From Securitization to Collaborative Governance: Digital and Ecological Risks along the Belt and Road Evidence from China–Malaysia and China–Vietnam Cooperation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.62517/jmsd.202612117

Author(s)

Yannan Wang

Affiliation(s)

Sichuan University of Media and Communications, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

Abstract

Against the backdrop of intensifying great-power competition and profound adjustments in global governance structures, non-traditional security issues such as digital security and ecological security have increasingly emerged as critical constraints on cooperation under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Existing studies tend to focus on risk identification and response strategies, while paying insufficient attention to how these issues are constructed as security concerns in specific contexts and whether securitization can subsequently evolve toward forms of collaborative governance. Drawing on securitization theory and integrating perspectives from cooperative security and collaborative governance, this article develops an analytical framework that traces the transition from securitization to collaborative governance. Through case studies of Malaysia’s digital sovereignty disputes and Vietnam’s ecological security concerns, the article systematically examines the construction mechanisms and governance trajectories of non-traditional security risks along the BRI. The findings show that digital sovereignty and ecological security risks do not arise solely from objective threats, but are progressively securitized through discursive practices and institutional processes shaped by the interaction of international structures and domestic political–social factors. Different issue areas exhibit distinct securitization pathways in terms of securitizing actors, modes of risk perception, and institutional consequences, which can be summarized as two ideal types: technology–sovereignty securitization and environment–survival securitization. Moreover, securitization does not necessarily lead to the breakdown of cooperation; instead, it reshapes the conditions and modalities of cooperation through heightened governance prudence and institutional complexity. Under certain conditions, the introduction of multi-actor collaborative governance mechanisms can facilitate the desecuritization of non-traditional security issues and provide more stable expectations for cooperation under the BRI. This study contributes to a deeper understanding of the relationship between non-traditional security, development, and governance, and offers analytically grounded insights into non-traditional security cooperation under the Belt and Road Initiative.

Keywords

Belt and Road Initiative; Non-traditional Security; Collaborative Governance; Digital Sovereignty; Ecological Security

References

[1]Silva, C. C. V. (2024). Securitization theory and its empirical application: a literature review. Revista de Sociologia e Política, 32(2), e019. [2]Quah, E.; Tan, J. R.; Nursultan, I. A Comparative Analysis of the Belt and Road Initiative with Other Global and Regional Infrastructure Initiatives: Prospects and Challenges. Journal of Risk and Financial Management 2025, 18(6):338.1-27 [3]Zhu, X.; Hu, S.; Li, Z.; Wu, J. A System Dynamics Framework for Port Resilience Enhancement Along Maritime Silk Road: Insights from ESG Governance. Systems 2025, 13(8):719. [4]Valentine Y., Trihartono A., & Sunarko B. S. (2025). Environmental Security in Belt and Road Initiative Green Development Coalition (BRIGC): A Study of Pakistan, Kenya, and Indonesia. The Journal of Indonesia Sustainable Development Planning, 6(2): 239–253, [5]Paudel, P. (2025). The Rise of China’s Digital Silk Road in ASEAN Countries. Realism: Law Review, 3(2):70–94 [6]Bunnak, P., Song, N., Chen, X., & Thomson, R. (2024). A governance perspective on China’s belt and road initiative: A case study of the Sino-Thai railway project. Journal of Asian Public Policy, 17(3), 421–440. [7]Yang, F. & Li, J. (2024). A Review of Renewable Energy Investment in Belt and Road Initiative Countries: A Bibliometric Analysis Perspective. Energies, 17(19): 4900.1-24 [8]Securing Local Effects in Globalization through Multi-level Governance: Evidence from Steering the New Silk Road. Chinese Political Science Review 2025, 10:101–122. [9]Wu, J.; Li, Y.; Zhang, H.; et al. Development status, trends, and prospects of cybersecurity strategies and methodologies. Engineering Sciences (in Chinese), 2025, 27(4): 14–27. [10]Schulhof, V., Hartley, K., Rabe, W., & Kostka, G. (2025). Conceptualizing sustainability in China's Belt and Road Initiative: A longitudinal analysis of scholarship (2013–2024). Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 212, 107891.