主权和领土:利害关系和前景

Nicolas Barreyre, Geneviève Verdo
{"title":"主权和领土:利害关系和前景","authors":"Nicolas Barreyre, Geneviève Verdo","doi":"10.1017/S239856820000073X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Over the course of the last twenty years, two historiographical movements have challenged the notion of sovereignty, particularly that of the “natural” anchoring of an absolute, statal form of sovereignty in a uniform territory as its perfected model. On the one hand, the experience of globalization that followed the fall of the Berlin Wall—and which fed talk of the “end of nation-states”—led to a new examination of the political organization of the contemporary world, which in part “deterritorialized” the issue of political control. On the other hand, the extraordinary rise in studies of colonial empires has established that sovereignty, far from being the homogeneous block of the jurist’s refined concept, could be exercised in varying degrees and even be conceived as multiple and “layered.”","PeriodicalId":86691,"journal":{"name":"Annales Nestle [English ed.]","volume":"20 1","pages":"179 - 185"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sovereignty and Territory: Stakes and Perspectives\",\"authors\":\"Nicolas Barreyre, Geneviève Verdo\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S239856820000073X\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Over the course of the last twenty years, two historiographical movements have challenged the notion of sovereignty, particularly that of the “natural” anchoring of an absolute, statal form of sovereignty in a uniform territory as its perfected model. On the one hand, the experience of globalization that followed the fall of the Berlin Wall—and which fed talk of the “end of nation-states”—led to a new examination of the political organization of the contemporary world, which in part “deterritorialized” the issue of political control. On the other hand, the extraordinary rise in studies of colonial empires has established that sovereignty, far from being the homogeneous block of the jurist’s refined concept, could be exercised in varying degrees and even be conceived as multiple and “layered.”\",\"PeriodicalId\":86691,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annales Nestle [English ed.]\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"179 - 185\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annales Nestle [English ed.]\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S239856820000073X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annales Nestle [English ed.]","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S239856820000073X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在过去的二十年中,两个史学运动挑战了主权的概念,特别是“自然”锚定在一个统一的领土上的绝对的、国家形式的主权,作为其完美的模式。一方面,柏林墙倒塌后的全球化经历——助长了“民族国家终结”的言论——引发了对当代世界政治组织的新审视,这在一定程度上“去领土化”了政治控制问题。另一方面,对殖民帝国的研究的异常兴起已经证明,主权远非法学家的精致概念的同质块,而是可以在不同程度上行使,甚至可以被视为多重和“分层”的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Sovereignty and Territory: Stakes and Perspectives
Over the course of the last twenty years, two historiographical movements have challenged the notion of sovereignty, particularly that of the “natural” anchoring of an absolute, statal form of sovereignty in a uniform territory as its perfected model. On the one hand, the experience of globalization that followed the fall of the Berlin Wall—and which fed talk of the “end of nation-states”—led to a new examination of the political organization of the contemporary world, which in part “deterritorialized” the issue of political control. On the other hand, the extraordinary rise in studies of colonial empires has established that sovereignty, far from being the homogeneous block of the jurist’s refined concept, could be exercised in varying degrees and even be conceived as multiple and “layered.”
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信