Russia in Foreign Academic Discourse on Political Geography and Geopolitics in the 2000–2023 Period

The study presents a comprehensive analysis of articles concerning Russia in foreign academic discourse on political geography and geopolitics from 2000 to 2023. The aim of the research is to define the main thematic clusters of such publications and their transformation over time. Cluster and temporal bibliometric analysis of headlines and abstracts of over 1500 articles in the leading journals, conducted by the means of VOSviewer 1.6.19 program allowed to define four clusters of the following thematic fields: critical geopolitics; economic transformations; transport and infrastructure; polls and elections. Each cluster is associated with a country that is most frequently used in the corresponding context. In the critical geopolitical cluster that is Turkey, in the cluster of economic transformations that is Russia, in the cluster of transport and infrastructure that is China and in the sociological and electoral cluster that is Ukraine. The largest is the critical geopolitical cluster considering perception of geopolitical position and international hierarchy, as well as the impact of that perception on actors’ behavior. The most compact cluster is the infrastructure one linked to China’s transportation projects and Eurasian integration. That is exactly this cluster that includes the “newest” terms concerning China’s recent infrastructure initiatives in Greater Eurasia as well as the functioning of the Eurasian Economic Union. The oldest terms are linked to the cluster of economic transformations and represents the analysis of the course and the outcome of the transfer to the market economy in Russia and other post-Soviet countries. Analyzing the context of Russia studies in the foreign political geographic academic discourse provides a better understanding of the views on Russia in the foreign academic community and allows to formulate its characteristic features.

1. Bakke K.M., Linke A.M., O’Loughlin J., Toal G. Dynamics of state-building after war: Externalinternal relations in Eurasian de facto states. Polit. Geogr., 2018, vol. 63, pp. 159–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.POLGEO.2017.06.011

2. Browning C.S. The region-building approach revisited: The continued othering of Russia in discourses of region-building in the European North. Geopolitics, 2003, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 45–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/714001005

3. Dittmer J., Moisio S., Ingram A., Dodds K. Have you heard the one about the disappearing ice? Recasting Arctic geopolitics. Polit. Geogr., 2011, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 202–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.POLGEO.2011.04.002

4. Du L., Chen W. Political discourse and translation studies. A bibliometric analysis in international core journals. SAGE Open, 2022, vol. 12, no. 1. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221082142

5. Fartyshev A.N. Quantitative methods in Russian geopolitical researches. Political Science, 2022, no. 4, pp. 18–40. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.31249/POLN/2022.04.01

6. Kaledin N.V., Chistobayev A.I., Kaledin V.N., Elatskov A.B. The development of political geography and geopolitics as an academic and research discipline in the Baltic region: The historical contribution of Saint Petersburg University. Baltic Region, 2019, no. 2. pp. 136–152. https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2019-2-8

7. Kolosov V.A. Geography of state boundaries: Ideas, achievements, practice. Izv. Akad. Nauk, Ser. Geogr., 2008, no. 5, p. 8–20. (In Russ.).

8. Kolosov V.A. Critical geopolitics: Main concepts and field experience in Russia. Political Science, 2011, no. 4, p. 31–52. (In Russ.).

9. Kuteleva A., Vasiliev D. China’s Belt and Road initiative in Russian media: Politics of narratives, images, and metaphors. Eurasian Geogr. Econ., 2021, vol. 62, no. 5–6, pp. 582–606. https://doi.org/10.1080/15387216.2020.1833228

10. Liu Z., Dunford M., Liu W. Coupling national geopolitical economic strategies and the Belt and Road Initiative: The China-Belarus Great Stone Industrial Park. Polit. Geogr., 2021, vol. 84. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.POLGEO.2020.102296

11. Merabishvili G., Metreveli V. Spiritual geopolitics of Georgia’s territorial integrity. Polit. Geogr., 2021, vol. 87. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.POLGEO.2021.102374

12. Nikiforova E., Brednikova O. On labor migration to Russia: Central Asian migrants and migrant families in the matrix of Russia’s bordering policies. Polit. Geogr., 2018, vol. 66, pp. 142–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.POLGEO.2018.04.006

13. O’Loughlin J., Kolossov V. Still not worth the bones of a single pomeranian grenadier: The geopolitics of the Kosovo war 1999. Polit. Geogr., 2002, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 573–599. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0962-6298(02)00008-2

14. Okunev I.Yu. Critical geopolitics and post-critical shift on geopolitical research paradigm. Sravnit. Politika, 2014, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 6–14. (In Russ.).

15. Orlov B.S. Russia as viewed by the Germans in the modern times. Ross. Sovrem. Mir, 2010, no. 1, pp. 165–185. (In Russ.).

16. Perepechko A.S., Kolossov V.A., ZumBrunnen C. Remeasuring and rethinking social cleavages in Russia: Continuity and changes in electoral geography 1917-1995. Polit. Geogr., 2007, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 179–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.POLGEO.2006.09.006

17. Picone F., Buonocore E., Chemello R., et al. Exploring the development of scientific research on Marine Protected Areas: From conservation to global ocean sustainability. Ecol. Inform., 2021, vol. 61, pp. 101–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOINF.2020.101200

18. Pototskaya T.I., Silnichaya A.V. Modern geopolitical research in Russia. Baltic Region, 2019, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 112–135. https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2019-2-7

19. Radnitz S. Reinterpreting the enemy: Geopolitical beliefs and the attribution of blame in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Polit. Geogr., 2019, vol. 70, pp. 64–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.POLGEO.2019.01.009

20. Sattich T., Morgan R., Moe E. Searching for energy independence, finding renewables? Energy security perceptions and renewable energy policy in Lithuania. Polit. Geogr., 2022, vol. 96. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.POLGEO.2022.102656

21. Silnichaya A.V., Gumenyuk L.G., Russian geopolitical studies through the prism of bibliometry. Reg. Issled., 2019, no. 1, pp. 76–88. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.5922/1994-5280-2020-1-7

22. Tsygankov A.P. Finding a civilisational idea: “West,” Eurasia,” and “Euro-East” in Russia’s foreign policy. Geopolitics, 2007, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 375–399. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650040701305617

23. van Eck N.J., Waltman L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 2010, vol. 84, no. 2, pp. 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3

24. van Noort C., Chatterje-Doody P.N. Visualizing China’s Belt and Road Initiative on RT (Russia Today): From infrastructural project to human development. Eurasian Geogr. Econ., 2023, vol. 64, no. 4, pp. 431–459. https://doi.org/10.1080/15387216.2021.2005650

25. Waltman L., van Eck N.J. A new methodology for constructing a publication-level classification system of science. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Tec., 2012, vol. 63, no. 12, pp. 2378–2392. https://doi.org/10.1002/ASI.22748

26. Xiao H., Li L. A bibliometric analysis of critical discourse analysis and its implications. Discourse Soc., 2021, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 482–502. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926521992150