Island studies and socio-economic development policies in East Asia

Abstract

The globalization of island studies has resulted in a greater recognition by island studies scholars of the need for more regional-based island research to encompass the diversity of island knowledge and experiences. Island research in East Asia provides examples of both English and native language perspectives across four distinct socio-cultural contexts: Japan, South Korea, the Chinese mainland, and Taiwan. Historical literature and contemporary scholarly research provide a context for understanding: (1) how East Asian researchers engaged with island studies and islandness; and (2) how East Asian socio-economic development policies reflect understandings of islandness locally and across the region. We found similarities among the four East Asian regions, but also variations based on different domestic political perspectives. Given the late start of island research in East Asia, many topics await more detailed future examination.

Headnote

Abstract: The globalization of island studies has resulted in a greater recognition by island studies scholars of the need for more regional-based island research to encompass the diversity of island knowledge and experiences. Island research in East Asia provides examples of both English and native language perspectives across four distinct socio-cultural contexts: Japan, South Korea, the Chinese mainland, and Taiwan. Historical literature and contemporary scholarly research provide a context for understanding: (1) how East Asian researchers engaged with island studies and islandness; and (2) how East Asian socio-economic development policies reflect understandings of islandness locally and across the region. We found similarities among the four East Asian regions, but also variations based on different domestic political perspectives. Given the late start of island research in East Asia, many topics await more detailed future examination.

Keywords: China, East Asian islands, island development, islandness, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan

https://doi.org/10.24043/isj.395 * Received March 2022, Early access August 2022

© Island Studies Journal, 2023

(ProQuest: ... denotes non-USASCII text omitted.)

Introduction

The most common description of an island is a piece of land surrounded by water. But islands are more complicated than that for scholars. Randall (2020, p. 28) notes that islands are "what we as individuals and groups make them be." That second definition reflects the anglophone (English) literature that currently dominates global island studies (Gegeo, 2001; Ginoza, 2020; Randall, 2020). The term 'islandness' itself, for example, developed within the anglophone literature.

Island research has traditionally depended on generalized typologies to classify types of islands. However, such global classifications overlook the unique characteristics of different islands and island regions. Our understanding of an island should not be found in "the label we give it, but in the meaning that [a] place holds for us" (Randall, 2020, p. 28). Islands are unique places of nature, geography, humanities, history, and society (Ginoza, 2020). As Baldacchino (2018, p. i) states, "from tourist paradises to immigrant detention camps, from offshore finance centres to strategic military bases, islands offer distinct identities and spaces in an increasingly homogenous and placeless world."

The contained and separate nature of islandness has made islands tempting as laboratories for advancing and assessing new ideas across a wide range of interdisciplinary interests. In the social sciences, scholars have employed islandness to understand, for example, rural versus metropolitan islands, tropes of colonial and decolonial islands, and 'eco-colonization' occasioned by human-induced climate change (Ginoza, 2020; Grydehøj et al., 2021; Grydehøj, 2017). Inter- and transdisciplinary perspectives, feminist lenses, and 'relational thinking' are other areas of growing interest among island researchers (Ginoza, 2020; Pugh, 2018; Randall, 2020).

An emergent research challenge is to encourage the understanding of islands in a manner that makes sense to islanders and within specific islands' own cultural contexts, emphasizing epistemic diversity (Nadarajah et al., 2022). This follows the 'ontological turn' in anthropology and the social sciences, which recognizes the validity of the world in which each individual lives, rather than interpreting it in mostly English universalist terms (Pickering, 2017). Such an emphasis on native and local understandings of islandness must be sensitive to the diversity of perspectives not just between but also within islands as well as the fact that islanders are inevitably simultaneously local and global beings.

Relational thinking is another increasingly popular way of understanding islands. It is a type of social theory that focuses on the many varied relationships that exist between different groups in a social structure (such as an island). Pugh (2018) emphasizes how relationality shapes the complexity of island spaces. This includes new mobilities, new technologies, changing geopolitics, and emerging networks in which islanders take part. He sees the relational turn and relational island geographies as ways of exploring complex and diversified localities in regional contexts.

With these global trends in island research as a backdrop, we review and assess island research in East Asia from geographical, anthropological, ethnological, and tourism perspectives. This paper takes a narrative literature review approach to examine historical and contemporary island studies in the East Asia. Our focus is on the Chinese mainland, South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan. We use basic data for each and review literature both in English and the local languages. We discuss historical changes and current trends in the understandings of islands in these four areas of East Asia (also geographically defined as Northeast Asia). Our analysis addresses the following research questions:

(1) How have East Asian researchers engaged with island studies and islandness?

(2) How have East Asian socio-economic development policies reflected understandings of islandness locally and across the region?

Superficially, islandness refers to how a society defines what is and is not an island. Intrinsically, it is the full range of identities, beliefs, socio-economic relationships, environmental relationships, and cultures that make an island place unique. In exploring these questions, we found East Asian islands and the concept of islandness to be under-researched areas for Asian scholars. Domestic research in our study areas has mainly focused on case studies of a few selected islands. Theoretically based studies and regional contextual studies were both lacking.

To understand the dynamics of East Asian island research, a deeper relational understanding is needed, not only between local language and anglophone publications, but also among East Asian islands, countries, regions, and cultures themselves. For example, the islands in this region are forming new relational meanings and assemblages as a result of geopolitical developments, with remote border islands becoming a frontline for territorial tensions. This, however, is a topic largely ignored by researchers across the region.

In addition, islands across Northeast Asia face diverse environmental challenges due to both their geopolitical locations and their varying relationships with central government development policies. For example, many islands have the potential to develop sustainable forms of tourism, but many others do not. This points to a need for more research into sustainable futures for islands, along with further discussions regarding the nature of islandness in East Asia.

