BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//EuroSEAS 2024//EN
X-WR-CALNAME:EuroSEAS 2024
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Europe/Amsterdam
X-LIC-LOCATION:Europe/Amsterdam
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
DTSTART:19700329T020000
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=3;BYDAY=-1SU
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
DTSTART:19701025T030000
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=10;BYDAY=-1SU
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20240919T035400
UID:euroseas-2024-from-contested-to-hybrid-space-transnationality-everyday-sovereignty-and-global-order-1
SUMMARY:From Contested to Hybrid Space: Transnationality, Everyday Sovereignty, and Global Order (1)
LOCATION:REC A2.09
DESCRIPTION:This panel aims to identify and locate a new foundation of unde
 rstanding “everyday” practice of International Relations despite of the ben
 evolent belief and expectation of the liberal order of Second World War Glo
 bal Governance. A vibrant academic “habitus” such as European Association f
 or Southeast Asia Studies would be a perfect space to engage a conversation
  of identifying and locating the gap of understanding the “Western” idea of
  “sovereignty” of which embedded in the concept of nation-state as the main
 stream subject of International Relations. International Relations as a new
  study of understanding “nation-state” in early 1919 has been suffered from
  both Eurocentric and America-centric approaches as well as concept of whic
 h reflects to the blindness of finding the gap between the mainstream and a
 pplicable concept to understand International Relations in Southeast Asia p
 ost-colonial states including as Indonesia. On the other hand, Area studies
  remains silent to bring back the post-colonial discourses to contest and b
 uild critical argument against asymmetric relations among states as well as
  the inequality of global order in the study of International Studies. In t
 his direction, a transdisciplinary approach is required to address such com
 plex engagements as well as diachronic transition process in order to propo
 se alternative choice of policy in which entitled to the idea of “local own
 ership“ for the sustainability sciences or policies. Therefore, the core ai
 m of this panel  invites further interest and direction of applying a new p
 erspective and approach of understanding International Relations of which m
 ore focus on an analytical method of identifying and locating the act of tr
 ansnationality as a relation other than the mainstream of interstate relati
 ons.\n\nPrabawaningtyas (2015), for example, identifies the construction of
  a hybrid space when Indonesian fishers contested the existing of state’s b
 order at seas while Indonesia and Australian agreed of recognizing the prac
 tice of Indonesian traditional fishing right in Ashmore Reef and a surround
 ing water of Australian territorial water in 1974. The construction of tran
 sborder identity is located under, at least four circumstances, namely 1) t
 he contestation between past and present of cross border practices, 2) the 
 continuous practice of tradition in present relevant, 3) the share of geogr
 aphical space a cross border, and 4) human mobility (Prabawaningtyas 2015: 
 161-163).\n\nBy taking account the concept of transnationality (Ishikawa 20
 10), everyday sovereignty (Carvalho, Schia, and Guillaume 2019) and global 
 order (Keohane 1984, Waltz 1993), this panel identifies case studies in pos
 t-colonial states including Indonesia on how the concept transborder identi
 ty juxtaposed and intertwined in certain thematic practices along period of
  time to locate the gap of identity’s construction and the locality of the 
 practices of International Relations.\n\nThe objective of this panel will f
 urther examine the construction of transborder identity by locating the gap
  of identity’s construction and the locality of this practice that can be m
 anifested on certain thematic global issues such as information, supply cha
 in of global markets, carbon market of renewable energy, and migrant worker
 s. The current both policies debate and academic discourse in International
  Relations on the post-pandemic Covid1-19 reveals the vulnerability of the 
 “Westphalian’s” concept of nation-state and liberal order against “critical
  security”. Questions of who’s representing the state? How a nation-state i
 s constructed? Whose security is justified to be a national security? What 
 is national interest? How national interest is constructed and further purs
 ued? How local’s practice is constructed against global discourse? Those ar
 e some root’s question that would be addressed through those thematic field
 . \n\nThis panel aims to invite prospective contributors discussing both ca
 se studies and theoretical approach on the construction of post-colonial st
 ates in order to identify and locate these contested and hybrid space. We a
 re looking forward for the opportunity to arrange a double panel discussion
  for this discussion.
