Analysis of Regional Country Studies and International Communication Pathways
Abstract
As globalization is continuously expanding, the position of area country studies and international communication in multicultural exchanges is being emphasized. This paper is intended for analyzing the consequences of regional country studies on the international communication network via the description of cultural communication in different regions and examining the types and obstacles of such communications. With the theoretical backgrounds of regional country studies, this paper has further worked out in the direction of specific case studies, thus examining their diverse manifestations and communication pathways of regional cultures in international communication. According to the article, global communication can be seen as a tool for abolition of cultural borders as well as a bridge of communication and understanding globally. Finally, the paper brings to light the points that regional country studies shed on the future international communication pathways and underlines the fact that unique expressions of regions should be a part of cultural diversity and mutual understanding promotion in a global cultural communication.
References
[2] Ulucak, R., Danish, & Khan, S. U. D. (2020). Does information and communication technology affect CO₂ mitigation under the pathway of sustainable development during the mode of globalization? Sustainable Development, 28(4), 857–867. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2054
[3] Fragkos, P., Paroussos, L., Fragkiadakis, K., & Pisani-Ferry, J. (2021). Energy system transitions and low-carbon pathways in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, EU-28, India, Indonesia, Japan, Republic of Korea, Russia, and the United States. Energy, 216, 119385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119385
[4] Dollinger, M., Lodge, J. M., & Coates, H. (2021). Participatory design for community-based research: A study on regional student higher education pathways. The Australian Educational Researcher, 48(4), 739–755. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-021-00464-x
[5] Wibeck, V., & Linnér, B.-O. (2021). Sense-making analysis: A framework for multi-strategy and cross-country research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20, 1609406921998907. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406921998907
[6] Dabić, M., Vlačić, B., Daim, T., & Sahasranamam, S. (2020). Pathways of SME internationalization: A bibliometric and systematic review. Small Business Economics, 55, 705–725. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00158-5
[7] Chen, G., Zhang, Y., Liu, X., & He, C. (2020). Global projections of future urban land expansion under shared socioeconomic pathways. Nature Communications, 11(1), 537. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-14386-x
[8] Cheruiyot, D., & Ferrer-Conill, R. (2021). Pathway outta pigeonhole? De-contextualizing majority world countries. Media, Culture & Society, 43(1), 189–197. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443720926042
[9] Candela, M., Luconi, V., & Vecchio, A. (2021). A worldwide study on the geographic locality of Internet routes. Computer Networks, 201, 108555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2021.108555
[10] Lehtonen, H. S., Huttunen, S., & Rikkonen, P. (2021). Shared socioeconomic pathways for climate change research in Finland: Co-developing extended SSP narratives for agriculture. Regional Environmental Change, 21, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-021-01795-1
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright for this article is retained by the author(s), with first publication rights granted to the journal.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
1.png)
