The issue builds on IGE’s many years of experience working in the region and features leading scholars on eight countries—China (Fenggang Yang), Indonesia (Robert W. Hefner), Singapore (Mathew Mathews), the Philippines (Jayeel Cornelio), Burma (Mikael Gravers), Vietnam (James F. Lewis), Laos (Stephen Bailey), and Japan (Kevin Cooney). These experts assess the state of existing scholarly research on religious freedom, and make detailed recommendations for future research projects on religious freedom that would enrich the Asian Studies field.

Two articles from the issue are available free online at the journal’s website. Full online access is available via library subscription. (Recommend to a library).

Table of Contents:

“Religious Freedom Research and the Future of Asian Studies: An Introduction to the Summer 2013 Issue” [FREE]
By Stephen Bailey (Simpson University and IGE) and Jiexia Zhai Autry (IGE and George Mason University)

“A Research Agenda on Religious Freedom in China” [FREE]
By Fenggang Yang (Purdue University)

“The Study of Religious Freedom in Indonesia”
By Robert W. Hefner (Institute on Culture, Religion, and World Affairs, Boston University)

“Understanding Religious Freedom in Singapore”
By Mathews Mathew (National University of Singapore)

“Religious Freedom in the Philippines: From Legalities to Lived Experience”
By Jayeel Serrano Cornelio (Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity)

“Spiritual Politics, Political Religion, and Religious Freedom in Burma”
By Mikael Gravers (Aarhus University)

“Vietnamese Religions, Asian Studies, and the Rule of Law”
By James F. Lewis (Bethel University)

“Laos and Religious Freedom Studies”
By Stephen Bailey (Simpson University and IGE)

“Religious Freedom in Japan: Research Needs in History and Social Science”
By Kevin Cooney (Northwest University)

This publication was made possible in part through the support of a grant from the John Templeton Foundation. The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the John Templeton Foundation.