DOCSLIB.ORG

1 the Sociology of a Diverse Discipline

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1 the Sociology of a Diverse Discipline The Sociology of a Diverse Discipline: International Relations, American Dominance and Pluralism. Submitted by Helen Louise Turton, to the University of Exeter as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Politics, January 2013. This thesis is available for Library use on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgment. I certify that all material in this thesis which is not my own work has been identified and that no material has previously been submitted and approved for the award of a degree by this or any other University. Signed: Helen Louise Turton. 1 Abstract. The discipline of International Relations is frequently depicted as an American dominated discipline. This disciplinary self-image has become so entrenched that it is rarely questioned and operates as a ‘quasi-fact’ within the field. However, the manner in which this widespread claim has been put forth is largely speculative. There is a surprising lack of data verifying the prominent notion, and indeed the ‘evidence’ that does exist is largely out-dated and methodologically problematic. As such, this thesis attempts to remedy this dearth of data by systematically investigating if and how the United States dominates the discipline of IR. Rather than speaking of a generic and ambiguous form of dominance this thesis begins by disaggregating the concept of dominance and stating the ways in which an actor can potentially dominate and how this can be measured. What this crucially means is that the US may dominate in some ways and not others. Through exploring twelve of discipline’s international journals over a ten-year period from 1999-2009, and four international conferences from 2005-2011 it becomes clear that the central issue is not whether the United States dominates the discipline but the degree and manner in which it does. Through demonstrating the numerous current trends and inclinations in the discipline a complex image of the IR emerges; an image that challenges a number of prevalent assertions about the disciplinary character of IR. The findings presented illustrate how the discipline of IR is more international and more diverse than is commonly perceived, and yet how the discipline of IR still experiences certain forms of American dominance. This thesis aims to highlight the importance of perspective and consequently how we need to be more nuanced and reflective in the ways we characterize the discipline’s dominance claims. Overall this thesis aims to highlight the many dynamics occurring at different levels of the discipline, all of which shape the contours of the field and IR’s relationship with the American academy. 2 Contents. Title Page 1 Abstract 2 List of Figures and Tables 5 List of Abbreviations 7 Acknowledgements 8 1. Introduction: Is International Relations an American Dominated Discipline? 9 Dominant Definitions of Dominance. 12 Methodology. 19 Journal Investigation. 20 Conference Investigation. 28 Interviews. 30 Chapter Overviews. 30 2. American Dominance as Agenda Setting? 36 ‘Hegemonic Country: Hegemonic Discipline’. 37 The American Agenda. 40 The Clinton Administration’s Foreign Policy. 44 The Bush Administration’s Foreign Policy. 47 The Obama Administration’s Foreign Policy. 59 Foundations. 64 Think Tanks. 66 The Diverse Discipline. 70 Conclusion. 77 3. American Theoretical Dominance? 80 Dominance and Dependence: The Claims of American Theoretical Preponderance. 82 Forms of Theoretical Dominance. 82 American Production and ‘Peripheral’ Consumption. 89 Implications for the Discipline. 95 The Plural Discipline. 100 Theoretical Pluralism: A Cause for Celebration. 110 What Does it Mean to be ‘American’? 115 Conclusion. 117 4. American Epistemological and Methodological Dominance? 119 Conceptual Confusion: Epistemology and Positivism. 122 The Dominance of Positivism: A Philosophy of Social Science Perspective. 128 International Relations, the Rationalist Discipline? 131 The Interpretive Discipline. 134 Conclusion. 144 5. American Institutional Dominance? 146 The Global Expansion of International Relations: De-Americanization? 150 American Institutional Dominance and Diversity. 155 How Did America Become Institutionally Dominant? 159 International Relations – the Parochial Discipline? 164 What Does American Institutional Dominance Mean for the Discipline? 171 Conclusion. 173 6. American Dominance as Gate-Keeping? 177 Claims of Gate-Keeping Explored. 179 Pluralism and Internationalism. 186 The Gate-Keeping Underway. 198 Gate-Keeping Behind the Scenes: Thomson Reuters. 204 Conclusion. 211 3 7. Conclusion: Diversity and Dominance in International Relations. 216 Pluralism, the Empirical Reality. 218 Institutional Perspectives and Reflexivity. 228 The Virtual Reality? 231 The Discipline of International Relations. 234 Avenues for Further Research. 240 Appendix I: Methodological Notes. 242 Appendix II: Sample Interview Consent Form and Certificate of Ethical Approval. 