Current Projects

This page will keep my students and colleagues updated on my current projects. I will also use the space to brainstorm about potential research topics.

Recent projects (2023)

Short Term

With the publication of my most recent papers on ADIZs in East Asia and Secondary State Hierarchy Formation Projects, my workflow is moving forward with some papers on the politics of technology and others continuing with the investigation of hierarchy formation (see attached image).

Mid-Term

In the mid-term, I envision my research activities splitting into two streams. First, I plan to continue investigating Korea’s role in regional hierarchies because I believe that the peninsula’s experience is useful for international relations scholars to refine existing theories of hierarchy. In contrast to traditional perspectives—which understood hierarchy as a power-based diplomatic relationship between states—new approaches are focused on tracing the processes of international hierarchy formation and resistance in domestic and transnational spaces (e.g. MacKay 2019; Sharman 2013). These hierarchical orders are increasingly conceptualized as layered or nested, with actors in the middle playing a significant role in maintaining and shaping the systems. This is in conjunction with growing awareness of the significance of culture as a key resource for the competing networks seeking to create or destabilize hierarchical orders. For example, my own research has been focusing on cultural and memory repertoires used to create/resist secondary states’ hierarchical relationships. Building on these insights, I have been developing a model of hierarchical lifecycles and tracing how states employ different strategies at distinct points in their rise and/or decline. Essentially, this model argues that hierarchy is not reducible to power differences but is better understood as a typology of different patterns of interaction, each with their own genealogies. I am currently writing a paper exploring some of these interactions between the US and South Korea in the areas of semiconductors and space technologies (aiming for an early 2024 submission to an SSCI journal). This model also has relevance for future papers seeking to better understanding South Korea’s behavior in Southeast Asia, such as its up and down relationship with Indonesia, one of the upcoming countries in the region.

My second work stream is the finalization of several sub-projects on Korean topics. The first is a paper on South Korean gender, which argues that the stickiness of the country’s gender inequality requires a modification of the Feminist Political Economy model to account for societal resistance to government gender policy. The paper is currently being revised in anticipation of submission to a SSCI journal in the late summer of 2023. A planned follow-up study to this paper will focus on the politics of the Korean anti-feminist movement, with a particular focus on the role of violence. The second sub-project is a theoretical paper examining how liberal ideology creates distortion effects in negotiations between states. Although this is framed as a security studies paper—and will be aimed at a top-level IR journal—one of the case studies will look at ROK-DPRK negotiations. This, I feel, exemplifies how my scholarship often strays from the disciplinary boundaries of Korean Studies but continues to revolve around central questions about Korea’s role in regional and global dynamics.

Long-Term

If my recent work exemplifies my international relations background, my long-term research agenda seeks to leverage my science and technology studies (STS) background. I have published work on the emerging technologies of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, especially their human rights impacts, but also investigated their impacts on security in East Asia and beyond. In the future, I would like to expand this aspect of my research by linking it more explicitly to Korean case studies. The discipline of STS is still largely Western-centric—built on the frameworks produced by European and American scholars investigating their own technological assemblages—and East Asian contributions to the field are comparatively limited. Conversely, Korean Studies frequently focuses more on social and cultural issues rather than reflexively engaging with the complexities of new technologies, though there are notable exceptions (e.g. Kim 2015; 2021). Therefore, I think there is an opportunity to bring these two disciplines into closer dialogue. On one hand, STS theories and methodologies can help us better understand the significance of the materiality and post-materiality of Korean culture. On the other hand, Korean cases and examples are crucial for broadening these STS insights and testing their empirical relevance to non-Western societies. Particularly interesting is the fact that Korea is a digitally advanced democracy with its own ecosystem of apps, programs, and technologies that are often built around alternative design choices compared to their Western or Chinese counterparts. This includes artifacts as diverse as dating apps, word processors, and virtual entertainers and influencers. Tracing the political, ethical, and commercial implications of these design choices in the Korean context and comparing them with Western or regional examples promises to be a rich and productive vein of scholarship that will supplement my existing work streams on Korean politics and foreign affairs.

