Geoeconomic competition in the triangle of space, network and norm: A comparison of BRI and IMEC

This thesis examines how the strategic competition between China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the U.S.-supported India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) reshapes the global geopolitical order. Addressing a gap in the existing literature—which typically compares BRI and IMEC in terms of infrastructure scale, investment volume, or financing mechanisms—this study conceptualizes corridor rivalry not as the sum of individual projects but as a multi-layered problem of "flow governance" operating across the space–network–norm triad. In this framework, the space dimension refers to the capacity and diversification of physical routes; the network dimension captures time reliability generated through port–dry port–rail interfaces; and the norm dimension reflects the predictability and enforceability of financing and governance standards. Within this context, the thesis clarifies that back-office standards denote the often invisible yet decisive institutional infrastructures—payment and clearing systems, insurance rules, data governance protocols, and procurement procedures—that determine the functionality and credibility of cross-border economic corridors. Likewise, hedging strategy describes the risk-balancing behavior of middle powers that simultaneously engage with multiple corridors to maximize connectivity benefits while reducing financing and political exposure. The study adopts a mixed-methods design, combining primary and secondary document analysis, comparative case reading, and security risk mapping, with the findings synthesized through cost–benefit reasoning and insurance/risk-premium logic. Results indicate that BRI's multi-route architecture enhances portfolio resilience by expanding access through scale and speed, whereas IMEC's high-standard integration across selective nodes narrows delay distributions and generates a measurable "time reliability premium." Geopolitically, influence increasingly crystallizes not through alliance umbrellas but through the thickening of back-office standards—payment–clearing rules, insurance regimes, data standards, and procurement norms—turning normative competition into a long-term race over whose rulebook becomes default. Middle powers employ a dual-track hedging posture, using both corridors to capture accessibility gains while leveraging institutional guarantees to reduce financing costs. The thesis contributes an evaluative framework that disaggregates corridor performance into "coverage gains," "reliability gains," and "predictability gains." At the policy level, it emphasizes the need to pair hardware investments with software reforms such as single-window customs, transparent procurement, cyber-physical security, and parametric insurance. For future research, the study proposes a measurable indicator set including time reliability indices, risk-premium metrics, and normative alignment scores.