276 Bibliography. 278 4 Figures and Tables. Figures. 1.1: Adherence to the American agenda in the discipline’s journals. 1.2: Adherence to the American agenda in the discipline’s conferences. 2.1: Articles written from either a neo-realist, neo-liberal or ‘rationalist’ theoretical perspective in 12 international journals from 1999-2009. 2.2: Theoretical perspectives of articles published in International Organization from 1999-2009. 2.3: Distribution of theoretical perspectives in 12 international journals from 1999-2009. 2.4: Distribution of theoretical approaches in articles published from 1999-2009 in International Studies Perspectives. 2.5: Distribution of theoretical approaches in articles published from 1999-2009 in the Review of International Studies. 2.6: Distribution of theoretical approaches in articles published from 1999-2009 in Cooperation and Conflict. 2.7: The percentage of feminist articles published in 12 international journals from 1999-2009. 3.1: Methodological orientation in 12 international journals from 1999-2009. 3.2: The quantitative/qualitative split for each journal under review from 1999-2009. 3.3: The different methodologies employed in 12 international journals from 1999-2009. 3.4: The different methodologies employed in the articles under review from 1999-2009 in 4 of the discipline’s international journals. 4.1: Institutional affiliation of authors published from 1999-2009 in the 12 journals investigated. 4.2: Institutional affiliation of conference participants from BISA, ISA, ISA-Joint Conventions and CEEISA from 2005-2011 (Chairs, panellists and paper-givers). 4.3: Overall composition of the field from the combined journal and conference investigations. 4.4: Institutional affiliation of all scholars published in International Organization, International Security, International Studies Perspectives, International Studies Quarterly and World Politics from 1999-2009. 4.5: Institutional affiliation of authors published in International Studies Quarterly, International Relations, Cooperation and Conflict, and the Australian Journal of International Affairs from 1999- 2009. 4.6: Institutional affiliation of participants at the BISA, CEEISA, ISA, and the ISA-Joint Convention conferences from 2005-2011 (Chairs, panellists and paper-givers). 4.7: Institutional affiliation of all scholars published in International Relations and the Review of International Studies from 1999-2009. 5.1: The theories used in 12 of the discipline’s international journals from 1999-2009. 5.2: The methodologies used in 12 of the discipline’s international jounals from 1999-2009. 5.3: The institutional affiliation of academics published in 12 of the discipline’s international journals from 1999-2009. 5.4: The institutional affiliation of participants in the BISA, CEEISA, ISA and ISA-Joint Conventions from 2005-2011 (Chairs, panelists, paper-givers). 5.5: The geographical institutional affiliation for members of the editorial boards of 12 of the discipline’s international journals from 1999-2009. 5.6: Orientation of the research agenda for members on the editorial boards of the 12 IR journals investigated in 2012. 6.1: Distribution of theoretical approaches in the 12 journals under review from 1999-2009. Tables. 1.1: Distribution of articles adhering to the American agenda in 12 international journals from 1999-2009. 5 1.2: Percentage of panels adhering to the American agenda in the specified international conferences from 2005-2011. 1.3: Percentage of panels adhering to the American agenda for the four conferences reviewed as part of the joint conventions category. 2.1: The dominant theory in each journal under review from 1999-2009. 5.1: The institutional affiliation of the managing editors for 12 of the discipline’s international journals in 2011. 6.1: Dominance and Diversity: The findings from each chapter summarized. 6 List of Abbreviations. AJIA Australian Journal of International Affairs APSR American Political Science Review (journal). BISA British International Studies Association CC Cooperation and Conflict (journal) CEEISA Central Eastern European International Studies Association EJIR European Journal of International Relations JIRD Journal of International Relations and Development IO International Organization (journal) IR International Relations (journal) IRAP International Relations of the Asia Pacific (journal) IS International Security (journal) ISA International Studies Association ISI Institute for Scientific Information ISQ International Studies Quarterly (journal) ISP
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Field and Diverse Purposes: Science, Application and Critique in the American Field of International Relations