Island studies in Japan: from 'Okinawan research' to 'remote islands'

The country of Japan has around 6,852 islands, 416 of which are inhabited (... ...2016), including some disputed islands. As an island nation, Japan has a long tradition of island research. Before World War II (WWII), Japanese research focused on how natural factors shaped different island societies and cultures. The great diversity of Japanese islands, with varying geographic advantages and disadvantages, may have led to this focus on individual case studies, which were often published in ethnographic journals (... 2003). With large and small islands stretching from the subtropical south to the subarctic north, Japan's geography provides many opportunities to advance research in island biology (... et al., 2020). Some southern islands (Ogasawara Islands, Yakushima Island, Amami-Oshima Island, Tokunoshima Island, and the northern part of Okinawa Island combined with Iriomote Island) are designated as UNESCO World Natural Heritage Sites (UNESCO, 2021). In addition, growing interdisciplinary studies on the human-nature interface issues are bringing about increased cooperation between Japan's natural and social scientists.

Miyauchi ... (2014) identified several trends from an analysis of 627 scientific papers on islands published in geographical journals in Japan between 1907 and 2013. First, very few approach islands from a theoretical perspective, and few cover the whole country. Second, several waves of island research have occurred, often associated with a popular issue, like the onset of rural depopulation or the boom in interest in Okinawan culture. Third, island research has focused on the southern islands, especially after Okinawa was returned to Japan in 1972. New airport developments improved access and shifted Japanese public interest to those more 'exotic' southern places. Fourth, agriculture, settlements, population, and fisheries have been the major themes in published research. Tourism started attracting interest during the phase of intensive resort development in the 1980s and the development of ecotourism since 1990.

Some theoretical research was published in the 1950s around the definition of 'island'. That definition has been problematic in Japan, partly because the five largest islands (Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku, and Okinawa) are often referred to as hondo, the 'mainland'. For example, Yamashina (1952, cited in ... 2006) and Ömura ... (1959) define islands in relation to the Japanese mainland, characterizing them as relatively small land masses compared to the mainland. Alternatively, other authors argue that, because they are all surrounded by water, all the landmasses of Japan should be regarded as islands (... 2006; ... 1965). Most island studies in Japan have, however, excluded the five mainland islands (... 2006).

During the 1950s and 1960s, some human geographers were interested in 'insularity' and 'islandness', that is, the characteristics of islands that make them different from non-islands. Yamashina (1952, cited in ... 2006) suggests two forms of insularity: 'environmental insularity' and 'phenomenal insularity'. The former is closely related to 'environmental determinism', in which certain island characteristics are determined by their physical context. Phenomenal insularity (the island experience) is more complex, being the culmination of an island's human activities, including its history and economy. Ömura ... (1959) suggests that insularity is: (1) a universally shared characteristic of islands; (2) unique to islands in contrast to other spatial areas, and (3) based on island environmental factors. He was an early proponent of 'island geography' as a research field. It can thus be argued that Japan has the world's oldest tradition of island studies as such, predating the emergence of anglophone island studies by several decades.

The debate over the characteristics of islands was criticized by Ono (1961, cited in ... 2006), who claimed that it was impossible to clearly distinguish areas based on natural characteristics. Eventually, researchers began questioning whether there is such a thing as insularity at all, because technology and space-time compression have made islands much less isolated than in the past (... 2006). Definitions of islands and insularity in Japan have mostly played out between the poles of (1) environmental determinism versus human agency and (2) common universal characteristics versus special features and unique sense of place. In a recent definition of insularity, Kakazu ... (2019) identifies three common factors: oceanic, smallness, and remoteness, but even these three would not cover all islands that are subjects of island research (for example, river islands, large islands, and near-shore islands).

The definition and perception of islands became further complicated by the introduction of the term rito, 'remote island' (... 2006). Ritā has been widely used since 1953 when Japan enacted the Remote Island Development Law, which defines remote islands (1) by limited population (no more than 6000 residents) and distance from main islands or (2) by 'backwardness'. This law sought to improve island access, industries, welfare, culture, education, tourism, environmental protection, renewable energy, and protection against natural catastrophes (Funck, 2020).

Historically, many island locations in Japan thrived as port towns when shipping was the major form of internal transport. The development of roads and railways since the late 19th century pushed islands into peripheral and remote positions (Qu et al., 2020). Capital support through the Remote Island Development Law made these islands increasingly politically, economically, and socially dependent on the mainland (... 2006). In addition, relations between remote islands themselves became weaker (... 1959).

Today, island economies cannot survive without the Japan mainland. That dependency continues to be formalized through the construction of bridges throughout the country, integrating island municipalities into larger mainland cities. Laws specifically encouraged these kinds of municipal mergers in the 2000s. This process has further deprived many islands of administrative independence and increased their peripherality by reducing their political power (Funck, 2020).

In recent years, many of the most remote islands in Japan have become areas of political dispute as East Asian countries vie for control of maritime waters and resources. In 2016, Japan enacted a law to ensure the continued habitation of border islands. To support this, the law promotes improving access, infrastructure and port facilities, and employment opportunities, with tourism development being an important element. In addition, the law seeks to strengthen border controls and interisland cooperation to ensure border islands are firmly integrated into Japan's national defense system (... 2017).

The Remote Island Development Law has influenced academic discussions on Japan's islands in several ways. The Act positions islands as areas in need of special support, thus constructing a negative image. Suyama ... (2003) points out the tendency for researchers to view remote islands as problem regions characterized by depopulation and isolation. Also, policies under the Act have had mixed results. It soon became obvious that remote islands could not be improved by adopting uniform remedies nationwide. This led to intensive quantitative analysis to understand the factors leading to successful developments on some Japanese islands and failures on others (... 2006; ... 2003).

Other policies, like the Law for the Development of Comprehensive Resort Areas (1999) and the Law for the Promotion of Ecotourism (2008), also brought mixed changes to island economies and societies (d'Hauteserre & Funck, 2016). These initiatives attracted geographical research (... 2014), mirroring the strong focus of Japanese geographers on improving regional conditions throughout the country (... 2006).

Starting in the 1990s, Japanese research in geography and other sciences became more focused and organized through the establishment of island research groups and societies, which also sought to increase publications (... 2014). Interdisciplinary island research projects have been conducted since 2009 by the Research Institute for Islands and Sustainability (RIIS) at Ryukyu University in Okinawa. Building on the former International Institute for Okinawan Studies, RIIS has sought to shift island research away from notions of deficiencies and toward development strengths and opportunities (... et al., 2014), especially through publication of the Okinawan Journal of Island Studies. This turn is seen in research on migration to islands, where newcomers have been shown to contribute to innovations in island economies and societies (Qu et al., 2020; Usui et al., 2021). It is also represented by Kakazu (2018), who emphasizes cultural diversity on Okinawa as a necessary component for island sustainability. He has also promoted a return to 'nissology' as a way of encouraging more transdisciplinary research in Japanese island studies (... 2019).

Island studies in South Korea: from 'backward region' to 'development target'

In the Republic of Korea (hereafter Korea), islands are defined in various ways according to their topography, politics, and development policies. In terms of topography (or geographical regulations), an island is an area surrounded by the sea at high tide (Article 2 of the Island Development Promotion Act). Based on this definition, as of 2018, there were 472 inhabited islands and 2,876 uninhabited islands in Korea ... 2018).

The Korean Constitution vaguely states that the territory of Korea is "the Korean Peninsula and its annexed islands." This is intentionally ambiguous to reflect the political situation of the Korean Peninsula, which is divided between South Korea and North Korea (..., 2018). It is intended to cover the symbolic and affective domains of what Korea should be in the minds of many, without provoking territorial disputes with North Korea.

In addition to North Korea, the unclear definition also functions to obscure territorial issues with neighboring countries, such as Japan and China. In particular, in Korea's eastern and southern maritime waters, the obscure definition of islands helps avoid international territorial disputes because no one knows exactly who owns a particular island. But in doing so, the ambiguity causes differences in the interpretation of the scope of Korea's territory, especially the extent of its islands (... 2018).

This ambivalent view of islands has origins in Korean history. For almost 1000 years, Koreans were not allowed to migrate to islands. The Gongdo (..., ban the islands) policy of the Goryeo Dynasty (918-1392) and the Haegeum (... block the sea) policy of the Joseon Dynasty (1392-1910) were based on the ideological understanding that islands were beyond the control of the king, and therefore should not be settled by his subjects (... 2008).

In Korea, academic studies focusing on 'islandness' (what makes islands distinct from non-island areas) began to appear in the 1970s at universities on Jeju Island and in the country's southwest region, which has many islands (... 1976; ... 1981; ..., 1976). At that time, island research was split between studies in the social sciences (anthropology and sociology) and applied research to support the government's economic development policies. Jeju National University was a leader in sociological studies after the Jeju Research Society was founded in the 1970s and sociology departments were subsequently established at the university (... 1987). However, it was not until the early 1980s that a significant increase in studies on the nature of islandness got underway (... 1981).

Particularly noteworthy is Kang's ... (1981) article, which defines islandness in terms of geography. Using Jeju as an example, this included being surrounded by water, isolated, small, and "backward and underdeveloped" (..., 1981, p. 213). Interestingly, the article starts with a social science approach but ends with recommendations for the industrial development of island areas. That recommendation reflected the economic development focus of Korea under the military regime that had been in power since 1962. Academic research funding and output often supported national development policies of the time.

Research specifically focused on the economic development of islands was centered at Chonnam National University in the southwest of Korea. For example, Park ... (1976) defines islands as having limited land, scarce water and underground resources, and small markets. He emphasizes the need to expand social capital and obtain more support from the national budget. These studies directly or indirectly drove the enactment of the Island Development Promotion Act in 1986. The Act defined the direction of Korea's academic research on islands, making them a target for economic development in support of the overall development of the country.

Since the mid-1980s, research on islands has been conducted in various academic areas, centered mostly in universities located on Jeju Island and in the southwestern region. After Korean democratization in the late 1980s, research topics broadened to include economics, tourism, society and welfare, history, education, culture and folklore, ecology, and geography (°ļ, 2010). Mokpo National University in the southwest created an Institution for Marine and Island Cultures in 1983 and has been publishing the Korean academic journal Island Culture ever since, subsequently launching Journal of Marine and Island Cultures (JMIC) in 2012, which is an international English publication indexed by SCOPUS. JMIC's editor-in-chief Sun-Kee Hong, is also chairman of the Korea Island Foundation and is affiliated with the Institute for Marine and Island Culture. Hong (2015, 2017) conducts island research from socio-economic and interdisciplinary perspectives, and helped create an international framework for landscape and ecological research on Korean islands.

The Korean Association of Islands, established in 1989 in southwest Korea, publishes the Journal of Korean Island. Korean language journals, such as Island Culture and Journal of Korean Island, have a strong focus on the history and folklore of island regions, as well as ecology, fishery, sociology, education, and tourism. In contrast, Korea's English language journals, such as JMIC, tend to emphasize emerging research in the areas of biodiversity and tourism, reflecting international trends. To the extent that they cover Korean topics, they mostly deal with islands in the country's southwestern archipelago.

Jeju National University established the World Environment and Island Research Institute and began publishing academic journals in Korean in 1998, but these efforts were discontinued due to financial problems in 2001. In 2011, they launched the English language journal World Environment and Island Studies. Unlike the journals mentioned above that focus on islands in Korea, this journal emphasizes regional and global topics. More generally, Jeju is rarely studied alongside Korea's other islands and is usually treated as a quite distinct kind of island.

Korean government initiatives for island research have continued in recent years with the 2020 update to the Island Development Promotion Act, which established the Korea Island Development Institute in 2021. It is a national think tank with a mission to become a center for international island research.

Island studies in China: from 'mountains in the sea' to 'island cities'

Until recently, island research in China has been limited (Grydehøj, 2021). But since 2016, there has been a rapid growth in publications on Chinese islands in a variety of publications. We reviewed 3034 island-related articles published in Chinese academic journals (from the China Journal Full-Text Database on cnki.net) between 2011 to 2021. The top five island research areas were: oceanography 483 (13.98%), tourism 466 (13.90%), electrical power industry 243 (7.04%), environmental science and resources 241 (6.98%), and agriculture 230 (6.66%). These studies focus either on specific islands or one of the four major island regions of the country: the Yangtze River Delta (the Zhoushan Archipelago), the Pearl River Delta (the Wanshan Archipelago), coastal Fujian Province, and the island province of Hainan. While territorial disputes with other countries are an important aspect of China's border islands, that is not a topic of Chinese academic research.

The Zhoushan Archipelago (3061 islands) is the largest island development project in China (... 2009). Its major islands have undergone rapid industrialization and urbanization. Adjacent to the coastal city of Ningbo, it is a prime example of an 'island city' (Zhang & Grydehøj, 2021). Rapid development has completely changed the social structure of the islands in terms of production, lifestyle, tourism, and transportation (Wu et al., 2020). There has also been a population redistribution from the islands due to the decline of fishery resources (Yue et al., 2007). These complex relational processes have impacted ecosystem services, including farmlands and wetlands, with construction being the main cause of the loss of ecosystem services (Qiu et al., 2017). Further south, the coastal cities of Zhuhai and Guangzhou have leveraged a similar relational approach to reformulate their "island spatiality and city formation, [and] land-sea configurations" (Hong, 2017, p. 7). In this period of rapid change, islands are playing the important role of transitional urban-rural "in-betweenness" (Zhang & Grydehøj, 2021).

Tourism is often a major part of the urban-centered construction and industrialization of China's coastal islands (Grydehøj 2021). An emphasis on visitors further contributes to the changing nature of island cultures (?, 2017; ... 2006; ...2012). There have been many reports of islands lacking the infrastructure to support intense development and tourism, and of stakeholders lacking sufficient management skills (... 2012). While many island communities pursue economic benefits, awareness is also increasing of the importance of sustainable development (Ш & Ш, 2012) and tourism resource management (?, 2017). Recent research has focused more on the economic and ecological fragility of islands, as well as ways to sustain the relatively small-scale tourism market of many of these destinations.

But environmental issues such as pollution, poor planning, and bad management continue to be major threats to China's islands and their development (... 2009). Reclamation, sand dredging, and mining have intensified year by year, with data showing 806 islands declining in size (before 2011, at least) due to disorderly and extensive development activities (... 2011). No island in China's coastal waters is safe and free from human interference, and many face significant environmental challenges (.... 2017).

Grydehøj (2021) identifies three major issues for current Chinese island studies. The first is a heavy focus on the economic development of urban-centered coastal and near-shore islands. That emphasis is because island and rural research funding is often targeted at raising China from its status as a developing country. Many of the tourism articles we found in the Chinese journal database, for example, relate to economic development, with funding from central, provincial, and local governments. The second issue is the lack of English-speaking scholars and articles on Chinese islands. The third is an apparent lack of interest in Chinese islands by researchers outside China. These latter two issues reflect the applied and domestic focus of island studies in China, which is of less interest and accessibility to the global academy. Together, these issues make China an isolated 'island' for island studies.

Unlike many other countries, Chinese researchers have rarely focused on islandness. That may be why, depending on which source is consulted, China has either more than 6500 (..., 1995; ... и, 2009) or 6961 islands larger than 500 square meters (... 2011). The early version of the ideogram of Chinese characters for island (... dao) (Shuowen Jiezi, 100 BCE) was formed by the ideograms for bird (...) and mountain (.... The ideogram uses 'mountain' as the radical, and 'bird' as the sound component" ... 121). The general meaning conveyed was that of a "land/island/islet in the sea" ... literally "sea centered land"). Luo and Grydehøj (2017, p. 39) further suggest that islands played an important cultural role in shaping traditional Chinese worldviews because they were often "associated with sacred or heavenly realms, abodes of gods and spirits, and the possibility of immortality." That is still seen in Chinese island research, where religious and cultural beliefs are significant areas of focus ... &, 2006).

From a historical perspective, Luo and Grydehøj (2017) found much in common between traditional Western and ancient and Imperial Chinese views on islands. Both saw islands as peripheral extensions of a dominant core, rather than as places with unique geographical and social contexts (Hong, 2022). While they may have distinct cultures, islands are continuously acculturated by the dominant mainland society (... 2006). Compared with other parts of the world, this may be even more prominent in China as the empire/country has long been known to "focus on land and neglect the sea" (... 2009, p.10). As a result, China's islands have historically been ignored and poorly developed (... 2009).

After the founding of the People's Republic of China (PRC) in 1949, China's islands were closed to the outside world because of national defense and security concerns. As a result, their social and economic status fell far behind adjacent coastal areas (... 2009). In 1988, the central government started to experiment with various island development policies. The initial focus was on the Zhoushan Archipelago south of Shanghai on the East China Sea, the islands of coastal Guangdong and Guangxi provinces on the South China Sea, and Shandong Province's islands in the Yellow Sea. In subsequent years, broader legislative and management plans for island regions have been adopted, including in the provinces of Guangdong (1992), Fujian and Zhejiang (2003), and Hainan (2011) (... et al., 2012). In 2008, China introduced the "ten policy measures for island development" and an "opening-up" policy to support economic and social development in more island areas (... et al., 2012).

