• The Southeast Asian review
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.93-135
• /
• 2011

Vietnamese scholars contend that they have developed Southeast Asian studies viewing Southeast Asia as both a geographical entity with a long history and cultural tradition and a strategic region for modern development. This study has traced the construction of Southeast Asian studies as an academic discipline in Vietnam through the studies and arguments of Vietnamese scholars. It has put primary focus on the institutionalization of Southeast Asian studies, taking note of the assessment and perceptions of Vietnamese scholars. It also looked into the construction and limitations of Southeast Asian studies in Vietnam, which advocates Southeast Asian Studies as interdisciplinary area studies, with stressing of the origin of indigenous studies. The major contents of this study include: First, a historic overview of the institutionalization of Southeast Asian studies centering on research institutions of Southeast Asian studies in Vietnam, Second, the perceptions of Southeast Asian studies inside Vietnam and the inside evaluation of the effort to indigenize Southeast Asian studies. This study took note of Vietnamese scholars' perceptions and assessment of Southeast Asian studies performed by outsiders, primarily by Western scholars; the perceptions and evaluation of Southeast Asian studies conducted by Southeast Asian insiders; and the perceptions and evaluation of the origin of Southeast Asian studies indigenous to Vietnam. Last, it examined the construction and limitations of Southeast Asian studies in Vietnam, which advocates the studies as interdisciplinary regional studies.

• The Southeast Asian review
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.1-40
• /
• 2010

China and Southeast Asia share intimate relationships based on close spatial, temporal and human conditions. Thus, Southeast Asian studies in China boast of a long lineage of 'traditional', 'embryonic', 'closed' and 'opened' Southeast Asian studies. In the modern period the 'embryonic Southeast Asian studies,' professing conservative nationalism based on traditional Sino-centric perspectives, accumulated elementary knowledges on the history of Sino-Southeast Asian relations and Chinese communities in Southeast Asia. On the other hand, 'closed Southeast Asian studies' standing for radical Communism suffered from chronic stagnation. After the Reform and Opening, 'opened Southeast Asian studies' recorded impressive progress in the restoration and development of Southeast Asian studies. Nevertheless, 'opened Southeast Asian studies' are faced with some serious problems such as biased perspectives, traditional methods, and national subjects. Most of all, it is urgent to overcome Sino-centric perspectives on Southeast Asia. Despite the opening of Southeast Asian studies to the diverse methods of modern social sciences, descriptive studies prevail over analytical ones. Regardless of the diversification of subjects, national questions such as the overseas Chinese and cross-border nationalities are prone to excessive nationalism.

• The Southeast Asian review
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.43-93
• /
• 2012

This paper examines the performances of economics for Southeast Asian studies and finds the relationship between economics and Southeast Asian studies in Korea. Based on this we try to find the direction and the way how economics contributes to Southeast Asian studies. First of all, we look into several journals on area studies, such as Review of Southeast Asia, and find out that economics researches on Southeast Asia are much fewer than expected. This shows that Korean economists are not much interested in the issue of Southeast Asia and reflects the academic differences as discipline in economics and interdisciplinary Southeast Asian studies. However, we could find the common area that economics and Southeast Asian studies can share. Also, we suggest some points that economics contributes to development of Southeast Asian studies toward a independent academic discipline. It includes the theory and methodology of international, and development economics. The rapid development of information and communication technology and the economic integration by globalization needs new and modified economic theory and methodology for research on Southeast Asia. Adopting the objective and statistical methodology of economics could level up Southeast Asian studies as social science. Also, Southeast Asian studies need to recruit more actively economics research topics and methodology. Economics could attribute to the development of Korean Southeast Asian studies.

• SUVANNABHUMI
• /
• v.7 no.1
• /
• pp.89-103
• /
• 2015

Over the last decade, the field of Southeast Asian Studies has been inundated with issues of its "territory" (or the definition of what comprises Southeast Asia), relevance and future. The methodology of approaching Southeast Asian Studies has also come under constant scrutiny providing much fodder for debate. One significant suggestion was that the field of Southeast Asian Studies should "break out of the comfort zone" (Van Schendel, Bijdragen, 2012:168(4)). This paper will explore some of the ways of approaching Southeast Asian Studies beyond that comfort zone by examining other/alternative units of studying Southeast Asia in place of the traditional (or statist) perspectives that tend to confine the field within the scope of the national/nation-state boundaries. The paper will also provide some personal observations of the author on the current state and limitations to teaching and researching Southeast Asian Studies in the region.

