Kolossov

Downloaded by [Universiteit Leiden / LUMC] at 23:08 15 June 2014

symbols and images in the media, advertising, cinema, cartoons, etc. It is one basis of the world geopolitical vision – a necessary element of ethnic and political identity, and a tool of state-building. This world geopolitical vision consists of representations of the relationship between different elements of political space, national security and threats to it, advantages and shortcomings of a certain strategy in foreign relations, and so on. The world geopolitical vision also includes representations about the territory of the ethnic group or political nation, its boundaries, preferable models of the state, historical mission and forces preventing its realisation.47 This vision is a product of national history and culture, a synthesis of views professed by different strata of the political elite, academic experts, the creative intelligentsia and public opinion as a whole.48 To legitimate its activity, the government needs ‘high’ and ‘low’ geopolitics to match, to the largest possible extent.

Geopolitical discourse is formed by both politicians and media, and by the system of education and mass culture. The functions and importance of boundaries in the life of the state and society are a subject of discussion and compromise, the role of boundaries being differently interpreted by various social groups. Social representations about boundaries constitute an element of ethnic and political identity. For example, for the post-Communist governments of Central and East-Europe, it was important to represent their boundaries as limits between the West and the East; first, at the global level, as boundaries of Europe; next, at the macro-regional level, as the ‘historical, native’ boundaries of their ethnic groups; and finally, by way of contrast, at the local level,49 the result of wise though painful compromises in the name of international stability.

An analysis of geopolitical discourse also helps to identify the limits of the so-called informal regions existing in representations by political leaders and public opinion (for instance, ‘Northern Europe’, ‘Central Europe’, the ‘Muslim World’, etc.).50

THE ‘POLICY–PRACTICE–PERCEPTION’ (PPP) APPROACH

The ‘PPP’ approach appeared only recently and represents an attempt to synthesise the latest theoretical achievements with traditional approaches that have not lost their practical value – in particular, the functional approach. From this perspective, the boundary is not simply a legal institution designed to ensure the integrity of state territory, but a product of social practice (in the terms of H. Lefebvre), the result of a long historical and geopolitical development, and an important symbolical marker of ethnic and political identity.

This approach integrates analyses at different spatial levels, first, of the practice related to transboundary flows and developed under the influence

Downloaded by [Universiteit Leiden / LUMC] at 23:08 15 June 2014

of the border. The focus is on informal transboundary networks in business, local authorities, NGOs, etc. The scale, form and objectives of this activity depend on the understanding, by the state, supra-national and regional actors, of national security and of the role played by the given boundary. Border activity is determined by the boundary regime, which, in its turn, has an influence on it.

Second, border policy is considered at different levels, such as the state, international, institutional and legal infrastructures ensuring transboundary flows and determining the relationship between the barrier and contact functions of the boundary – in other words, the degree of its permeability. This infrastructure is usually a mirror of the strategies of the state, the border regions and local authorities and includes the tools designed to stimulate and to limit border activities, and to regulate processes of external (transboundary) and internal territorial integration.

Third, PPP researchers study the perception of the boundary, i.e., the character, the evolution and the channels of influence of social representations on the boundary/border regions, on relations between neighbouring states and regions, cross-boundary cooperation and ‘high’ and ‘low’ geopolitical discourse.51 Border activities and the perception of the boundary and border institutional and legal infrastructures are thus seen as interdependent: the primacy of any of these three elements of the analysis is a ‘chicken or egg’ question.

The theory of human behaviour in border areas is close to the ‘PPPapproach’.52 It is also related to the functional theory of John House53 and to postmodern approaches. According to this theory, the boundary limits the freedom of people’s movements according to rationale and conditions. As a result, the area of human life cycles also changes. In the ideal case, it has the shape of concentric circles reflecting the weakening of an individual’s contacts as the distance from his home increases. The shape and size of this area also depends on sex, age, education, socio-professional status, the development of transport, political and legal factors, etc. In border areas, under the influence of the boundary’s barrier functions, this area appears to be quite different from its perception in centre of the state territory. The impact of the boundary depends strongly on the level of education. ‘Intellectuals’, or ‘white collar workers’ (teachers, journalists, professionals, functionaries, etc.) are closer related to jobs in the state apparatus and depend on public authorities. The pattern of their life cycle changes more under the influence of a political boundary, as compared to less educated people.