Despite these efforts, China lacks an overall island development policy and legislation. Instead, it has approached each instance in a piecemeal manner (... et al., 2012; ... 2009). This may reflect the country's large number of islands and the complexity of island issues. Ma (... 2018), however, suggests that since the establishment of the PRC, the country has had an unofficial island policy of "continentalization." This includes the migration or movement of former water dwellers around the South China Sea to terrestrial settlements, land reclamation that makes former islands physically part of the mainland, fishing economies shifting from fishing boats to aquaculture, and turning islands into tourism destinations for mainlanders.

Island studies in Taiwan: from 'offshore island' to 'cultural hybridity'

There are 121 small islands under the administration of Taiwan, excluding the main island of Taiwan (... 1999). Taiwan is also part of the Pacific Rim islands geographically, and linkages to a variety of regional geographic, political, and economic relations often influence its research on islands (... 2000). Taiwan's ethnic cultures are connected to both the South Pacific and the Chinese mainland, and it has a long history of complex political relations with both the Chinese mainland and Japan. Taiwan's contemporary culture also has a strong influence from the US. From a relational standpoint, the islands of Taiwan are caught in between competing and opposing interpretations of their identities, relativities, notions of sustainability, and futures (Baldacchino & Tsai, 2014).

Around the 1990s, island studies in Taiwan started to gain popularity. It mainly focused on anthropology, ethnology, and biogeography. According to human ecological research and archaeological evidence, Kinmen, Matsu, and Penghu islands, due to the geographical locations, served as a springboard for Han Chinese immigrants from the Chinese mainland and experienced earlier development than the main island of Taiwan. A review of 199 papers in the Journal of Island Tourism Research (in Chinese), published in Taiwan since 2008, found 57 papers focused on tourism on the main island of Taiwan, and the islands of Penghu, Kinmen, Matsu, and Xiaoliuqiu. Taiwan is heavily involved in the International Small Island Studies Association (ISISA) and the Commission on Islands of the International Geographical Union (IGU). Especially, '8th Islands of the World' Conference of ISISA in Kinmen (2004), the Inaugural Meeting of the IGU Commission on Islands in Taipei (2007), the '13th Islands of the World' Conference of ISISA in Penghu (2014), and other international conferences have helped Taiwan receive international attention within island studies and have encouraged island studies research in Taiwan. Driven by the government policies, the tourism industry has gradually become the core of the island economy. Therefore, Taiwan's research on islands has come to center on the topic of sustainable tourism. These offshore islands in western Taiwan today serve special geopolitical roles, including military defense, political refuge, migration, and more (... 2020). The offshore islands in the east of Taiwan have different geographical environments and unique historical cultures.

For example, Lanyu Island (also called Orchid Island) was an anthropological research area during the Japanese government's 50-year rule over Taiwan. At that time, outsiders were prohibited from moving in or developing the island (W ... 2020). Even with the change of the political system, Lanyu has been less affected by modernization and still retains the unique small-scale fishing culture of the Tao people (Chang & Chung, 2022). The Tao (also called Yami) of Lanyu have culturally and historically had close ties to the Philippines (Grydehøj et al., 2020), and the diversity of nature and culture on Lanyu presents a unique human landscape worthy of continued preservation (Tsai, 2003).

Taiwan's offshore islands are layered with history and a fusion of cultures. Coupled with appropriate development policies and a growing emphasis on sustainable development, they present unique values and diverse research opportunities. However, even though Taiwan's scholars have paid increasing attention to island research, there have not been extensive discussions or comprehensive definitions of 'islandness'. The diversity of Taiwan's islands has also created a degree of difficulty in identifying shared issues.

Among the limited research on islandness in Taiwan is an early study of the two islands of Kinmen (also known as Quemoy). Chen (2013) describes how islandness shaped Kinmen's landscape evolution, as seen in its geographical marginality and cultural hybridity. More recently, Huang ... (2019) uses relational geographies to define islandness in his study of Leiyu Island (the smaller of the two Kinmen islands). He defines islandness as a "sense of island place" based on the human characteristics of islanders, such as culture, social relations, and economic relations. He predicts that planned infrastructure projects, especially a bridge connecting Leiyu with the main island of Kinmen, would improve local quality of life on the smaller island but reduce its distinctiveness and change its sense of islandness and "island place" (see also Lee et al., 2017).

The main island of Taiwan is a geographical, political, and economic core in relation to its subsidiary islands. Those smaller islands are collectively known as 'offshore islands', a designation that was formally made in 2000 with the passing of the Offshore Islands Development Act. 'Offshore islands' were defined in Article 2 of the Act as land detached from the main island of Taiwan and under the governing jurisdiction of Taiwan. Jou and Tsai M ... (2000) study the Act's efforts to build more comprehensive and strategic regulations. To safeguard the fragile and unique environment and culture of offshore islands, and to support islanders' basic needs and sustainability, the Enforcement Rules for the Isolated Islands Construction Act was adopted the following year, in 2001. This Act not only more clearly defines the characteristics of 'isolation' and 'island' but also pays attention to the diversity of offshore islands.

It took seven years to draft the Offshore Islands Development Act due to debates over structure and policies (M & ... 2000). Further complicating matters, the Act, as an ordinance to promote the development of the offshore islands area, is related to many other laws and regulations. For example, with the lifting of martial law in Taiwan in the late 1980s, Taiwan residents could go to the Chinese mainland to visit relatives. Article 18 of the Act addresses the growth in cross-strait exchanges, mainly focused on Matsu, Kinmen, and the Penghu Islands, which lie between Taiwan and the Chinese mainland (Öshiro, 2005).

