Globalizing local understanding of fragility in Eurasia

The article aims to introduce the underlying motivation and conceptual underpinning to the special issue entitled “Globalizing Local Understanding of Fragility in Eurasia.” The main purpose of this article is to problematize the popular opinion and portrayal of Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Repub...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Prajakti Kalra, Siddharth Shanker Saxena
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	SAGE Publishing 2021
Materias:	Geography (General) G1-922 Political science J
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/ec83a6810b8541fbb932b9f23ffe37eb
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:ec83a6810b8541fbb932b9f23ffe37eb
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:ec83a6810b8541fbb932b9f23ffe37eb2021-11-09T22:33:54ZGlobalizing local understanding of fragility in Eurasia1879-36651879-367310.1177/18793665211044839https://doaj.org/article/ec83a6810b8541fbb932b9f23ffe37eb2021-07-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1177/18793665211044839https://doaj.org/toc/1879-3665https://doaj.org/toc/1879-3673The article aims to introduce the underlying motivation and conceptual underpinning to the special issue entitled “Globalizing Local Understanding of Fragility in Eurasia.” The main purpose of this article is to problematize the popular opinion and portrayal of Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan) and more generally the countries of Eurasia and the Caucasus as inherently fragile states which are politically unstable and thus on the brink of collapse. This article also seeks to question narratives of modernity that are singular and constantly out of reach for large swathes of the world’s populations because of the narrowness and hegemonic nature of the architecture of global governance. By carefully considering the ways and means through which international institutions categorize countries as fragile and/or failed, the article aims to provide the theoretical foreground for the special issue which focuses on locating inherent community resilience strategies. We explain how the non-participatory norm making behavior of international organizations privilege certain actors, largely the Global North, and simultaneously ignore the majority of Eurasian states. In other words, a demand predicated in the linear evaluation of institutions and norms dictated by global institutions clash with the Eurasian model of inherent complex adaptive capability and introduce fragility. The focus thus is on understanding the ‘local’ based on the historical analysis of development in the region, nodal points of urban development and community life, forms of social capital, and community resilience strategies in the wider Eurasian region.Prajakti KalraSiddharth Shanker SaxenaSAGE PublishingarticleGeography (General)G1-922Political scienceJENJournal of Eurasian Studies, Vol 12 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Geography (General) G1-922 Political science J
spellingShingle	Geography (General) G1-922 Political science J Prajakti Kalra Siddharth Shanker Saxena Globalizing local understanding of fragility in Eurasia
description	The article aims to introduce the underlying motivation and conceptual underpinning to the special issue entitled “Globalizing Local Understanding of Fragility in Eurasia.” The main purpose of this article is to problematize the popular opinion and portrayal of Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan) and more generally the countries of Eurasia and the Caucasus as inherently fragile states which are politically unstable and thus on the brink of collapse. This article also seeks to question narratives of modernity that are singular and constantly out of reach for large swathes of the world’s populations because of the narrowness and hegemonic nature of the architecture of global governance. By carefully considering the ways and means through which international institutions categorize countries as fragile and/or failed, the article aims to provide the theoretical foreground for the special issue which focuses on locating inherent community resilience strategies. We explain how the non-participatory norm making behavior of international organizations privilege certain actors, largely the Global North, and simultaneously ignore the majority of Eurasian states. In other words, a demand predicated in the linear evaluation of institutions and norms dictated by global institutions clash with the Eurasian model of inherent complex adaptive capability and introduce fragility. The focus thus is on understanding the ‘local’ based on the historical analysis of development in the region, nodal points of urban development and community life, forms of social capital, and community resilience strategies in the wider Eurasian region.
format	article
author	Prajakti Kalra Siddharth Shanker Saxena
author_facet	Prajakti Kalra Siddharth Shanker Saxena
author_sort	Prajakti Kalra
title	Globalizing local understanding of fragility in Eurasia
title_short	Globalizing local understanding of fragility in Eurasia
title_full	Globalizing local understanding of fragility in Eurasia
title_fullStr	Globalizing local understanding of fragility in Eurasia
title_full_unstemmed	Globalizing local understanding of fragility in Eurasia
title_sort	globalizing local understanding of fragility in eurasia
publisher	SAGE Publishing
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/ec83a6810b8541fbb932b9f23ffe37eb
work_keys_str_mv	AT prajaktikalra globalizinglocalunderstandingoffragilityineurasia AT siddharthshankersaxena globalizinglocalunderstandingoffragilityineurasia
_version_	1718440799887163392

Globalizing local understanding of fragility in Eurasia

Ejemplares similares