systems Approach to Understand China's Role in Contemporary World Order.

对于中国在世界体系中正在崛起的角色，人们有不同的解读。一些人认为中国是一个修正主义势力，在结构上与西方不同。其他人认为中国是一个在美国领导的自由世界经济秩序中运作并从中受益的维持现状的强国。在这种对中国在国际关系上的立场的分歧解读中，关于中国实力的结构性现实及其成为全球政治主导力量的能力，还存在进一步的辩论。与这些主流分析并驾齐驱的是一套从全球化话语中涌现出来的新理论。这些不同来源的理论挑战了传统的以国家为中心的国际关系模式，并将我们的注意力指向新的跨国势力的出现。这些理论破坏了传统分析的稳定性，传统分析将国家作为主要参与者和拥有实权的有效代理人进行分析。在我的研究中，我认为世界体系理论仍然是理解国际关系的合适起点。本文试图说明，通过民族国家机器构建的世界体系理论、体系思想、相互联系和权力等级安排是理解中国地位的最好起点。然而，我也会争辩说，世界体系理论受到某种概念上的过度确定的限制。霸权、核心、边缘和半边缘等概念过于松散，在分析上也不够复杂，无法准确描述复杂的现实。鉴于世界体系理论的缺陷，我建议提出一个更适合理解国际动态的经过调整的概念框架。矛盾的是，这些动态既高度整合又高度分散。关键词：霸权、世界体系理论、中国、全球化、权力转移。

There are competing interpretations of China's emerging role in the world-system. Some view China as a revisionist power, structurally differentiated from the west. Others see China as a status quo power operating within, and benefitting from the U.S. led liberal world economic order. Within this split interpretation of Chinese positionality with regards to its international relations, there are then further debates as to the structural reality of Chinese power and its ability to become the dominant force in global politics. Running alongside these mainstream analyses are a new set of theories emerging from globalisation discourse. These theories, which are of diverse origin, challenge the traditional state centric presentation of international relations and point our attention to the emergence of new transnational forces. Such theories destabilise traditional analysis that focus analysis on states as principle actors and effective agents with real power. In my research I suggest that world-systems theory is still an appropriate starting point for understanding international relations. I will attempt to show that world-systems theories, ideas of system, interconnection and hierarchical arrangements of power structured through nation state apparatus are the best starting point for understanding the positionality of China. However I will also argue that world-systems theory is limited by a certain conceptual overdetermination. Concepts such as hegemony, core, periphery and semi-periphery are too loose and not analytically complex enough to produce accurate portrayals of complex realities. In light of the shortcoming of world-systems theory I propose to produce an adapted conceptual framework more suited to understanding international dynamics. Dynamics that are paradoxically both highly integrated and highly disaggregated. Keywords: Hegemony, World-systems theory, China, globalisation, power transfer.