• SUVANNABHUMI
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.35-49
• /
• 2017

This paper will concentrate on how various particular Southeast Asian conditions created a distinct Southeast Asian cultural identity despite a very challenging geographical and historical diversity in the region. The paper will argue that Southeast Asians demonstrate an ability to adapt to changes and new values but also exhibit fatalism through a very high degree of passive acceptance to political and other changes that affect their society. The paper identifies a degree of environmental and geographical uniqueness in Southeast Asia that shapes context and gives rise to very distinct cultural traits. The historical transformation in the region brought about by colonialism and nationalism, combined with this geographical and political make-up of the region, had an immense impact on Southeast Asian society as it fostered adaptability. Finally, the political transitions brought about by various conflicts and wars that continued to affect the area in rapid succession all throughout the 20^th century likewise contributed immensely to a local Southeast Asian fatalistic response towards change. Historically, Southeast Asia demonstrated these socio-cultural responses to such an extent that these are argued to permeate the region forming a distinct aspect of Southeast Asian culture.

• The Southeast Asian review
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.77-123
• /
• 2011

Recently, Southeast Asian people, its food, natural sceneries and so on have been increasingly exposed to Korean people through mass media and multi-cultural events. At the same time, Koreans can frequently encounter Southeast Asians in their everyday lives. Thus, specific images and discourses of Southeast Asia has been established in our society, which creates a new social trend called 'Southeast Asia phenomena'. In short, 'Southeast Asia phenomena' means a totality of Korean people's experience of Southeast Asian and their perception on the region. On the one hand, 'Southeast Asia phenomena' is a result of inflow of Southeast Asians and their culture into Korea. On the other hand, it is also a consequence of Korean people's understanding of Southeast Asia from their trip to Southeast Asia or from their interactions with Southeast Asian people. This article aims to analyze the origin and diffusion of 'Southeast Asian Phenomena' in Korea in the context of Southeast Asia focusing on 4 topics, that is, migrant workers, overseas investments, retirement migration, study-abroad categorized as human movement. This article is also about a country-by-country comparative analysis both at the macro level and the micro level. At the macro level, overseas investments and trade, human exchanges, positive perception to Koreans which considered to be the structural causes become a strong mechanism playing a important bridge role between Korea and Southeast Asia. So these create the high probability of the emergence of 'Southeast Asian Phenomena' At the micro level which is more direct causes of 'Southeast Asian Phenomena', the economic cause is the most important common cause for 4 Southeast Asian Phenomena. Additionally, Korean wave is also remarkable common cause creating 'Southeast Asian Phenomena' even it is not the origin in the context of Southeast Asia. The diffusion of 'Southeast Asian Phenomena' is different by the topics and the elements contributing to create the favorable situation for the diffusion are not only overseas investments and trade, human exchanges at the macro level but also policy elements at the micro level. The relative differences of the causes of 'Southeast Asian Phenomena' in the country-by-country analysis are found. Regarding overseas investments in Vietnam and Cambodia, the economic degree of freedom in Cambodia is higher than in Vietnam. Even Korean Wave has had the longer history in Vietnam, but the favorable perspectives on Korean Wave are stronger in Cambodia. For migrant workers from Vietnam and Indonesia, the economic causes in Vietnam are more significant than in Indonesia. The impact of Korean Wave is stronger in Vietnam than in Indonesia. In case of study-abroad, the social-cultural elements and policy elements are more diverse in Malaysia than in Korea. For the Korean retirees who immigrate to the Philippines and Malaysia, the economic causes in the Philippines is more significant in Malaysia.

• SUVANNABHUMI
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.77-94
• /
• 2016

The paper examined Southeast Asia as a whole and focused on similarities among countries composing what is now known as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). In order to determine these similarities, the analysis focused on the fact that during World War II the whole of Southeast Asia was occupied by one political power: Japan. The policies the Japanese implemented in the region were to a degree very similar in terms of pressures and tensions that occurred in the different countries. The paper argues that these pressures and the responses of the various peoples of Southeast Asia instilled a nucleus of common identity in Southeast Asia as a whole. Basically, the policies that the Japanese implemented all over Southeast Asia were the following: the setting up regional administrations; the extraction of resources and emphasis on local self-sufficiency; the implementation of cultural Japanization; and local indigenization policies. The Southeast Asian responses that crystalized this joint Southeast Asian identity may be described as: accommodating and resisting the Japanese; commemorating portraying; and collectively remembering the era. The process of action and reaction between Japan and Southeast Asia was formative of this joint Southeast Asian identity.