    A FIELD AND DIVERSE PURPOSES: SCIENCE, APPLICATION AND CRITIQUE IN THE AMERICAN FIELD OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Félix Grenier Thesis submitted to The Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctoral program in Political Science School of Political Studies Faculty of Social Sciences University of Ottawa © Félix Grenier, Ottawa, Canada, 2017 Abstract One of the most important aspects of the American field of International Relations (IR) is the deeply-rooted and broadly shared commitment to a “scientist” understanding of scholarly work. Scientism can be described as an indubitable belief in our ability to produce value-free and non-normative knowledge and in the power of such knowledge to resolve societal problems. Since the mid-20th century, this scientist commitment prevailed in the main approaches and standards guiding the practice of IR scholarship in the United States. One problem with the dominance of scientism is that it reproduces a restrictive view of American IR scholarship. More precisely, the dominance of scientism has not only limited the diversity of methodological and theoretical approaches but, this thesis argues, also restricted American IR scholars’ ability to further different understandings of the legitimate purposes of scholarly work. Following this idea, this thesis endeavors to challenge the dominance of scientism and legitimize alternative forms of scholarship in American IR. More precisely, this thesis advances that American IR scholars’ work is guided by three categories of objectives, that is, the production of scientific knowledge, the application of knowledge and the advancement of critical thinking. To clarify how these three objectives are concretely formulated, the thesis also specifies nine categories of epistemic approaches (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Fluid Identities: Toward a Critical Security of Water
    Western University Scholarship@Western Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository 9-27-2013 12:00 AM Fluid Identities: Toward a Critical Security of Water Cameron Harrington The University of Western Ontario Supervisor Dr. Erika Simpson The University of Western Ontario Graduate Program in Political Science A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree in Doctor of Philosophy © Cameron Harrington 2013 Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd Part of the International Relations Commons Recommended Citation Harrington, Cameron, "Fluid Identities: Toward a Critical Security of Water" (2013). Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository. 1716. https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/1716 This Dissertation/Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Western. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Western. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FLUID IDENTITIES: TOWARD A CRITICAL SECURITY OF WATER MONOGRAPH by Cameron Harrington Graduate Program in Political Science A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy The School of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies The University of Western Ontario London, Ontario, Canada © Cameron Harrington 2013 Abstract Water wars are coming! Water is the defining security threat of the 21st century! The future belongs to the water-rich! These types of warnings are frequently proclaimed, urging attention to looming water conflict, which will occur as stores of freshwater diminish in both quality and quantity. Yet the issue of water security is far more complex than as an inevitable source of future violent conflict.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    Selected Efforts/Research in the Area of Warning Susanne Schmeidl The entries listed below are based on a very broad definition ment Efforts; Research kentres at Universities; and Indi- of early warning. Anyone involved in research on conflict vidual Researchers. The difference between the last two is prediction, mediation, and/or resolution is included as I that the former is an orgianized researcheffort with an estab- believe that early warning, in order to be successful, must lished research project, *bile the latter refers to a research take into consideration a wide range of factors. In addition, project that is undertake~lbyone or two researchers. Most of I wish to encourage interaction among different participants the listings here are self-entries. Only in a very few circum- who share an interest in early warning. stances did I include a research effort without an initial sub- The following descriptions of efforts/research in the area mission (these efforts are marked with an asterik [*]). of early warning are based on submissions to the Centre for Individual researchers were only included if they answered Refugee Studies after request for the creation of a directory our request for information and provided enough material on "Who is Who and does What in Early Warning" was to be discussed. This sedtion, therefore, is the most incom- posted on the Internet. Thus, this list is incomplete by defi- plete. If you wish to lem more about certain efforts/re- nition, excluding those efforts that for some reason have not search you can contact the people identified. come to the attention of the Prevention/Early Warning Unit As the author of this r~mpilation,I take complete respon- at the Centre for Refugee Studies.
