IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mes/chinec/v51y2018i3p227-240.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Effective Is the BTUN-Diagram in the Evaluation of Territorial Unification Negotiations: The Case of China-Taiwan Territorial Unification

Author

Listed:
  • Mario Arturo Ruiz Estrada
  • Ibrahim Ndoma
  • Donghyun Park

Abstract

This article evaluates the effectiveness of the Box Territorial Unification Negotiation Diagram (BTUN-Diagram) in the evaluation of any territorial unification negotiation between two or more territories anywhere and anytime. We used the BTUN-Diagram to evaluate the possible unification of China and Taiwan as it provides a much deeper analysis and interpretation of what unification of the two territories entail. The BTUN-Diagram extends the study of territorial unification beyond the common economic implication of unification as observed in many studies by widening the scope of the study through a multidisciplinary approach. Given the huge gaps that exist in the China-Taiwan unification drawn from our analysis, we observed more divergence than convergence given the huge cost likely to be borne by a unifying party. We suggest very serious and purposeful negotiations could bring about trade-offs that may institute an equilibrium point in the territorial unification negotiation.

Suggested Citation

  • Mario Arturo Ruiz Estrada & Ibrahim Ndoma & Donghyun Park, 2018. "How Effective Is the BTUN-Diagram in the Evaluation of Territorial Unification Negotiations: The Case of China-Taiwan Territorial Unification," Chinese Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(3), pages 227-240, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:mes:chinec:v:51:y:2018:i:3:p:227-240
    DOI: 10.1080/10971475.2017.1398364
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10971475.2017.1398364
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10971475.2017.1398364?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mes:chinec:v:51:y:2018:i:3:p:227-240. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/MCES20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.