But the Act's primary intention was to promote local economic development on offshore islands (Tsai, 2002). It was conceived as a development-oriented construction act (M & ... 2000). Therefore, in addition to the aforementioned three island groups, the Act was expanded in 2009 to better address the needs of other offshore islands (such as Green Island, Lanyu Island, and Xiaoliuqiu Island). The diversity of Taiwan's offshore islands has resulted in much consultation and discussion between the central government and local island authorities. As a result, the Act has undergone 12 revisions up to 2022.

In one sense, the amended laws have given greater control and initiative to offshore islanders (Royle & Tsai, 2008). However, Shih ... (2020) suggests that the Offshore Islands Development Act has also strengthened the impression of offshore islands as places in need of development, compared to the main island of Taiwan. The main island continues to define the issues and development policies of offshore islands. This sometimes results in a divergence from the expectations of islanders and further strengthens differences between offshore islands and central authorities. In addition, local islander voices and rights to their islands are easily overshadowed by political powers in the central government. According to Wang ... (2020), the Act's current legal framework "centralizes" authority more than disperses it. Prioritizing islander voices remains essential for true sustainable island development in Taiwan (Tsai & Chiang, 2014).

Island Studies in East Asia

Table 1 summarizes of the main points addressed in each of the above sections. Historically, China and Korea share an understanding of islands similar to that of Western literature on islands. For China, the historical understanding of the word 'island' is more universal, as well as more of a continental geography perspective.

In the modern era, all four regions began with similar island research approaches that focused on descriptive studies of only a few islands or island groups. As global influences expanded, island studies in East Asia saw an increase in interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary approaches. This parallels Ginoza's (2020) findings on contemporary Pacific-based island studies. With the emergence of global island studies, research networks and island studies institutes were established. International academic journals from Japan, Korea, and Taiwan all appeared around the year 2010. China's island studies emerged a few years later, in around 2016, and has been marked by significant growth in research and publications (Grydehøj, 2021).

These regions differ geographically in their understandings and approaches to islands. Because Japan is a country of many islands of various sizes and geographies, it is no surprise that studies of its islands have a long history among both social and natural scientists. Many studies are individual case studies, especially of the country's southern islands. Island research in Korea began with studies on islandness, focusing on their underdevelopment and backwardness as justifications for national economic development policies. The recent establishment of island research institutes in Korea seeks to bring more global perspectives to its understanding of islands.

In China, relational, interdisciplinary, and geographical studies are gradually expanding as the Chinese government understands the growing economic and political importance of islands. Emerging Chinese studies on island development (Grydehøj, 2021), island cities (Wu et al., 2020; Zhang & Grydehøj, 2021), and tourism are slowly connecting China to the broader international academy of island studies researchers. China's continentalization policies (Ш, 2018) are making near-shore islands more like peninsulas jutting out into the sea from the mainland. In Taiwan, island research has paralleled the growth of island studies worldwide. However, the comparatively small number of island researchers has slowed the broader development of Taiwan's island studies.

Although the historical start of island research varies, all four regions share some similar attributes. One of these is a limited discussion of islands from a theoretical perspective. Thus, it is not possible to understand clearly how islandness is understood in each case, let alone the entire East Asia region. This is the most significant research gap in East Asian island studies.

The East Asia islandness

Relationally speaking, each region has a different geographical, historical, and contemporary context. For each, the understanding of 'islands' is heavily influenced by governmental, geopolitical, and cultural factors.

The words 'insularity' and 'isolation', for example, appear in the East Asian context and seem to be universal perceptions of the region's islands. But from a relational perspective, an island's insularity and isolation are relative to what it is compared to, which is the 'mainland', however that is defined. All islands are physically separate from their mainland, but more insular islands are more isolated and less integrated with the mainland. Mainland policies often seek to reduce island insularity through island development (Baldacchino, 2020).

In Japan and Taiwan, islands are defined in relation to the geographical scale of their larger main island(s). Larger islands are seen as 'mainlands', and smaller islands are 'remote' or 'offshore'. In Japan, there is also a general lack of discussion of its mainland islands as 'islands'. The geographical differences over what is a mainland complicate efforts to arrive at an overall understanding of East Asian 'islandness'. From a social anthropological perspective, Taiwan differs from the cultural homogeneity of the other three regions. 'Cultural hybridity' is a research concept there, which refers to the complex mixed ethnicities, nationalities, and identities resulting from a complicated migration and colonial background.

It is probably impossible to arrive at a definition of 'East Asian islandness' that generalizes the entire East Asia region. There is no fixed island epistemology in East Asian island research. The closest we come to this is in definitions of islands based on how people conceptualize relationships between small and large islands, between islands and continents, and between island country and a continental country.

Island policies and development

National social and economic development policies in all the cases seek to regulate and encourage island development and management. The Chinese mainland, Korea, and Taiwan started later than Japan, where standard policies were adopted and applied to all islands to address their purported backwardness. Similar policies were adopted in Taiwan's approach to offshore islands, but both Japan and Taiwan have been criticized for using one-size-fits-all policies that were ineffective and weakened islanders' political positions. Island policies in the Chinese mainland are adopted more at the provincial level than the national level but also tend to weaken the sense of island separation and distinctiveness.

All the regions give some acknowledgment to the uniqueness of islands from a socio-economic perspective, and they view islands as desirable sites for tourism development. But islands also have distinct ecosystems, and an increasing number of environmental studies show some variations among the regions. China is still a developing country, despite the wealth in its major cities. Island studies there focuses more on economic development, as was the case in Korea in the past. The continentalization and incorporation of islands into urban areas is an extension of China's rural development policy into island regions. That approach was also seen in the economic development focus that once dominated Korea's island studies, and geopolitically in Japan's current bridging of remote islands into nearby urban areas.