    [Show full text]
  • PP5883 IGCC Layout 4
    iGCC INSTITUTE ON GLOBAL CONFLICT AND COOPERATION IGCCIGCC NEWNEWSSWWiredired AnAn AnnualAnnual ReviewReview 20022002 IGCC Quick Reference Main Office Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation University of California, San Diego 9500 Gilman Drive La Jolla, California 92093-0518 Telephone: (858) 534-3352 Fax: (858) 534-7655 Director: (858) 534-0348 Development/External Affairs: (858) 534-6429 Publications: (858) 534-1979 Campus Programs: (858) 534-7224 E-mail: Campus Programs: [email protected] Development/External Affairs: [email protected] Publications: [email protected] Washington, D.C., Office 1608 Rhode Island Avenue, NW Third Floor Washington, D.C. 20036 Washington Representative: (202) 974-6295 Fax: (202) 974-6299 URL: http://www-igcc.ucsd.edu/home/ucdc/ Campus Program Offices UC Berkeley Institute of International Studies Michael Watts, (510) 642-1106 UC Davis Institute of Governmental Affairs Alan Olmstead, (530) 752-2043 UC Irvine Center for Global Peace and Conflict Studies Wayne Sandholtz, (949) 824-6410 UC Los Angeles Burkle Center for International Relations Geoffrey Garrett, (310) 825-4921 UC Riverside Program on Global Studies Juliann Allison, (909) 787-4582 Christopher Chase-Dunn, (909) 787-2063 UC San Diego Institute for International, Comparative, and Area Studies Miles Kahler, (858) 822-5295 UC San Francisco Program in Health Science and Human Survival Chris Kiefer (415) 476-7543 UC Santa Barbara Global Peace and Security Program Mark Juergensmeyer, (805) 893-4718 UC Santa Cruz IGCC-UCSC Program Ben Crow, (831) 459-5503
    [Show full text]
  • UC San Diego Old Archived Documents
    UC San Diego Old Archived Documents Title IGCC 2002 Annual Report Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/1qg3k8kb Author Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation Publication Date 2002 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California iGCC INSTITUTE ON GLOBAL CONFLICT AND COOPERATION IGCCIGCC NEWNEWSSWWiredired AnAn AnnualAnnual ReviewReview 20022002 IGCC Quick Reference Main Office Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation University of California, San Diego 9500 Gilman Drive La Jolla, California 92093-0518 Telephone: (858) 534-3352 Fax: (858) 534-7655 Director: (858) 534-0348 Development/External Affairs: (858) 534-6429 Publications: (858) 534-1979 Campus Programs: (858) 534-7224 E-mail: Campus Programs: [email protected] Development/External Affairs: [email protected] Publications: [email protected] Washington, D.C., Office 1608 Rhode Island Avenue, NW Third Floor Washington, D.C. 20036 Washington Representative: (202) 974-6295 Fax: (202) 974-6299 URL: http://www-igcc.ucsd.edu/home/ucdc/ Campus Program Offices UC Berkeley Institute of International Studies Michael Watts, (510) 642-1106 UC Davis Institute of Governmental Affairs Alan Olmstead, (530) 752-2043 UC Irvine Center for Global Peace and Conflict Studies Wayne Sandholtz, (949) 824-6410 UC Los Angeles Burkle Center for International Relations Geoffrey Garrett, (310) 825-4921 UC Riverside Program on Global Studies Juliann Allison, (909) 787-4582 Christopher Chase-Dunn, (909) 787-2063 UC San Diego Institute for International, Comparative, and
    [Show full text]
  • GRINDINGS 021709.Docx
    Tuesday, February 17, 2009 Editor: SF Rotary Webmaster THE SF ROTARY OFFICE HAS MOVED If you have any comments or by SF Rotary Webmaster questions, email the editor. The new address for the SF Rotary office is: Upcoming Events 300 Montgomery St. Suite 200 WE GOTTA DANCE AT THE ARC- FEB 20 San Francisco, CA 94104 Feb 20 2009 International Service Committee Meeting Feb 24 2009 Public FEBRUARY 17 - David DesMarais, Sr. Scientist NASA Relations/Communications by SF Rotary Webmaster Feb 24 2009 World Wide Rotary Day Feb 24 2009 FEBRUARY DIVISION COCKTAIL MIXER- FEB. 25 BIO: David Des Marais has investigated the biogeochemistry of Feb 25 2009 microbial ecosystems and Earth's early biosphere, and he has participated in Mars ROTARY ROOTS OF PEACE GALA exploration. Feb 27 2009 Tahoe City Rotary Ski He has published more than 160 technical articles and chapters on the stable Challenge Feb 27 2009 isotope geochemistry of carbon in lunar samples, meteorites and oceanic basalts, Community Service Committee the Meeting biogeochemistry of marine cyanobacterial communities, the geochemistry Mar 3 2009 of ancient sedimentary carbon, and Mars science. Jean Paul Jacob, UC Scholar Mar 3 2009 MT SUTRO ROTARY MEADOW David is a member of the science teams of NASA's 2003 Mars Exploration Rover RESTORATION mission, the CRISM instrument of the 2005 Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter mission, Mar 7 2009 and Carl Djerassi, Phd Mar 10 2009 the CHEMIN instrument of 2009 Mars Science Laboratory mission. He is the P.I. Club Service Committee of the Ames team of the NASA Astrobiology Institute. He is a Fellow of the Meeting Geochemical Society, the European Association of Geochemistry, the International Mar 10 2009 Society for the Study of the Origins of Life, the California Academy of Sciences Rotary Peace Symposium and the American Geophysical Union.
