Suchergebnisse

Starting from a series of "General Viewpoints", i. e. a catalogue of basic statements on the role and position of Political Geography as an empirical discipline, the author turns to some topics of special significance to the interrelations between Southeast Asia and the powers of the industrialized world. Thus, under the heading "Old and New Power-Centres in Change" the functional consequences of post-colonial power regrouping are shortly discussed, leading to the (theoretical) conclusion that, as a rule, the old "power-centres" must expect a change for the worse whilst the new ones can count on the contrary, be it from social or the economic view. This is often denied by expert interpretations of what is commonly called "The Problem of Population Explosion", especially when it comes to aspects of poverty. Closer investigation, however, reveals many weak points and contradictions within the concept of population/poverty growth. There is, e.g. no satisfactory definition of "poverty" as yet. Furthermore, comparison between economic theory and socio-ecological field observations can lead to markedly different conclusions, including last but not least, that "mass pauperization", reducing the average life-spans, is incompatible with "explosive" population growth. In other words, many of the categories and analytic tools of the industrialized world are inadequate for a proper functional understanding of Southeast Asian reality. No less misleading are many commonplace ideas of a growing food gap and of "Development through Industrialization", two topics whose ambivalence can readily be described in geographical terms. "What to do?" This final paragraph briefly depicts a course of basic research that, with the means and measures of Political Geography, can render a more reliable platform for the future cooperation of "developing" and "industrialized" nations. Decision-making, however, cannot be the task of an empirical research discipline; this must be left, now as before, to the politicians.

Untersucht werden Problembereiche der Beziehungen zwischen Südostasien und der industrialisierten Welt. Die Machtveränderungen der nachkolonialen Zeit werden kurz diskutiert. Es wird die Folgerung gezogen, daß die alten Machtzentren in sozialer und ökonomischer Hinsicht eine schlechtere Entwicklung zu erwarten haben, die neuen dagegen eine günstigere. Diese Position steht damit im Gegensatz zu Konzepten, die sich auf die These der Bevölkerungsexplosion stützen. Widersprüche und Mängel dieses Standpunktes werden hervorgehoben (z.B. mangelnde Definition von Armut; Widerspruch zwischen erwarteter Massenverelendung mit abnehmender Lebenserwartung und prognostiziertem explosivem Bevölkerungswachstum). Es wird aufgezeigt, daß viele Kategorien und Analyseinstrumente der industrialisierten Welt für das Verständnis der südostasiatischen Wirklichkeit nicht geeignet sind. Der Autor skizziert zum Schluß, wie die Politische Geographie zu einem besseren Verständnis der Entwicklungsländer und der industrailisierten Länder beitragen kann. (KE2)