Environmental studies in the Chinese mainland, Taiwan, and Korea have often criticized unsustainable industrial and tourism development impacts on islands' natural and social environments. For the Chinese mainland, this is seen in the expansion of coastal cities and industrial zones. For Korea, it is seen in the government's industrial development policies and projects. And for Taiwan, it arises from tourism development overwhelming many of its islands. Japan, on the other hand, is a post-growth and post-industrial society facing depopulation issues. Depopulation is especially problematic in its islands and peripheral areas and has become a central focus of its contemporary island studies.

Conclusion

This survey contributes to a better understanding of island studies by reviewing the evolution of island policies and research in Japan, Korea, China, and Taiwan. We place particular attention on government and scholarly understandings of 'island' and 'islandness' from historical to contemporary times. Our findings add to the development of an East Asia-based relational island geography perspective (Pugh, 2018), which emphasizes the similarities and differences in island narratives and demonstrates opportunities and challenges for future research.

We also answer how East Asian socio-economic development policies reflect understandings of islandness locally and across the region. Government policies aim to promote urbanization (especially in China and Japan), industrialization, and tourism development (in all cases). But island research is still in its early stages in East Asia, with many issues requiring more thoughtful study. There is a need for more regional, transnational, and integrative research, beyond case studies. There is also a scarcity of critical research and interdisciplinary perspectives. These issues are similar in other parts of the world, where island studies remain a maturing field of research.

Island studies in East Asia are marked by significant differences between areas with complex historical and mixed cultural interactions, such as in Taiwan (in relation to China) and Okinawa (in relation to Japan) (Ginoza, 2020). Different characteristics and perspectives on islandness are also seen in the relational perspectives of smaller islands to a continent or a larger island 'mainland'. Unlike much other anglophone research on colonialism and militarism in the Pacific regions (Ginoza, 2020; Randall, 2020), our findings in East Asia project a changing understanding from isolation to relational spaces, from peace to tension, from the nation-state to cultural hybridity, and from uniform to diverse understandings of islandness. We relied considerably on the term 'islandness' to describe East Asian understandings of islands. In terms of geographical coverage, a major shortcoming of this research is the missing contributions of North Korea.

East Asia's future development of islands and island studies must pay crucial attention to a sustainable balance that reduces the risk of losing diverse island cultures (Randall, 2020) while ensuring necessary development. Academically, East Asia is an emerging stage for island studies. Future research should build on a relational perspective of islands and archipelagos to reveal a more deeply diversified understanding of islands, islandness, and island relations in East Asia. Having an East Asian understanding of island studies does not imply that we must abandon anglophone theories to study islands. Future research should transcend the duality of English and Native to establish a multifaceted research horizon for island studies.

Acknowledgments & Funding

We sincerely thank Adam Grydehøj and anonymous referees for their insightful comments on earlier drafts. This research was funded in part by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research Projects No. 20K12400 and 22K13251.

References

References

English-language references

Baldacchino, G. (2020). How far can one go? How distance matters in island development. Island Studies Journal, 15(1), 25-42. https://doi.org/10.24043/isj.70

Baldacchino, G. (Ed.). (2018). The Routledge international handbook of island studies: A world of islands. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315556642

Baldacchino, G., & Tsai, H. M. (2014). Contested enclave metageographies: The offshore islands of Taiwan, Political Geography, 40, 13-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2014.02.002

Chang, S. E., & Chung, Y. R. (2022). Defining 'Tao-style' equality of fishing allocations as the small-scale fishing cultural heritage in Lanyu, Taiwan. Okinawan Journal of Island Studies, 3(1), 97-114.

Chen, Y. C. (2013). Shifting place identities in a post-conflict society: Irony and multiculturality in Quemoy, Taiwan (Doctoral dissertation, Louisiana State University, Louisiana, United States).<http://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool dissertations/3209

Conkling, P. (2007). On islanders and islandness. Geographical Review, 97(2), 191-201. https://doi.org/10.1111/i.1931-0846.2007.tb00398.x

d'Hauteserre, A., & Funck, C. (2016). Innovation in island ecotourism in different contexts: Yakushima (Japan) and Tahiti and its Islands. Island Studies Journal, 11(1), 227-244. https://doi*org/10*24043/isi*345

Funck, C. (2020). Has the island lure reached Japan? Remote islands between tourism boom, new residents and fatal depopulation. In M. Manzenreiter, R. Lützeler, & S. Polak-Rottmann (Eds), Japan's new ruralities (pp. 177-195). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429331268-13

Gegeo, D. W. (2001). Cultural rupture and indigeneity: The challenge of (re)visioning 'place' in the Pacific. The Contemporary Pacific, 13(2), 491-507. https://doi.org/10.1353/cp.2001.0052

Ginoza, A. (Ed.). (2020). The challenges of Island Studies. Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6288-4

Grydehøj, A. (2017). A future of island studies. Island Studies Journal, 12(1), 3-16. https://doi.org/10.24043/isj.1

Grydehøj, A. (2021). An expanding world of islands: The emergence of Chinese Island Studies. Okinawan Journal of Island Studies, 2, 1-9.