    [Show full text]
  • Alumni Newsletter School of International Relations, University of Southern California * Winter 1998
    Alumni Newsletter School of International Relations, University of Southern California * Winter 1998 FEATURES COLUMNS Director's Message Fall 1998 update on School activities, faculty searches and publications, new courses, and Gear up for the 75th the 75th anniversary kick-off. 2 BY JONATHAN ARONSON (literally!) 3 Changes to South Asian Security 9 BY DA YID KARL SIR and USC Alumni Asn. host this year's reception Claude Buss Remembered 4 Ross Berkes and Robert Dockson remember their former professor. 7 Center for International Studies update 5 "Do Not Fear Democracy in Taiwan" SIR Professor Dan Lynch on Taiwan's democracy movement. 11 BY DANIELLYNCH Faculty Focus 6 "Lonely at the Top" SIR in Newsweek 6 It's tough being a superpower. Dr. Steel address the trials and tribulations of being the only hegemon on the block. 12 BY RONALD STEEL EU Center of CA 7 USC is "Watching" Publication Profile: USC students and faculty initiate University Watch chapter of Human Rights Watch. Kick­ Laurie Brand 8 off event was covered by Voice of America. 13 BY ERIC GARCETTI USC Calendar is online 17 Anniversary Wishes and Good Advice SA VE THIS DATE! President Sample introduces Distingished Lecturer Senator George Mitchell, chairman Katzenstein lectures at SIR/ peace talks between Northern Ireland and British governments. 14 CIS on January 19th BY SHELBY URITZ 18 "New Perspectives-New Disciplines" Plus, Alumni Class Notes in The new Culture, Gender and Global Society emphasis has brought attention and innova­ center section! tion to SIR's graduate program. 16 BY LESLIE WIRPSA Director's Message Dear SIR Alumni and Friends: Alumni Newsletter~ School of International Relations, USC 01 Fall 1998 A colleague recently asked me to summarize what we have accomplished this semester.
    [Show full text]
  • The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning
    The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning Edited by Frank Fischer and John Forester © 1993 Duke University Press Published outside North America by: UCL Press Limited University College London Gower Street London WC1E 6BT This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2002. The name of University College London (UCL) is a registered trade mark used by UCL Press with the consent of the owner. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN 0-203-49946-8 Master e-book ISBN ISBN 0-203-80770-7 (Adobe eReader Format) ISBN: 1-85728-183-7 PB Patsy Healey’s chapter was published in an earlier version as “Planning Through Debate: The Communicative Turn in Planning Theory,” Town Planning Review 63, no. 2 (1992): 143–162, and appears in this volume by permission of Liverpool University Press. Duncan MacRae’s chapter was published in an earlier version as “Professional Knowledge for Policy Discourse,” Knowledge in Society 1, no. 3 (1988): 6–24, and appears in this volume by permission of Transaction Publishers. James Throgmorton’s chapter was published in an earlier version as “Planning as a Rhetorical Activity: Survey Research as a Trope in Arguments about Electric Power Planning in Chicago,” Journal of the American Planning Association 59, no.3 (Summer 1993), and appears in this volume by permission of the journal.