URL:https://euroseas2024.org/panels/from-contested-to-hybrid-space-transnationality-everyday-sovereignty-and-global-order
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Amsterdam:20240724T140000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Amsterdam:20240724T153000
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20240919T035400
UID:euroseas-2024-from-contested-to-hybrid-space-transnationality-everyday-sovereignty-and-global-order-2
SUMMARY:From Contested to Hybrid Space: Transnationality, Everyday Sovereignty, and Global Order (2)
LOCATION:REC A2.09
DESCRIPTION:This panel aims to identify and locate a new foundation of unde
 rstanding “everyday” practice of International Relations despite of the ben
 evolent belief and expectation of the liberal order of Second World War Glo
 bal Governance. A vibrant academic “habitus” such as European Association f
 or Southeast Asia Studies would be a perfect space to engage a conversation
  of identifying and locating the gap of understanding the “Western” idea of
  “sovereignty” of which embedded in the concept of nation-state as the main
 stream subject of International Relations. International Relations as a new
  study of understanding “nation-state” in early 1919 has been suffered from
  both Eurocentric and America-centric approaches as well as concept of whic
 h reflects to the blindness of finding the gap between the mainstream and a
 pplicable concept to understand International Relations in Southeast Asia p
 ost-colonial states including as Indonesia. On the other hand, Area studies
  remains silent to bring back the post-colonial discourses to contest and b
 uild critical argument against asymmetric relations among states as well as
  the inequality of global order in the study of International Studies. In t
 his direction, a transdisciplinary approach is required to address such com
 plex engagements as well as diachronic transition process in order to propo
 se alternative choice of policy in which entitled to the idea of “local own
 ership“ for the sustainability sciences or policies. Therefore, the core ai
 m of this panel  invites further interest and direction of applying a new p
 erspective and approach of understanding International Relations of which m
 ore focus on an analytical method of identifying and locating the act of tr
 ansnationality as a relation other than the mainstream of interstate relati
 ons.\n\nPrabawaningtyas (2015), for example, identifies the construction of
  a hybrid space when Indonesian fishers contested the existing of state’s b
 order at seas while Indonesia and Australian agreed of recognizing the prac
 tice of Indonesian traditional fishing right in Ashmore Reef and a surround
 ing water of Australian territorial water in 1974. The construction of tran
 sborder identity is located under, at least four circumstances, namely 1) t
 he contestation between past and present of cross border practices, 2) the 
 continuous practice of tradition in present relevant, 3) the share of geogr
 aphical space a cross border, and 4) human mobility (Prabawaningtyas 2015: 
 161-163).\n\nBy taking account the concept of transnationality (Ishikawa 20
 10), everyday sovereignty (Carvalho, Schia, and Guillaume 2019) and global 
 order (Keohane 1984, Waltz 1993), this panel identifies case studies in pos
 t-colonial states including Indonesia on how the concept transborder identi
 ty juxtaposed and intertwined in certain thematic practices along period of
  time to locate the gap of identity’s construction and the locality of the 
 practices of International Relations.\n\nThe objective of this panel will f
 urther examine the construction of transborder identity by locating the gap
  of identity’s construction and the locality of this practice that can be m
 anifested on certain thematic global issues such as information, supply cha
 in of global markets, carbon market of renewable energy, and migrant worker
 s. The current both policies debate and academic discourse in International
  Relations on the post-pandemic Covid1-19 reveals the vulnerability of the 
 “Westphalian’s” concept of nation-state and liberal order against “critical
  security”. Questions of who’s representing the state? How a nation-state i
 s constructed? Whose security is justified to be a national security? What 
 is national interest? How national interest is constructed and further purs
 ued? How local’s practice is constructed against global discourse? Those ar
 e some root’s question that would be addressed through those thematic field
 . \n\nThis panel aims to invite prospective contributors discussing both ca
 se studies and theoretical approach on the construction of post-colonial st
 ates in order to identify and locate these contested and hybrid space. We a
 re looking forward for the opportunity to arrange a double panel discussion
  for this discussion.
URL:https://euroseas2024.org/panels/from-contested-to-hybrid-space-transnationality-everyday-sovereignty-and-global-order
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Amsterdam:20240724T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Amsterdam:20240724T173000
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR