Measurement and analysis of geopolitical risk in Southeast Asian countries based on GDELT event data

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-9479.2024.04.20222102

Abstract

Abstract:

With the continuous promotion of China's " going out " strategy and the Belt and Road Initiative, the demand for overseas geopolitical risk research is also increasing. Southeast Asia is a key region for the Belt and Road Initiative, with a complicated geographical environment and frequent geopolitical incidents. Based on geopolitical events, this paper proposes a geopolitical risk measurement method, taking Southeast Asia as an example to measure and analyze its spatio-temporal characteristics. Some conclusions can be drawn as follows: (1) Geopolitical risks in Southeast Asia are generally stable and controllable, but the spatio-temporal differences are large. It is relatively high in the Philippines and Myanmar, low in Laos, Singapore, Timor-Leste and Vietnam, and fluctuating in other countries. (2) The geopolitical risks of Indonesia, Cambodia, Thailand and Malaysia are more affected by internal events than those of the other five countries. Internal problems need to be solved urgently. Brunei, Laos, Timor-Leste, Vietnam and Singapore have high geopolitical risks affected by external events and relatively stable internal environments. (3) The geopolitical risks of South Asian countries are much more affected by external events than internal events, among which external events mainly come from countries outside the region such as the United States, China and Australia, while countries within the region account for a relatively low proportion, mainly from Thailand and Malaysia. The results of this study provide scientific support for grasping the geopolitical risks in Southeast Asia and ensuring the construction of the Belt and Road Initiative.

Key words: geopolitics, geopolitical risk, risk evaluation, GDELT, Southeast Asia

摘要：

随着我国“走出去”战略和“一带一路”倡议的持续推进，对海外地缘政治风险研究的需求也与日俱增。东南亚地区是“一带一路”建设重点地区，地缘环境十分复杂，地缘政治事件频发。通过事件分析刻画东南亚国家地缘政治风险的等级，并分析其时空特征有重要的理论和实践意义。本研究发现：①东南亚地缘政治风险总体稳定可控，但内部时空差异较大。菲律宾和缅甸的地缘风险水平相对较高，老挝、新加坡、东帝汶和越南较低，其他国家则处于波动状态。②印尼、柬、泰、马等四国地缘政治风险受内部事件影响高于其他五国，国家内部问题亟待解决；文莱、老挝、东帝汶、越南和新加坡等五国地缘政治风险受外部事件影响较高，内部环境相对较为稳定。③东南亚国家地缘政治风险受外部事件影响远高于内部事件影响，其中外部事件主要来自美国、中国和澳大利亚等域外国家，域内国家占比较低，主要来自泰国和马来西亚。研究结果为掌握东南亚地缘政治风险情况与保障“一带一路”建设提供科学支撑。

关键词: 地缘政治, 地缘政治风险, 风险测度, GDELT, 东南亚

Shukun DU, Jing ZHANG, Zhijun HAN, Linjie WANG, Daihong TANG. Measurement and analysis of geopolitical risk in Southeast Asian countries based on GDELT event data[J]. World Regional Studies, 2024, 33(4): 13-23.

杜树坤, 张晶, 韩志军, 王琳洁, 唐代红. 基于GDELT事件数据的东南亚国家地缘政治风险测度与分析[J]. 世界地理研究, 2024, 33(4): 13-23.

Figures/Tables 5

References 45

1	杜德斌,段德忠,刘承良,等.1990年以来中国地理学之地缘政治学研究进展.地理研究,2015,34(2):199-212.
	DU D, DUAN D, LIU C, et al. Progress of geopolitics of Chinese geography since 1990. Geographical Research,2015,34(2):199-212.
2	陆大道, 杜德斌.关于加强地缘政治地缘经济研究的思考.地理学报, 2013,68(6):723-727.
	LU D, DU D. Some thoughts on the strengthening of geopolitical and geo-economic studies. Acta Geographica Sinica,2013,68(6):723-727.
3	张晶,刘建忠.地缘体概念内涵及特征研究.世界地理研究,2014,23(4):50-55.
	ZHANG J, LIU J. Research on attribute and concept of geo-entity. World Regional Studies, 2014,23(4):50-55.
4	CALDARA D, IACOVIELLO M. Measuring geopolitical risk. American Economic Review, 2022, 112(4): 1194-1225.
5	CARNEY M. Uncertainty, the economy and policy.(2016-06-30)[2022-05-09]. .
6	World Economic Forum. The global risks report 2021.(2021-01-19)[2022-05-09]..
7	MIDDELDORP M, GROENEWEGEN J, VREEDE I. Outlook 2018: The Economic Impact of Geopolitical Risks and Events on the Dutch Economy. Utrecht, Netherland: Rabobank/RaboResearch,2017.
8	刘文革,周洋.地缘政治风险指数构建及其跨国比较. 区域与全球发展,2018,2(2):5-29.
	LIU W, ZHOU Y. Index development for geopolitical risks and international comparison. Area Studies and Global Development,2018,2(2):5-29.
9	BOHL D, HANNA T, MAPES B, et al. Understanding and forecasting geopolitical risk and benefits. Denver, USA: University of Denver, 2017.
10	SU C, QIN M, TAO R, et al. Can bitcoin hedge the risks of geopolitical events? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2020, 159: 120182.
11	SHARIF A, ALOUI C, YAROVAYA L. COVID-19 pandemic, oil prices, stock market, geopolitical risk and policy uncertainty nexus in the US economy: Fresh evidence from the wavelet-based approach. International Review of Financial Analysis, 2020, 70: 101496.
12	蒋姮."一带一路"地缘政治风险的评估与管理.国际贸易,2015(8):21-24.
	JIANG H. Assessment and management of geopolitical risks of the Belt and Road Initiative. Intertrade,2015(8):21-24.
13	刘文革,傅诗云,黄玉.地缘政治风险与中国对外直接投资的空间分布——以"一带一路"沿线国家为例.西部论坛,2019,29(1):84-97.
	LIU W, FU S, HUANG Y. The geopolotical risk and spatial distribution of China's outward direct investment: Taking the countries along "the Belt and Road"as an example. West Forum,2019,29(1):84-97.
14	葛旭瑞,李灿松,胡平平,等.湄公河流域国家地缘政治风险评估与影响研究.地理与地理信息科学,2022,38(6):52-59.
	GE X, LI C, HU P, et al. Geopolitical risk assessment and impact of Mekong River basin countries.Geography and Geo-Information Science,2022,38(6):52-59.
15	熊琛然,王礼茂,屈秋实,等.地缘政治风险研究进展与展望.地理科学进展,2020,39(4):695-706.
	XIONG C, WANG L, QU Q, et al. Progress and prospect of geopolitical risk research. Progress in Geography,2020,39(4):695-706.
16	周平."一带一路"面临的地缘政治风险及其管控.探索与争鸣,2016(1):83-86.
	ZHOU P. Geopolitical risks facing the Belt and Road Initiative and their management. Exploration and Free Views,2016(1):83-86.
17	胡志勇. "一带一路"的地缘风险与挑战浅析. 西部学刊, 2016(8):5-8.
	HU Z. A brief analysis of the geopolitical risks and challenges of the "Belt and Road" Initiative. Journal of Western, 2016(8):5-8.
18	郗笃刚, 刘建忠, 周桥, 等. "一带一路"建设在印度洋地区面临的地缘风险分析. 世界地理研究, 2018,27(6):14-23.
	XI D, LIU J, ZHOU Q, et al. Geopolitical risks for the One Belt and One Road construction in Indian Ocean region. World Regional Studies, 2018,27(6):14-23
19	张芳芳,刘慧,宋涛,等.中南半岛地缘综合风险评价与机制分析.世界地理研究,2021,30(6):1151-1162.
	ZHANG F, LIU H, SONG T, et al. Assessment and mechanism analysis of the geo-integrated risk of Indochina Peninsula. World Regional Studies,2021,30(6):1151-1162.
20	申玉坤,骆华松,洪菊花,等.基于"一带一路"的拉丁美洲地缘风险空间分异格局及驱动因素.热带地理,2021,41(6):1222-1235.
	SHEN Y, LUO H, HONG J, et al. Spatial differentiation pattern and driving factors of geo-risk in Latin America based on the "Belt and Road" Initiative. Tropical Geography,2021,41(6):1222-1235.
21	阳军.国外政治风险评估现状分析.国外社会科学,2018(4):77-84.
	YANG J. Analysis of current situation of foreign political risk assessment. Social Sciences Abroad,2018(4):77-84.
22	ZHANG C, XIAO C, LIU H. Spatial big data analysis of political risks along the belt and road. Sustainability, 2019, 11(8): 2216.
23	YONAMINE J. A nuanced study of political conflict using the global datasets of events location and tone (gdelt) dataset. University Park: The Pennsylvania State University, 2013.