External factors include socio-economic conditions (economic development, prices in the markets of labour, goods and capital, the state of transportation, the diffusion of media, etc.), as well as administrative and legal restrictions. Territorial restrictions, mental maps and values of people shared by an individual and by his socio-territorial group as a whole, can be classified

Downloaded by [Universiteit Leiden / LUMC] at 23:08 15 June 2014

as internal factors. An important place among them is held by ethnic and national identity, i.e., the self-association of people with interests of their ethnic group, citizens of their state and inhabitants of their region or neighbourhood.

ECOPOLITICAL APPROACH

It is well known that natural processes do not recognise socio-political boundaries. Mountains, river basins, areas of birds or fish, monuments of nature, internal seas and other natural regions are very often divided by political and administrative boundaries. Mineral deposits are also often shared by two or several political units. At the same time, integrated natural regions create paths for the diffusion of pollutants in air and water. The awareness of global and regional environmental problems strongly stimulates international cooperation, including cross-boundary cooperation.54 There is a powerful branch of social science studying transboundary environmental/political problems, which is being developed mainly by political scientists, specialists in international relations and physical geographers (only few names from a long possible list are quoted in Table 1).

Discussion of these problems is far beyond the limits of this paper. Let us indicate only one direction – the river basins approach. It allows socioand physical-geographical analyses to be integrated, in order to contribute to the solution of many international conflicts and to work out new principles for environmental management. River basins represent closely integrated natural regions, while at the same time, they constitute a basis of settlement and transportation systems, and often determine boundaries between historically created territorial and cultural communities.55 But problems of the use of their waters, energy and biological resources are a classic reason for international and border conflicts.

CONCLUSION

Border studies are a rapidly expanding interdisciplinary field facing new challenges. First, from the quantitative perspective, the number of boundaries has recently increased because of disintegration of the Soviet Union and of some other countries, and the partition of part of the world’s oceans. The collapse of the Soviet empire removed important ideological and geopolitical obstacles to the involvement of a large part of the world in international economy. Dozens of territorial (boundary) claims continue to poison international relations, even if they are often in a latent form and not yet brought to the official level.

Downloaded by [Universiteit Leiden / LUMC] at 23:08 15 June 2014

Second, under the influence of globalisation and integration, the functions of boundaries and borders are being rapidly changed, creating a situation that demands careful analysis. The impacts of these factors are so complicated and diversified that they are far from sufficiently clear. Globalisation and liberalisation of economies, the development of new technologies and communications, the growing well-being and the awareness of cross-boundary and global environmental problems, are all stimulating a gradual evolution of state boundaries from alienating to open, integrational forms. This evolutionary trend is also explained by the increasing international awareness of global environmental, energy and other problems, and of the importance of international cooperation. Under these conditions, it may become easier to find solutions to border conflicts on the basis of international law. A number of contradictions could be overcome as a result of the separation of the economic and ideological functions of boundaries.

The improvements in international transport and in the quality and density of telecommunications networks are modifying economic space, increasing the importance of hubs like world cities, maritime gateways and logistic centres. On the one hand, they often deepen territorial contrasts within countries, provoke the growth of the barrier functions of internal boundaries and blur the difference between political (international) and administrative (internal) dividing lines. However, on the other hand, they also contribute to cross-boundary cooperation, which is at the same time a result and a reason for the growing permeability of political boundaries. The study of new directions and technologies under various geographical, social and political conditions, including economic, cultural and psychological aspects, spatial planning etc., may become a separate interdisciplinary field.

New postmodern approaches successfully complement traditional methods of border study, considering boundaries and cross-boundary interactions at different levels (from the global to the local) and as a single system. Moreover, recent publications show that the scale of analysis is not naturally determined, but represents a social construct and can be used to define the object and the scope of a conflict.56 Postmodern approaches help us to understand how a political discourse can define the position and role of particular boundaries and borders in foreign and domestic politics and thus enable critical thinking about political choices.

