| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
187022
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
China’s cyber norm-building efforts can be usefully explored based on the concept of the norm life cycle developed by Finnemore and Sikkink. Although China puts cyber sovereignty and government involvement at the core of its cyber governance approach, its Internet policies are a result of interactions between state agencies and business units, and recent reforms suggest greater involvement of Chinese companies. Moreover, many countries, including some from the West, have placed increasing emphasis on intergovernmental involvement and data sovereignty when developing their Internet policies. The EU, for instance, believes that digital sovereignty is necessary to protect its own market from US and Chinese technology giants. Despite the fundamental differences between Brussels's digital sovereignty and Beijing’s cyber sovereignty, the dichotomy between China’s sovereignty-oriented approach and the more open approach of Western countries is more blurred than it may appear, leading to Western countries, the EU in particular, potentially becoming more receptive to China’s cyber norms.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
145002
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
London, IISS, 2016.
|
| Description |
155p.pbk
|
| Series |
Adelphi Series; no. 456
|
| Standard Number |
9781138211162
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:2/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 058653 | 303.48830951/INK 058653 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
| 058755 | 303.48830951/INK 058755 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
187024
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In order to better capture the dynamics of global cyber governance, it is important to go beyond the established West vs. non-West dichotomy in the scholarly literature and thus develop a more nuanced understanding of the variations of cyber governance norms and approaches within and beyond the traditional Western camp, as well as to take into account the role of regional organisations in reshaping the normative framework of cyber governance. Indeed, the European Union is emerging as a new norm entrepreneur and autonomous regional actor in cyber governance by proactively projecting its regulatory and normative power in the digital sphere. In contrast, the development of ASEAN’s cyber governance norms is a process of norm subsidiarity based on ASEAN’s unique diplomatic culture and normative structure characterised by the ASEAN Way and the principle of ASEAN centrality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
187023
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Global cyber governance is characterised by a West vs. non-West paradigm that glosses over a significant body of states that exhibit more nuanced positions. Such dichotomy has gained greater traction in the midst of geopolitical tensions between the United States on the one hand and China and Russia on the other. Examining the roles and limitations of middle powers, such as Singapore and South Korea, in their efforts to shape global cyber governance allows moving beyond the West vs. non-West paradigm. By employing a range of middle-power behaviours, Singapore and South Korea have been able to carve out a unique role as middle powers and, to some extent, shape the arena in which debates on global cyber governance take place, although not without constraints.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|