24	GERNER D, SCHRODT P, YILMAZ O, et al. Conflict and mediation event observations (CAMEO): A new event data framework for the analysis of foreign policy interactions. International Studies Association, New Orleans, 2002.
25	WARD M, BEGER A, CUTLER J, et al. Comparing GDELT and ICEWS event data. Analysis, 2013,21(1):267-297.
26	李萌,袁文,袁武,等.基于新闻大数据的北极地区地缘关系研究.地理学报,2021,76(5):1090-1104.
	LI M, YUAN W, YUAN W. Big data analysis on geographical relationship of the Arctic based on news reports. Acta Geographica Sinica,2021,76(5):1090-1104.
27	陈小强,袁丽华,沈石,等.中国及其周边国家间地缘关系解析.地理学报,2019,74(8):1534-1547.
	CHEN X, YUAN L, SHEN S, et al. Analysis of the geo-relationships between China and its neighboring countries. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2019, 74(8): 1534-1547.
28	JIANG Y, ZHOU B, TU H, et al. A temporal dual graph convolutional network for social unrest prediction. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2021, 1757(1): 012005.
29	SUN X, GAO J, LIU B, et al. Big data-based assessment of political risk along the belt and road. Sustainability, 2021, 13(7): 3935.
30	漆林,秦昆,罗萍,等.基于GDELT新闻数据的冲突强度定量表达及冲突事件检测研究.地球信息科学学报,2021,23(11):1956-1970.
	QI L, QIN K, LUO P,et al. Quantitative expression of conflict intensity and conflict event detection based on GDELT news data. Journal of Geo-information Science,2021,23(11):1956-1970.
31	HALKIA M, FERRI S, PAPAZOGLOU M, et al.Conflict event modelling: Research experiment and event data limitations//Proceedings of the Workshop on Automated Extraction of Socio-Political Events from News 2020.Marseille: LREC, 2020: 42-48.
32	CLARK E. Valuing political risk. Journal of International Money and Finance, 1997, 16(3): 477-490.
33	WALLERSTEIN I. The Modern World-System I. Berkeley, California: University of California Press, 2011.
34	刘锐,胡伟平,王红亮,等.基于核密度估计的广佛都市区路网演变分析.地理科学,2011,31(1):81-86.
	LIU R, HU W, WANG H, et al. The road network evolution of Guangzhou-Foshan metropolitan area based on kernel density estimation. Scientia Geographica Sinica,2011,31(1):81-86.
35	陈冲.机会、贪婪、怨恨与国内冲突的再思考——基于时空模型对非洲政治暴力的分析.世界经济与政治,2018(8):94-127.
	CHEN C. Rethinking opportunity, greed, grievance and internal conflict: A spatio-temporal analysis of African political violence. World Economics and Politics,2018(8):94-127.
36	卢光盛,胡辉.身份与利益——东南亚恐怖主义根源探析.世界民族,2020(2):21-31.
	LU G, HU H. Identities and interests: A probe into the root causes of terrorism in Southeast Asia. Journal of World Peoples Studies,2020(2):21-31.
37	聂文娟.东南亚地区中美战略均衡的机制论.国际政治科学,2022,7(1):86-113.
	NIE W. The mechanism theory of Sino-US strategic equilibrium in Southeast Asia. Quarterly Journal of International Politics,2022,7(1):86-113.
38	严飞,沈旭涵.罗兴亚人问题的缘起、发展与地区影响.南亚研究,2022(3):138-154.
	YAN F, SHEN X. The Rohingya issue: Roots, development and regional implications. South Asian Studies,2022(3):138-154.
39	祝湘辉,张添.政治转型系统机制与中缅关系的变迁.南亚研究,2020(2):109-129.
	ZHU X, ZHANG T. System of political transition and the evolution of China-Myanmar relations. South Asian Studies,2020(2):109-129.
40	朱陆民,崔婷.中国对柬埔寨直接投资的政治风险及化解路径.国际关系研究,2018(1):130-144.
	ZHU L, CUI T. The risks of China's FDI in Cambodia and countermeasures. Journal of International Relations,2018(1):130-144.
41	郑佳.国内有关战后马来西亚政治发展研究概述.南亚东南亚研究,2021(6):132-152.
	ZHENG J. Overview of domestic studies on the political development of Malaysia after World War Ⅱ. South and Southeast Asian Studies,2021(6):132-152.
42	刘阿明.权力转移过程中的东南亚地区秩序——美国、中国与东南亚的角色.世界经济与政治,2009(6):38-46.
	LIU A. Regional order in Southeast Asia during the process of power transition: Roles of the United States, China and the Southeast Asian countries. World Economics and Politics,2009(6):38-46.
43	李晓星. 澳大利亚的南海政策:从观望到介入的转变.北京: 外交学院,2016.
	LI X. Australia's South China Sea policy: A shift from wait-and-see to involvement.Beijing: China Foreign Affairs University,2016.
44	刘丹,唐小松.澳大利亚对中国周边国家的公共外交——以东南亚为例.国际关系研究,2019(1):33-50.
	LIU D, TANG X. Australia's public diplomacy on China's neighboring countries--The case of the countries in Southeast Asia. Journal of International Relations,2019(1):33-50.
45	沈石,宋长青,程昌秀,等.GDELT: 感知全球社会动态的事件大数据.世界地理研究,2020,29(1):71-76.
	SHEN S, SONG C, CHENG C, et al. GDELT: Big event data for sensing global social dynamics. World Regional Studies,2020,29(1):71-76.