Security Stuff

This is outside the scope of my work at SSK Human Rights Forum, so I do not have as much time to devote to it as I would like. Nevertheless, research on peace and security issues is one of my core interests. I have a couple working papers finished and will be submitting them to journals this year.

Imagining the Dragon: US Elites’ Historical Perceptions of China’s Rise

Historical controversies are widely seen to be an obstacle to peace and cooperation in East Asia but this study looks beyond the usual suspects—Korea, China, and Japan—and investigates the collective memory work of American policymakers and foreign policy analysts. Despite claims to be operating from a more objective understanding of the past, US elites’ views of the rise of China are deeply shaped by an assortment of embedded historical myths, assumptions, and questionable analogies. Three interlinked narratives of China’s rise are described in detail: 1) Ungrateful China 2) Aggressive China 3) Fragile China. These myths have important policy implications in how America responds to its most recent challenger. Ultimately, these findings demonstrate the need for American elites to be more self-critical about the myths that they tell themselves. Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific will require all sides to re-visit their collective memories, not just Asian countries.

The Technopolitics of THAAD in East Asia

The decision by South Korean authorities to ask the American military to deploy a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile battery in 2016 unleashed a storm of protest, both domestically and internationally. Was this hostility to a defensive weapon system simply the result of ignorance and misinformation? Or does it tell us something more profound about the intersection of complex technologies and world politics? This work draws on scholarly work in the field of Science and Technology Studies (STS) to better explain the behavior of actors in the debate over THAAD and situates their strategies in theoretical and empirical context. It suggests that the controversy cannot be fully explained through traditional theories of International Relations, which put technology in a black box. First, the paper looks at the role of state and non-state actors in the controversy, highlighting key discursive and rhetorical strategies used to shape and contest the meaning of these missiles. Thinking of THAAD as having a self-evident ‘truth’ obscures the considerable investment of time and resources needed to stabilize its meaning in the face of rival interpretations. Second, it explores how the materiality of the human and non-human assemblages enable, constrain, and may even thwart state attempts to exercise power in the region. Ultimately, technology does have an inner truth—in practice—but it is not always a convenient one for its users.

Human Rights and Technology

Since joining SSK Human Rights Forum, I have embarked on the exploration of the theoretical and material intersections between human rights and technology. I believe that applying frameworks and concepts from the field of Science and Technology Studies (STS) alongside a human rights perspective is a productive way to explore the implications of our increasingly complex material and digital environments. This year, much of my work has involved analyzing the business and human rights implications of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, especially datafication.

This has developed into a joint project involving a variety of groups, including the SSK Human Rights Forum, KU Human Rights Center, and the United Nations Research Institute on Social Development (UNRISD).

For a brief introduction to the issue see our think piece on the UNRISD homepage.

LINK

2019 Projects

With our blockchain paper now out of the way, our team here at SSK International Human Rights Center has started work on another project looking at the effectiveness of human rights due diligence. Here is the tentative proposal for our paper.

Human Rights Due Diligence and New Technologies

The United Nations on Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (2011) were an important response of the International Community to the challenges of economic liberalization, especially the practice of off-shoring production to areas with weaker environmental and labor rights. An important aspect of these principles is the requirement for companies to engage in human rights due diligence, which is a multi-step process whereby companies identify and mitigate the human rights impacts of a company’s activities.

However, is this framework adequate for dealing with new technologies such as AI, autonomous cars, and big data? These new technologies of datification, distribution, and analysis constitute an important shift in global economic, political, and social practices, which some call the fourth industrial revolution: “These emerging technologies are not merely incremental advances on today’s digital technologies. [They] are truly disruptive—they upend existing ways of sensing, calculating, organizing, acting and delivering” [1] Business analysts also describe this as a convergence of technologies and data that will radically transform how value is created.[2]

What obstacles and gaps exist in applying the framework of business and human rights, especially human rights due diligence, to the issue of new technologies? This paper first surveys existing literature on the UN Guiding Principles and human right due diligence to identify historical debates about their efficacy. [3] Although broadly successful in many contexts, human rights due diligence has faced important implementation and enforcement challenges. We then identify key threats and opportunities from new technologies of datafication, distribution, and analysis. Interestingly, we find that new technologies, such as blockchain and the Internet of Things, may make human rights due diligence easier to perform. On the other hand, we find that the complex nature of these new technologies and their growing integration into private-public instruments of political and social governance are serious challenges. Are voluntary principles adequate protection in an era where business activities increasingly blur together with governance activities?