    [Show full text]
  • Prelim Test 2
    49th Annual ISA Convention San Francisco, CA March 26th ‐ March 29th, 2008 “Bridging Multiple Divides” Jack S. Levy, 2008 ISA President Kelly M. Kadera and Sara McLaughlin Mitchell, 2008 ISA Program Chairs ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Preliminary Program Updated on 4/17/2008 at 3:25:21 PM ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ WA01 Wednesday 8:30 ‐ 10:15 AM Room:Continental 5 Knowledge, Discourse and Practice in Global Health Governance Sponsors Global Development Convention Theme Chair(s) Cornelia Ulbert Institute for Development and Peace (INEF), University of Duisburg‐Essen Between Knowledge and Power: Exploring the Discursive Arena of Global SARS Governance Sung‐Won Yoon London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine Creating Science and Technology for Neglected Diseases. The International AIDS Vaccine Initiative (IAVI) as a Social Technology Experiment Joanna Chataway Open University Rebecca Hanlin The Open University Organizational Dysfunctions and the Effectiveness of Public‐Private Partnerships Marco Schäferhoff Free University Berlin The Effectiveness of Global Health Partnerships: What Determines Their Success or Failure? Cornelia Ulbert Institute for Development and Peace (INEF), University of Duisburg‐Essen Discussant(s) Sonja Bartsch German Institute of Global and Area Studies ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
    [Show full text]
  • Self Study Report
    Department of International Relations College of Liberal and Creative Arts Seventh Cycle Program Review – Self Study Report May 15, 2018 Revised August 25, 2018 Prepared and assembled by the faculty of the IR Department Mahmood Monshipouri, PhD Chair/Professor International Relations The enclosed self-study was submitted for external review on August 25, 2018 and sent to reviewers on September 17, 2018. 2 Table of Contents Contents I. Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................... 4 II. Overview of Program ................................................................................................................................ 6 III. Program Indicators ................................................................................................................................... 9 Section 3.1 Program Planning ........................................................................................................................ 9 3.2 Student Learning and Achievement ......................................................................................................... 13 3.3 The Curriculum ........................................................................................................................................ 17 3.3.1 Undergraduate ...................................................................................................................................... 17 3.3.2. Graduate .............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Progress in International Relations Theory: Appraising the Field
    Progress in International Relations Theory The BCSIA Studies in International Security book series is edited at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government and published by The MIT Press. The series publishes books on contemporary issues in international security policy, as well as their conceptual and historical foundations. Topics of particular interest to the series include the spread of weapons of mass destruction, internal con- ºict, the international effects of democracy and democratization, and U.S. de- fense policy. A complete list of BCSIA Studies appears at the back of this volume. Progress in International Relations Theory Appraising the Field Colin Elman and Miriam Fendius Elman, editors BCSIA Studies in International Security MIT Press Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England © 2003 by the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138 (617) 495-1400 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise—without permission in writing from The MIT Press, 5 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA 02142. This book was typeset in Palatino by Teresa Lawson and was printed and bound in the United States of America. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Progress in international relations theory : appraising the field / Colin Elman and Miriam Fendius Elman, eds. p. c.m—(BCSIA studies in international security) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-262-05068-4 (hc.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of International Relation: Masters in the Making?
    The Future of International Relations The Future of International Relations presents the state of the art of international relations theory through an analysis of the work of twelve key contemporary thinkers. The authors break with the procedure in the field which juxtaposes aspects of the work of contemporary theorists with others, presenting them as part of a disembodied school of thought or paradigm. A more individual focus can demonstrate instead, the well-rounded character of some of the leading oeuvres and can thus offer a more representative view of the discipline. The book covers the work of theorists whom students of international relations will read and sometimes struggle with. Each chapter places the thinker in the landscape of the discipline, identifies how they go about studying International Relations and discusses what others can learn from them. The twelve theorists are: John Vincent, Kenneth Waltz, Robert O.Keohane, Robert Gilpin, Bertrand Badie, John G.Ruggie, Hayward Alker, Nicholas G.Onuf, Alexander Wendt, Jean Bethke Elshtain, R.B.J.Walker and James Der Derian. Iver B.Neumann is head of the Centre for Russian Studies at the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs. He is also Jean Monnet Fellow at the European University Institute 1995–6. Ole Wæver is Senior Research Fellow at Copenhagen Peace Research Institute (COPRI). He is also SSRC MacArthur Post- Doctoral Fellow at the University of California at Berkeley 1996–7. The New International Relations Edited by Barry Buzan, University of Warwick, and Gerald Segal, International Institute for Strategic Studies, London The field of international relations has changed dramatically in recent years.
    [Show full text]