类型	地缘政治风险事件的CAMEO编码
外部事件	024呼吁政治改革、025呼吁妥协、028呼吁接受调解、09调查、104要求政治改革、105要求目标妥协、11批评、13威胁、15展示军事力量、16降低关系、17胁迫、18攻击、19军事对抗、20非传统大规模暴力
内部事件	024呼吁政治改革、025呼吁妥协、104要求政治改革、105要求目标妥协、112谴责、113集体反对、123拒绝政治改革、124拒绝让步、125拒绝开会讨论谈判、127拒绝协议解决争端、128公然反抗准则法律、13威胁、14抗议、15展示军事力量、17胁迫、18攻击、19军事对抗、20非传统大规模暴力

类型	地缘政治风险事件的CAMEO编码
外部事件	024呼吁政治改革、025呼吁妥协、028呼吁接受调解、09调查、104要求政治改革、105要求目标妥协、11批评、13威胁、15展示军事力量、16降低关系、17胁迫、18攻击、19军事对抗、20非传统大规模暴力
内部事件	024呼吁政治改革、025呼吁妥协、104要求政治改革、105要求目标妥协、112谴责、113集体反对、123拒绝政治改革、124拒绝让步、125拒绝开会讨论谈判、127拒绝协议解决争端、128公然反抗准则法律、13威胁、14抗议、15展示军事力量、17胁迫、18攻击、19军事对抗、20非传统大规模暴力

国家	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020	平均值
文莱	95:5	95:5	97:3	96:4	96:4	98:2	98:2	98:2	95:5	99:1	97:3
越南	92:8	94:6	93:7	95:5	94:6	94:6	94:6	93:7	93:7	92:8	97:3
老挝	94:6	89:11	88:12	93:7	92:8	93:7	93:7	93:7	93:7	93:7	92:8
东帝汶	93:7	85:15	90:10	90:10	95:5	94:6	95:5	94:6	91:9	96:4	92:8
新加坡	88:12	91:9	89:11	90:10	88:12	89:11	89:11	90:10	88:12	89:11	89:11
马来西亚	87:13	86:14	84:16	87:13	84:16	83:17	83:17	81:19	84:16	83:17	84:16
缅甸	78:22	83:17	82:18	81:19	81:19	80:20	87:13	87:13	84:16	83:17	83:17
泰国	83:17	84:16	82:18	81:19	79:21	81:19	79:21	84:16	81:19	77:23	81:19
菲律宾	82:18	84:16	84:16	80:20	79:21	79:21	79:21	78:22	79:21	78:22	80:20
印度尼西亚	81:19	81:19	80:20	80:20	81:19	79:21	80:20	79:21	77:23	76:24	79:21
柬埔寨	81:19	77:23	74:26	76:24	76:24	76:24	74:26	71:29	76:24	77:23	76:24