Endnotes

[1] Klaus Schwab and Nicholas Davis, Shaping the Fourth Industrial Revolution (New York: Currency, 2018) Preface, Para. 4.

[2] Martin Dube, “Driving Convergence and Interoperability for Industrial IoT & Industrie 4.0,” Cisco Blogs, November 23, 2016, http://blogs.cisco.com/manufacturing/driving-convergence-for-industrial-iot-industrie-4-0; PTC, “Converging Forces: Unlocking the Value Created by the Convergence of the Physical and Digital Worlds,” accessed November 5, 2018, https://www.ptc.com/-/media/Files/PDFs/About/Physical_Digital_Convergence_WP.ashx.

[3] John Ruggie, Just Business: Multinational Corporations and Human Rights (W.W. Norton & Co., 2013); UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights, Report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises UN A/73/163 (Jul. 16, 2018).

2018 Projects

Inspired by the Seoul Conference on the International Model Mobility Convention, Dr. Seunghyun Nam and myself have started work on a new paper critically examining the use of blockchain technology as a governance tool for marginalized people such as refugees and migrants. There are many positive developments surrounding this technology but also some important regulatory and technical issues that need to be considered. We are also starting work on a paper examining the abduction issue in Northeast Asia and its possible implications for reconciliation between North and South Korea.

I have also been preparing a paper on the North Korean nuclear issue. It is still in its preliminary stages but I am feeling excited about it. Does an obscure NATO debate in the Cold War hold the key to peace in Northeast Asia? I am starting to think that it does. I will give more details as my work progresses...

UPDATE Nov. 8, 2018 - These summer projects have now turned into fall and winter projects! Nevertheless, progress is being made. The blockchain paper will be submitted by early 2019 and the paper linking NATO and the nuclear crisis will be finished by early December. The abduction paper is on the back burner for now because everyone here at the SSK International Human Rights Center is busily working on a MOFAT project and organizing a large international conference on Tech and HR in December. The life of a research professor means that there is never enough time to do research!

New Frontiers of Profit and Risk - Working Paper

UPDATE February 2020 - This article has finally been published in New Political Economy, a very nice conclusion to my time at Korea University's SSK International Human Rights Research Center.

The Fourth Industrial Revolution, characterized by the fusion of physical, digital, and biological technologies, will have profound social and economic consequences. But what impact will it have on human rights? This article critically interrogates key writings and speeches about the Fourth Industrial Revolution, which requires reading between the lines of technical, business, and policy-orientated materials that rarely address human rights explicitly. The findings are a mix of good and bad news. First, the traditional linkage between economic competition and violations of bodily integrity is weakening as new forms of profitability in tomorrow’s digital ecosystems require empowered and creative individuals. However, these celebratory visions of the profitable interpenetration of our bodies, hardware and virtual worlds has a dark side. Tomorrow’s human rights violations will be dangerously subtle, diffuse, and sophisticated. We are approaching an unprecedented era of micro-governance by private actors and the rise of new threats to mental integrity.

This is one of those articles that seems to struggle to find a home. I always get excellent responses at conferences but then it gets rejected whenever I submit it to a journal. Although this has been very frustrating process, in hindsight I can say that it has been a good learning process. In many ways, I think it was too ambitious and tries to cross too many disciplinary boundaries and leaves too much unexplained. My mission this summer is fixing it up.

Also, for any of my students who are reading this, I hope it gives you some inspiration. No matter how much I am criticizing your presentations and papers in class, just remember that someone is also doing the same thing to me! It is all part of the academic food-chain.

Google Sites

Report abuse