Grydehøj, A., Bevacqua, M. L., Chibana, M., Nadarajah, Y., Simonsen, A., Su, P., Wright, R., & Davis, S. (2021). Practicing decolonial political geography: Island perspectives on neocolonialism and the China threat discourse. Political Geography, 85, 102330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2020.102330

Grydehøj, A., Nadarajah, Y., & Markussen, U. (2020). Islands of indigeneity: Cultural distinction, indigenous territory and island spatiality. Area, 52(1), 14-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/area.12520

Hong, G. (2017). Locating Zhuhai between land and sea: A relational production of Zhuhai, China, as an island city. Island Studies Journal, 12(2), 7-24. https://doi.org/10.24043/isj.16

Hong, G. (2022). Utopian and insular spaces in Chinese literature: An island approach. Island Studies Journal, 17(2), 13-27. https://doi.org/10.24043/isj.378

Hong, S. K. (2015). Socio-economic foundation by biocultural resources management: Suggestion for UNESCO Shinan Dadohae Biosphere Reserve, Korea. Journal of Marine and Island Cultures, 4, 81-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imic.2015.11.001

Hong, S. K. (2017). Interdisciplinary suggestion for sustainable islandness and improvement of islander's economy quality. Journal of Multiculture and Education, 2(1), 37-55.

Island Development Promotion Act (1986). Article 2.<https://elaw.klri.re.kr/eng mobile/viewer.do?hseq=55347&type=sogan&key=1> 5

Kakazu, H. (2018). Island sustainability and inclusive development: The case of Okinawa (Ryukyu) Islands. Journal of Marine and Island Cultures, 7(2), 1-36. https://doi.org/10.21463/jmic.2018.07.2.01

Lee, S. H., Huang, W. H., & Grydehøj, A. (2017). Relational geography of a border island: Local development and compensatory destruction on Lieyu, Taiwan. Island Studies Journal, 12(2), 97-112. https://doi.org/10.24043/isj.33

Luo, B., & Grydehøj, A. (2017). Sacred islands and island symbolism in Ancient and Imperial China: An exercise in decolonial island studies. Island Studies Journal, 12(2), 25-44. https://doi.org/10.24043/isj.19

Nadarajah, Y., Martinez, E. B., Su, P., & Grydehøj, A. (2022). Critical reflexivity and decolonial methodology in island studies: Interrogating the scholar within. Island Studies Journal, 17(1), 3-25. https://doi.org/10.24043/isj.380

Öshiro, H. (2005). Political scientific study for political economic placing and changes of policies in islands of Taiwan. University of the Ryukyus Repository, 12-30.

Pickering, A. (2017). The ontological turn: Taking different worlds seriously. Social Analysis, 61(2), 134-150. https://doi.org/10.3167/sa.2017.610209

Pugh, J. (2018). Relationality and island studies in the Anthropocene. Island Studies Journal, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.24043/isj.48

Qiu, S., Yue, W., Zhang, H., & Qi, J. (2017). Island ecosystem services value, land-use change, and the National New Area Policy in Zhoushan Archipelago, China. Island Studies Journal, 12(2), 177-198. https://doi.org/10.24043/isj.20

Qu, M., Coulton, T. M., & Funck, C. (2020). Gaps and limitations: Contrasting attitudes to newcomers and their role in a Japanese island community. Bulletin of the Hiroshima University Museum, 12, 31-46. http://doi.org/10.15027/50631

Royle, S. A., Tsai, H. M. (2008). Cultural heritage and development strategies of the offshore islands of Ireland and Taiwan', Insula, 17(1), 47-56.

Randall, J. (2020). An introduction to island studies. Rowman & Littlefield.

Tsai, H. M. (2003). Island Biocultural Assemblages: The case of Kinmen Island, Geografiska Annaler B, 85 (4), 209-218. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.04353684.2003.00143.x

Tsai, H. M. (2002). Sustainability of small islands in Taiwan. In Hsiao et al. (Eds), Sustainable development for island societies: Taiwan and the world (pp. 395-408). Asia-Pacific Research Program of Academia Sinica.

Tsai, H. M., & Chiang, B. W. (2014). Enclosing resources on the islands of Kinmen and Xiamen: From war blockade to financializing natural heritage, Journal of Marine and Island Cultures, 3(2), 69-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imic.2014.12.002

UNESCO (2021). Japan: Properties inscribed on the World Heritage List. UNESCO. https://whc.unesco.org/en/statesparties/jp

Usui, R., Funck, C., & Adewumi, I. B. (2021). Tourism and counterurbanization in a lowamenity peripheral island: A longitudinal study at Yakushima Island in Kagoshima, Japan. Sustainability, 13, 8822. 1-21. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13168822

Wu, Y., Wang, S., Yang, J., Wu, S., You, H., & Wang, Y. (2020). Impact of land use on coastline change of island cities: A case of Zhoushan Island, China. Island Studies Journal, 15(2), 335-352. https://doi.org/10.24043/isj.125

Yue, W., Qiu, S., Zhang, H., & Qi, J. (2017). Migratory patterns and population redistribution in China's Zhoushan Archipelago in the context of rapid urbanization. Island Studies Journal, 12(2), 45-60. https://doi.org/10.24043/isj.23

Zhang, H., & Grydehøj, A. (2021). Locating the interstitial island: Integration of Zhoushan Archipelago into the Yangtze River Delta urban agglomeration. Urban Studies, 58(10), 2157-2173. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098020937987

Japanese-language references

... (1959)....

... (2019). ...

... (1965). ...

... (2003). ...

... (2014). ...

... (2017) ...

... (2016) ...

... (2006) ...

... (2014) ...

... (2020) ...

Korean-language references

... (1976) ...

... (2018). ...

... (2008). ...

... (1981). ...

... (2018). ...

... (2010). ...

... (1976). ...

... (1987). ...

Simplified Chinese-language references

... (2007) ...

.... (2018) ...

... (2006). ...

... (2012). ...

... (121). ...

... (2011). ... Retrieved

... (1995). ...

... (2012). ...

... (2009). ...

Traditional Chinese-language references

... (2020). ...

... (2019). ...

... (2000). ...

... (2020). ...

... (1999). ...

... (2020). ...

... (2020). ...

... (2000). ...