Canada and the institute of pacific relations: Lessons from an earlier voyage
Woods suggests that valuable lessons can be learned from Canada's involvement in the Institute of Pacific Relations (IPR) which will aid and inform its current Asia‐Pacific relations. Two arguments are made in this paper: that interaction with the IPR has shaped current Canadian attitudes towards regional institutions; and that a form of 1920s track‐two diplomacy is alive today in Canada. Canadian interaction with the IPR is examined through: the impact the Institute had on the leader of the Canadian delegation to the first IPR conference, John Nelson, and his subsequent contributions to Canada's early track two diplomacy; the impact that the Canadian academic/diplomat E. Herbert Norman had on the Institute and Canada's Asia‐Pacific persona; the state‐society relationship within Canada vis‐a‐vis the IPR; and the role of American philanthropy in sustaining Canadian contributions to the Institute. Woods concludes that the belief in track‐two diplomacy is alive and well in Canada; that the utility of a broad...
The Institute of Pacific Relations and the Origins of Asian and Pacific Studies
W ESTERN, PARTICULARLY NORTH AMERICAN, SCHOLARS of Asia and the Pacific work amidst an abundance of materials, research programs, funding sources and the other features characteristic of major academic endeavors. Most have never known other circumstances. Given the relative sufficiency of their surroundings, many of these scholars-especially those trained since mid-century-may be unaware that the academic structure they depend upon dates back only five or six decades and was developed by a pioneering generation of scholars who, although diminished in number, are still present and peripherally active. As recently as the late 1920s, there were no mechanisms for the systematic study of either Asia or the Pacificno graduate programs, no research centers, no professional associations, no regular conferences, and no substantial library collections. Indeed, aside from the early efforts of a few like George H. Blakeslee, Stanley K. Hornbeck, and Kenneth S. Latourette, there were not even elementary courses offered through organized departments. A good number of these scholars may also be unaware that the Institute of Pacific Relations, an organization prominent from the late 1920s to the mid 1950s but now largely unknown except to older scholars, is almost solely responsible for changing these conditions. Through an extensive series of conferences on Asian and Pacific issues and a highly productive collaborative research program focused upon related topics, it laid the foundation for modern Asian and Pacific studies in the West. The Institute's achievements in research are especially significant. The classic studies of Asia and the Pacific during the 1930s, 1940s and early 1950s-works such as J. Lossing Buck's Land Utilization in China, George McT. Kahin's Nationalism and Revolution in Indonesia, Felix M. Keesing's Modern Samoa, Owen Lattimore's Inner Asian Frontiers of China, E. Herbert Norman's Japan's Emergence as a Modern State, Richard H. Tawney's Land and Labour in China, and Teng Ssu-yu and John King Fairbank's China's Reponse to the West-as well as many hundreds of lesser known titles were produced under its aegis.1 Perhaps no other organ-
REFORMA DO ESTADO E AS POLÍTICAS PARA A EDUCAÇÃO SUPERIOR NO BRASIL NOS ANOS 90
This article aims at discussing the federal policies for higher education implemented in Brazil in the 1990s. It assumes that such policies are based on socio-political choices and interests linked to the changes occurring in the contemporary Brazilian scene, changes that have deep historical roots, which emerge in the process of reformation of the Brazilian State. This situation implies alterations in the field of public policies, and more particularly in that of social policies, since the on-going official proposals and projects are characterized by a decrease of the role of State. The borders between public and private affairs have become increasingly blurred in a process detrimental to the former. The contradictions in the federal policies for higher education are analyzed here, as well as their results as for the following fields: institutional diversification and differentiation; assessment criteria, broadening and privatization of this level of education.