国家	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020	平均值
文莱	95:5	95:5	97:3	96:4	96:4	98:2	98:2	98:2	95:5	99:1	97:3
越南	92:8	94:6	93:7	95:5	94:6	94:6	94:6	93:7	93:7	92:8	97:3
老挝	94:6	89:11	88:12	93:7	92:8	93:7	93:7	93:7	93:7	93:7	92:8
东帝汶	93:7	85:15	90:10	90:10	95:5	94:6	95:5	94:6	91:9	96:4	92:8
新加坡	88:12	91:9	89:11	90:10	88:12	89:11	89:11	90:10	88:12	89:11	89:11
马来西亚	87:13	86:14	84:16	87:13	84:16	83:17	83:17	81:19	84:16	83:17	84:16
缅甸	78:22	83:17	82:18	81:19	81:19	80:20	87:13	87:13	84:16	83:17	83:17
泰国	83:17	84:16	82:18	81:19	79:21	81:19	79:21	84:16	81:19	77:23	81:19
菲律宾	82:18	84:16	84:16	80:20	79:21	79:21	79:21	78:22	79:21	78:22	80:20
印度尼西亚	81:19	81:19	80:20	80:20	81:19	79:21	80:20	79:21	77:23	76:24	79:21
柬埔寨	81:19	77:23	74:26	76:24	76:24	76:24	74:26	71:29	76:24	77:23	76:24

[1]	Chunjuan WANG, Dahai LIU, Yuting HUA, Chenglong LI. The geopolitical circle structure of Arctic Passage and competition cooperation relationship between relative countries [J]. World Regional Studies, 2024, 33(3): 29-39.
[2]	Gaojie GONG, Xue WANG. The dilemma and development of China-CEEC Cooperation under the "Three Seas Initiative" [J]. World Regional Studies, 2024, 33(1): 33-42.
[3]	Xinhuan ZHANG, Xiaolei ZHANG, Lu ZHANG, Rongwei WU, Chan ZHOU. Spatio-temporal evolution patterns of the geo-relationship between China and the countries along "the Belt & Road" [J]. World Regional Studies, 2023, 32(9): 17-27.
[4]	Yaowei CHANG, Jing ZHANG, Zhijun HAN, Junwei WANG, Daihong TANG, Shukun DU. The evolution of geo-military relations network of Indo-Pacific countries based on cooperation perspective [J]. World Regional Studies, 2023, 32(8): 1-15.
[5]	Peng LI, Yueji QI, Chiwei XIAO. Evolution characteristics of the trade between the ASEAN and global major extra-territorial powers since the 1990s [J]. World Regional Studies, 2023, 32(8): 63-72.
[6]	Min ZHAO, Jun ZHANG, Peng LI. Multi-scenario forecast of city linkage between Southwest China and Southeast Asia under the background of Pan-Asia High-speed Railway construction [J]. World Regional Studies, 2023, 32(3): 1-16.
[7]	Yue PAN, Tao SONG, Fuyu LI. Research on the Indonesian capital relocation plan under the push and pull of multi-scale geopolitical elements [J]. World Regional Studies, 2023, 32(11): 57-68.
[8]	Nannan XIE, Weidong HU. The logic and tendencies of the EU neighborhood strategy: From normative to security orientation [J]. World Regional Studies, 2023, 32(11): 69-81.
[9]	Ning AN, Bo ZHANG. The research of transnational migration and ethnic communities from the perspective of geopolitics [J]. World Regional Studies, 2022, 31(6): 1119-1129.
[10]	Shulan YE. Evolution of geostrategic logic of the South China Sea and construction of a community of shared future in the South China Sea [J]. World Regional Studies, 2022, 31(4): 687-699.
[11]	Weidong GUO, Debin DU, Xiya LI, Qifan XIA, Wanpeng CAO. Spatial characteristics of arms trade pattern of the South China Sea Region and its geopolitical implications [J]. World Regional Studies, 2022, 31(4): 713-725.
[12]	Hao CHEN, Liping ZHU, Fahu CHEN. The geopolitical security barrier function of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau from the perspective of world history [J]. World Regional Studies, 2022, 31(1): 1-11.
[13]	Bing LI, Fei PENG. The evolution of geo-relations between China and Southeast Asian countries based on GDELT [J]. World Regional Studies, 2021, 30(6): 1127-1139.
[14]	Xiaoyan YAN, Youde WU, Honghua CAO. An analysis of the relationship between Myanmar's civil war and drug economy from the perspective of geopolitics [J]. World Regional Studies, 2021, 30(4): 721-731.
[15]	Zhongyin WEI, Shan SHEN, Guangyu JIA, Yue MA. A study on the discernment of Central Asia and ASEAN region on China's geopolitical relations based on media events [J]. World Regional Studies, 2021, 30(4): 732-743.