{"id":{"repo_id":"columbia-diss","oai_identifier":"oai:academiccommons.columbia.edu:10.7916/D80P1617"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/columbia-diss/oai:academiccommons.columbia.edu:10.7916/D80P1617","repository":{"repo_id":"columbia-diss","name":"Columbia University","base_url":"https://academiccommons.columbia.edu/oai"},"display":{"title":"The Unipolar Era: Why American Power Persists and China's Rise Is Limited","abstract":"Is unipolarity sustainable? The dominant perspective among international relations scholars is that the United States is in decline relative to China, and that much of this decline is the result of globalization and the hegemonic burdens the United States bears to sustain globalization. According to an alternative perspective, however, globalization and hegemony reinforce unipolarity. This study tests these perspectives against each other and finds significant support for the alternative perspective. The results suggest that unipolarity is not a temporary aberration, but rather a deeply embedded condition with the potential to persist well into this century.","abstract_html":"Is unipolarity sustainable? The dominant perspective among international relations scholars is that the United States is in decline relative to China, and that much of this decline is the result of globalization and the hegemonic burdens the United States bears to sustain globalization. According to an alternative perspective, however, globalization and hegemony reinforce unipolarity. This study tests these perspectives against each other and finds significant support for the alternative perspective. The results suggest that unipolarity is not a temporary aberration, but rather a deeply embedded condition with the potential to persist well into this century.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Beckley, Michael Charles"],"institution":null,"degree_name":null,"degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2012,"date_issued":"2012","date_published":"2012","updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:44:18Z","subjects":["Political science","Unipolarity (International relations)","International relations"],"languages":["English"],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://doi.org/10.7916/D80P1617","outbound_label":"DOI","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Beckley, Michael Charles"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2012"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Theses"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Political science","Unipolarity (International relations)","International relations"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["English"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://doi.org/10.7916/D80P1617"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["Is unipolarity sustainable? The dominant perspective among international relations scholars is that the United States is in decline relative to China, and that much of this decline is the result of globalization and the hegemonic burdens the United States bears to sustain globalization. According to an alternative perspective, however, globalization and hegemony reinforce unipolarity. This study tests these perspectives against each other and finds significant support for the alternative perspective. The results suggest that unipolarity is not a temporary aberration, but rather a deeply embedded condition with the potential to persist well into this century."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["The Unipolar Era: Why American Power Persists and China's Rise Is Limited"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:creator":["Beckley, Michael Charles"],"dc:date":["2012"],"dc:description":["Is unipolarity sustainable? The dominant perspective among international relations scholars is that the United States is in decline relative to China, and that much of this decline is the result of globalization and the hegemonic burdens the United States bears to sustain globalization. According to an alternative perspective, however, globalization and hegemony reinforce unipolarity. This study tests these perspectives against each other and finds significant support for the alternative perspective. The results suggest that unipolarity is not a temporary aberration, but rather a deeply embedded condition with the potential to persist well into this century."],"dc:identifier":["https://doi.org/10.7916/D80P1617"],"dc:language":["English"],"dc:subject":["Political science","Unipolarity (International relations)","International relations"],"dc:title":["The Unipolar Era: Why American Power Persists and China's Rise Is Limited"],"dc:type":["Theses"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:44:18Z"}