Explored the controversy surrounding the academic concept of "Global South" and its underlying essence. Since the 1970s, this term has been rarely mentioned in academia and politics, but in the second decade of the 21st century, discussions have become intense. Due to the lack of a unified definition, there are diverse understandings of the "Global South". Research and international relations studies intersect but are not entirely identical, leading to misunderstandings. The construction of concepts is based on consensus in thinking and imagination. In the face of a lack of consensus, it is necessary to conduct research on the history of concepts. Domestic scholars have systematically sorted out the historical origins of the concept of "Global South", but there is still room for supplementary explanation of the debates surrounding its use as an academic concept. Existing research focuses on policy discourse debates among countries and distinctions from concepts such as developing countries, with limited discussion and debate on the use of academic concepts. This article aims to explore the debate over the academic concept of "Global South" and place it in the field of international issues research, analyzing the impact of disciplinary and paradigm differences. It is believed that the term "Global South" was first used as a metaphor, later manifested as left-wing terminology, and then as an international political concept. The emergence of new expressions does not mean the disappearance of old expressions. Academic research can be divided into two main paths: the left-wing critical research path since the 1970s and the mainstream international relations research path that emerged later. The different meanings of "global South" in the two paths reflect the ongoing debate on whether international issues research should be treated as a multidisciplinary field or follow the mainstream rules of international relations.

The Evolution of the Concept of "Global South": Three Manifestations

The concept of "Global South" has evolved through three forms of expression: general metaphor, left-wing terminology, and international relations concepts. At first, as a general metaphor, "Global South" was used to describe human social inequality, emphasizing the differences and contradictions between developed and underdeveloped societies. Its metaphorical nature highlighted class inequality and solidified hierarchical structures. Left wing scholars use the term 'global South' to emphasize its exploited and marginalized characteristics, viewing it as a historical product of the expansion of the Western capitalist system, facing the capitalist challenges of globalization, and highlighting the structural contradictions with the 'global North'. As an international relations concept, the "Global South" focuses on the widespread and persistent international inequality, and its concept is instrumentalized in international politics to advance specific agendas while masking the heterogeneity and internal inequality of Southern countries. The understanding of the "Global South" in the field of international relations places more emphasis on its heterogeneity, differentiation, and pursuit of status, tending to reduce the concept to specific countries. The popularity of the term 'Global South' reflects a shift in understanding of geopolitical power relations, with both a positive pursuit of fairness and justice and a non neutral emphasis on strengthening a hierarchical world order.

The essence of the debate on "Global South" as an academic concept: differences in disciplines and paradigms

The essence of the debate over the academic concept of "Global South" lies in the differences in disciplines and paradigms. This concept appears as a metaphor in research, making it difficult to focus on the research object and organize the literature. The intersection between left-wing theory and international relations disciplines is limited in the use of the term 'global South'. Concept is a thinking form that reflects the unique attributes of things, and is a theory about ontology that indicates the core characteristics and relationships of phenomena. Each specific science extracts a certain aspect of facts from the objective world as its research object, and different research paradigms limit the different research needs of the same term.

San Yu Lun

Explored the controversy surrounding the academic concept of "Global South" and the disciplinary differences behind it, emphasizing the importance of dialogue between left-wing theorists and international relations scholars. The chapter points out that although there are views that suggest keeping a distance from classical international relations theory, mainstream theory and marginal theory are mutually reinforcing. Researchers should focus on analyzing core concepts based on their own research subjects, and different disciplines have different research priorities for the 'Global South'. Interdisciplinary communication helps to bridge the narrow understanding of concepts within a single discipline. The research aims to clarify the knowledge foundation and construction principles behind concepts, laying the foundation for understanding the formation, dissemination, and evolution of concepts. Concepts are born in specific historical contexts and cannot transcend the era of their builders. The definition of a noun has both empirical and normative parts. The inconsistency between theory and fact is often due to the fact that facts are constructed by old ideologies, and exploring the underlying principles behind concepts is a manifestation of progress. If a concept is both analytical and critical, it will face questioning of scientific neutrality. The exploration of value propositions based on popular concepts and scientific propositions is not in opposition or substitution. Various research methods should support each other to maintain the respect level of political science in various disciplines.