英語のDevelopment Studiesと「国際開発研究」誌の対比からみる「環境持続性」の位置づけ

―課題主導型学際領域の可能性―

抄録

In today's world, not only in academia but also in popular scenes, environmental sustainability is discussed globally. However, regardless of such prominence of the term, it is rarely used in the Development Studies literature, which is deeply involved in issues of global inequalities and poverty.

Driven by this consideration, this paper examines how environmental sustainability is treated in academic publications in the field of Development Studies. The exploration is done by contrasting the two discursive spaces of academic journals: one is the global English-medium publications labeled as Development Studies according to the Web-of-Science classification. Another is the Journal of International Development Studies, published by the Japan Society for International Development, which collects articles written mostly in Japanese. The objectives are twofold: First, it tries to understand the differences of Development Studies practices and discourses in English- and Japanese-medium journals. Then, it examines the positions of academic works related to environmental sustainability within these two journal spaces.

The authors use topic modeling of words and phrases used in the articles published in two academic spaces between 2015 and 2024. They revealed that in the Japanese context, there are two strong points of focus: one on the micro-level human development and social issues, such as education and livelihood, and another on the history, philosophy, politics, and evaluation of Japanese aid for developing countries, compared to the discussions incorporating voices from the Global South in Englishlanguage publications. The paper suggests that the Japanese discourse is less integrated with the global emphasis on environmental sustainability, particularly in areas like climate finance and resource governance.

The study highlights the need for Development Studies to foster interdisciplinary approaches to environmental sustainability, breaking away from the reproduction of closed disciplinary academic production. It also calls for a broader, more inclusive academic platform to integrate various perspectives to address pressing global sustainability challenges.