In recognition of the 40th anniversary of Issues & Studies, the journal's history is traced from its 1964 inception; its new intellectual focus on social science research related to the People's Republic of China, Taiwan, & East Asia is articulated; changes in its format that include forum, roundtable, issues focus, & special issue features are described; & its new administrative procedures & services are identified. J. Zendejas
Focus includes mix of political scientists, sociologists, media experts, area studies specialists, and policy analysts discussing 2004 presidential elections and referenda, and book review/roundtable on Taiwan/Chinese identity by political scientists, sociologists, historians, and anthropologists; 30 articles.
We seek to provide an overview of the relationship between the English-language study of Taiwan & the social science disciplines, focusing primarily on political science, yet touching also on sociology, developmental studies, & economics. We identify three main periods in the evolution of Taiwan studies: (1) that from the end of WWII to the late 1970s saw the marginalization of Taiwan studies vis-a-vis China studies; (2) that of the early 1980s to the late 1990s, when, due to Taiwan's rising economic strength & democratic transition, Taiwan studies began to rise to fame, to become well-integrated with the social sciences: & (3) that since 2000, with Taiwan studies now facing both challenges & opportunities as it tries to remain integrated with the social sciences. We close with a comparison of the different research environments in both the US & Taiwan, discuss their respective roles in influencing the overall development of Taiwan studies, & suggest ways in which the social science research conducted in these two major venues for Taiwan research can be integrated more closely. 125 References. Adapted from the source document.
This article seeks to highlight the methods by which The China Quarterly (CQ) -- the founding journal of the modern China studies field -- has helped create a larger communal identity among researchers interested in the People's Republic of China. The argument is that CQ has used a variety of tools at its disposal -- including choices regarding articles, book reviews, research notes, obituaries, cover design, editorial staff, advisory board, editorial notes, advertisements, & extra-journal activities & publications -- to (1) create an editor-readership connection that creates a more intimate "community of like-minded scholars"; (2) maintain an informal yet quite public "China studies field membership list"; (3) act as a community newsletter, noting events, institutes, & publications of interest to the field; (4) present a "living textual history" of the development of the field; & (5) define or debate the topics, methodologies, & broad research directions that constitute China studies research. These five functions have allowed CQ to shape a communal identity among China watchers that extends far beyond the journal itself. The article closes by drawing implications for attempts to define the China studies field today. Adapted from the source document.