Beyond geography and social structure: disciplinary sociologies of power in international relations
- 60 Downloads
Throughout their relatively brief history, studies examining the academic International Relations (IR) discipline have manifested an abiding concern with power and its uneven ‘distribution’. In this, of course, they mirror the object of their analysis. The same might also be said of the approach they typically use to study disciplinary power: as within IR theory itself, studies of the IR discipline have primarily identified and assessed power in geographical and territorial terms. There are two principal (and often overlapping) variants of this approach: the first, and most familiar, is national (state-centric); the second, increasingly popular, is imperial (world-systemic).
Since the seminal work of Stanley Hoffmann (1977), for example, it has been a truism of IR disciplinary studies that their object is a distinctly ‘American social science’. Though this brisk caption might be understood in various ways, it has been generally held to imply that the global discipline is dominated by...
- Friedrichs, Jörg (2004) European Approaches to International Relations Theory: A House with Many Mansions, London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Hoffmann, Stanley (1977) ‘An American Social Science: International Relations’, Daedalus 106 (3): 41–60.Google Scholar
- Holsti, Kalevi J. (1985) The Dividing Discipline: Hegemony and Diversity in International Theory, Winchester: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
- Jordan, Richard, Maliniak Daniel, Oakes Amy, Peterson Susan and Michael J. Tierney (2009) One Discipline or Many? TRIP Survey of International Relations Faculty in Ten Countries, Williamsburg: Institute for the Theory and Practice of International Relations, College of William and Mary.Google Scholar
- Jørgensen, Knud Erik and Tonny Brems Knudsen, eds (2006) International Relations in Europe: Traditions, Perspectives and Destinations, Milton Park and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Tickner, Arlene B. and Ole Wæver, eds (2009) International Relations Scholarship Around the World, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Wæver, Ole (2007a) ‘Still a Discipline after All These Debates?’, in Tim Dunne, Milja Kurki and Steve Smith, eds, International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity, 288–308, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Wæver, Ole (2007b) ‘The Social and Intellectual Structure of the IR Discipline’, Paper presented at the 48th Annual Convention of the International Studies Association; 28 February–3 March, Chicago.Google Scholar