However, the dynamics of the world system of boundaries are far from linear, nor do they simplify combinations of geographical situations. On the contrary, de-territorialisation and re-territorialisation sharply multiply the variety of neighbouring countries and regions and, as a result, create countless new types of boundaries. Of course, globalisation does not guarantee a peaceful resolution of territorial disputes, especially in Africa, Asia and Latin America. For instance, in Africa the potential for border conflicts is characterised by the fact that about 42 per cent of the total length of land boundaries are drawn by parallels, meridians and equidistant lines, without any

Downloaded by [Universiteit Leiden / LUMC] at 23:08 15 June 2014

consideration of social realities. Thirty-seven percent of land boundaries were imposed on African countries by British and French colonial powers, who cared only about dividing lines between them.57

Postmodern approaches reveal new dimensions of globalisation. Their use helps the analysis of the relationships among globalisation of economic exchanges, international migrations and a rapid transformation of territorial identities, and of people’s concepts of boundaries, border areas and national security. New methods have demonstrated that the same processes are viewed differently in different countries and regions, and perceptions can play a major role in economic and political decision-making concerning boundaries and borders. Globalisation often provokes a defensive reaction and strengthens ethnic and national or regional identities, which, in turn, contribute to the reinforcement of border regimes.

One of the main methodological challenges remains the separation of the impact of general problems on a boundary from specific border issues. Indeed, are the physical line, the regime and the importance of particular state boundary for society a mere reflection of national or geopolitical problems – such as the struggle of an ethnic group for self-determination, or the rivalry between major international and regional powers? Obviously, space modifies the influence of political processes on border areas and boundaries, but its mechanisms are still not very well understood.

NOTES

1.E. Brunet-Jailly, ‘Toward a Model of Border Studies’, Journal of Borderland Studies, Special Number, The Canadian Border: A transparent border?, 19/1 (spring 2004) pp.1-18.

2.Y. Lacoste, La géographie, ça sert d’abord à faire la guerre (Paris: Maspéro 1976).

3.See, for instance, D.B. Knight, ‘Humanistic Political Geography?’, in S. Mackenzie (ed.), Humanism and Geography (Ottawa: University of Carleton Press 1986), pp.22-9; C. Flint, ‘Changing Times, Changing Scales: World Politics and Political Geography since 1890’, in G. Demko and W.B. Wood (eds), Reordering the World, 2nd ed. (Boulder, CO: Westview Press 2001).

4.On the relations between political geography and political science, see D. Newman, guest editor, Forging a Cross-boundary Discourse: Political Geography and Political Science, Special Issue, Political Geography 18/8 (November 1999).

5.For a characteristic view of traditional approaches, see V. Kolossov and J. O’Loughlin, ‘New Borders for New World Orders: Territorialities at the Fin-de-siècle’, GeoJournal 44/3 (1998, pp.259-73; V.A. Kolossov and R.F. Turovsky, ‘Sovremennye gosudarstvennye granitsy: novye funktsii v usloviakh integratsii i progranichnoe sotrudnichestvo’ (Contemporary state borders: new functions under the conditions of integration and border cooperation), Izvestia RAN, geographical series, 1998, No.1, pp.97-107 (in Russian); V. Kolossov and N. Mironenko, Politicheskaya geografia i geopolitika (Political Geography and Geopolitics) (Moscow: Aspekt-Press 2001) (in Russian).

6.Quoted from J.R.V. Prescott, The Geography of Frontiers and Boundaries (Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company 1965), p.3.

7.J. House, Frontier on the Rio Grande: A Political Geogrpahy of Development and Social Deprivation (Oxford: Clarendon Press 1982).

8.See, for instance, G. Goertz and P.F. Diehl, Territorial Changes and International Conflicts

(New York: Routledge 1992) and H. Starr and B. Most, Inquiry, Logic, and International Politics (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press 1989).