This paper examines the historial, political and economic forces behin
d the borderland integration efforts of Singapore and Hong Kong and th
e cross-interests at work between capital, state and community as inte
gration proceeds. The comparison between Hong Kong and Singapore shows
how colonialization created and maintained herders and how changes in
interstate relations led to the closing and the reopening of border h
interlands. The pressures of economic restructuring in Hong Kong and S
ingapore in the 1980s also fed the borderland integration process. The
analysis shows that there are significant differences between the two
cases with respect to agency (state versus private capital initiative
s) and the structure (bilateral versus a triangular arrangement) and d
irection (one-way versus two-way economic linkages) of integration. Th
e semi-peripheral status of Hong Kong and Singapore mean that while bo
rderland integration can be pursued as an initial strategy of economic
'exploitation' before moving to more distant shores, hegemony cannot
be fully achieved because of small size and the absence of military an
d economic sanctions wielded by core countries. While borderland integ
ration may benefit states and capital, the process is marked by a numb
er of conflicts involving federal and provincial government and betwee
n sending and receiving communities. Copyright (C) 1997 Elsevier Scien
ce Ltd.