• The Southeast Asian review
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.101-145
• /
• 2010

Southeast Asian studies in Singapore has had a problem with locating local scholarship from the outset. The initiation of English-track scholarship was done by British scholars while Chinese scholars in the beginning were not considered as local people but as sojourners who identified China as their fatherland. If the latter had successfully located their scholarship in the post-colonial environment of Singapore, the job of identifying local scholarship would have been much easier. Indeed, for some time in the 1960s-70s, there existed a relatively strong local scholarship that was based mainly at Nanyang University. However, they became marginalized as English became dominant not just in education but also in Singapore society. Unlike the Chinese-track scholarship, the English-track scholarship in Singapore has developed greatly over the years. The establishment of ISEAS was the crystallized form of Singapore's endeavors to develop a Singapore brand of Southeast Asian studies to the world. Alongside ISEAS, NUS has carried on the English-track Southeast Asian studies and become a world-class university in this academic field. The formation of the Southeast Asian Programme and ARI marked a cornerstone for NUS in advancing Southeast Asian studies. However, Singaporean scholarship continues to be weak in comparison to foreign scholarship. In the absence of strong local scholarship, the typical way in which Singapore has chosen to develop Southeast Asian studies has been to establish world-class institutes and to bring in foreign talents. This strategy has perhaps paid off since it has situated Singapore as the prime place where scholars gather, information goes around and quality research outcomes are published. However, whether or not it has strengthened local scholarship remains a controversial issue. The dominant contribution of foreign scholars continues to pose the problem of whether the ownership of Southeast Asian studies in Singapore belongs to Singapore itself. The identification of scholarship in Singapore is an unsettled matter.

• SUVANNABHUMI
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.7-33
• /
• 2021

With a view to contributing to the epistemological and methodological debates in Southeast Asian Studies, the aim of this paper is to examine critically the epistemic concepts and approaches in the social sciences and then to seek an epistemic reflexivity and its potential methodological applications to Southeast Asian Studies. Although the field of social sciences has attempted to search for a means of tackling the ontological and epistemological dilemmas in its major paradigms, Southeast Asian Studies still demands a more 'actor-centered' epistemic account of reflexive interaction between actors and social structures. Bearing in mind the need for a more 'actor-centered' epistemic approach, this paper continues to discuss the 'epistemic reflexivity' in the social sciences and its potential applications to Southeast Asian Studies. In this paper, I will consider 'epistemic reflexivity' as an alternative methodological orientation. It emerges as interlinked with the ontological standpoint of what is called 'reflexive approaches' and its application to the detailed 'reflexive methodology' which I am proposing in this paper. In doing so, this paper discusses the autobiographical experiences of the author arising from his ethnographic field research in North Sulawesi, Indonesia and their implication for a reflexive methodology in Southeast Asian Studies. In conclusion, the paper argues that we need a 'more actor-centered' epistemic framework to compensate for the epistemological and methodological dilemmas in the social sciences and the alternative framework will equip Southeast Asian Studies with a reflexive methodology relevant to the life-dynamics of the social world in the process of developing its inquiries, methodological technics, analysis, and validation.

• SUVANNABHUMI
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.111-130
• /
• 2020

This paper introduces the different Southeast Asian Studies academic programs of three universities in northeast Asia namely: Peking University (China); Tokyo University of Foreign Studies (Japan); and Busan University of Foreign Studies (Korea). This study mainly focuses on the Philippines as part of Southeast Asian studies program in the said universities. The researcher utilized archival work related to the Southeast Asian studies programs of each university. The study also examined the curriculum of the program, background of faculty, and motivations of students in studying Southeast Asian studies by conducting interviews and surveys. Strength, Weakness, Opportunities, Threats (SWOT) Analysis was employed by the researcher in analyzing the data from the different universities. Finally, in mapping out the teaching of Filipino language and Philippine-related subjects, this paper argued that Northeast Asian universities established a Southeast Asian Studies focused on Philippines because of various socio-economic-political factors, and not only because of the Filipino diaspora in the region.