Advertisement

International Politics

, Volume 56, Issue 1, pp 103–120 | Cite as

The English School: a new triad

  • Daniel DunleavyEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

Barry Buzan’s reformulation of the English School marked one of the most important developments in international relations (IR) theory over the past 15 years. Buzan sought to scientifically reconstruct the English School creating a return to grand theory. This article is a critical investigation of Buzan’s reformulation, aiming to discover whether the English School lost or gained as a result. If the School gained, we are presented with an explanatory grand theory that can explain IR throughout time. If the School lost, we may have to return to the approach of the classical English School characterised by Martin Wight and Hedley Bull, or to the post-classical approach of James Der Derian. This article will present a new English School triad employing Buzan’s, the classical and post-classical English School.

Keywords

English School Grand theory Explaining Understanding 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I wish to thank Seán Molloy for his invaluable comments on earlier drafts of this article. I also want to thank the School of Politics and International Relations at the University of Kent for their financial support.

References

  1. Adler, E. 2005. Barry Buzan’s use of constructivism to reconstruct the English School: ‘Not all the way down’. Millennium 34(1): 171–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ayres, L. 2008. Grand theory. In The SAGE Encyclopaedia of Qualitative Research Methods, ed. L. Given, 373–374. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  3. Bain, W. 2001. The tyranny of benevolence? National security, human security, and the practice of statecraft. Global Society 15(3): 227–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bellamy, A., and M. McDonald. 2004. Securing international society: towards an english school discourse of security. Australian Journal of Political Science 39(2): 307–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bennison, A. 2009. The Ottoman Empire and its precedents from the perspective of English School theory. In International society and the Middle East English School Theory at the Regional Level, ed. B. Buzan, and A. Gonzalez-Pelaez, 45–69. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  6. Booth, K., and N. Wheeler. 2008. The Security Dilemma: Anarchy, Society and Community in World Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  7. Bull, H. 1977. The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. GB: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bull, H. 1991. Martin Wight and the theory of international relations. In International Theory the Three Traditions, ed. G. Wight and B. Porter, ix–xxiii. GB: Leicester University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Bull, M. 2008. Early years: Sydney and Oxford. In Remembering Hedley, ed. C. Bell and M. Thatcher, 1–8. Canberra: ANU Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bull, H., and A. Watson (ed.). 1984. The Expansion of International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Buzan, B. 1999. The English School as a research programme: An overview, and proposal for reconvening. In Paper delivered to the panel ‘A Reconsideration of the English school: close or reconvene? British International Studies Association 24th annual conference, December 20–22, Manchester.Google Scholar
  12. Buzan, B. 2001. The English School: An underexploited resource in IR. Review of International Studies 27(03): 471–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Buzan, B. 2004. From International to World Society: English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalisation. GB: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Buzan, B. 2005. Not hanging separately: Responses to Dunne and Adler. Millennium 34(1): 183–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Buzan, B. 2010. The English School and International Security. In The Routledge Companion to Security Studies, ed. M. Cavelty and V. Mauer, 34–44. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Buzan, B. 2015. The English School: a neglected approach to international security studies. Security Dialogue 46(2): 126–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Buzan, B. and A. Gonzalez-Pelaez (ed.). 2009. International Society and the Middle East English School Theory at the Regional Level. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  18. Buzan, B., and R. Little. 2000. International Systems in World History. GB: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Buzan, B., Jones, C., and R. Little. 1993. The Logic of Anarchy: Neorealism to Structural Realism. Oxford: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Der Derian, J. 2003. Hedley bull and the case for a post-classical approach. In International Relations at LSE A History of 75 years, ed. H. Baucer and E. Bright, 61–94. GB: Millennium Publishing Group.Google Scholar
  21. Diez, T., and R. Whitman. 2000. Analysing European Integration, Reflecting on the English School: Scenarios for an Encounter. COPRI-Working Paper 21-2000.Google Scholar
  22. Donelan, M. 1983. Grotius and the image war. Millennium 12(3): 233–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dunne, T., and N. Wheeler. 2004. ‘We the peoples’: Contending Discourses of Security in Human Rights Theory and Practice. International Relations 18(1): 9–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. ECPR, 2001. Programme 4th Pan European international relations conference, September 6–10, University of Kent, Canterbury.Google Scholar
  25. Grotius, H. 2005. Of the causes of war; and first, of the defence of persons and goods. In The Rights of War and Peace Book II, ed. K. Haakonssen, R. Tuck and J. Barbeyrac, 389–419. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund. http://files.libertyfund.org/files/1947/1032-02_LFeBk.pdf.
  26. Guzzini, S. 2001. Calling for a less ‘brandish’ and less ‘grand’ reconvention. Review of International Studies 27(3): 495–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Halliday, F. 2009. The Middle East and conceptions of international society. In International Society and the Middle East English School Theory at the Regional Level, ed. B. Buzan and A. Gonzalez-Pelaez, 1–23. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  28. Halperin, S., and O. Heath. 2012. Political Research Methods and Practical Skills. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Hashmi, S. 2009. Islam, the Middle-East and the Pan Islamic movement. In International Society and the Middle East English School Theory at the Regional Level, ed. B. Buzan and A. Gonzalez-Pelaez, 170–200. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  30. Hinnebusch, R. 2009. Order and change in the Middle East: A Neo-Gramscian twist on the international societal approach. In International Society and the Middle East English School Theory at the Regional Level, ed. B. Buzan and A. Gonzalez-Pelaez, 201–225. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  31. Hollis, M., and S. Smith. 1990. Explaining and Understanding International Relations. GB: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Holsti, K. 1971. Retreat from Utopia: International relations theory, 1945–70. Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique 4(2): 165–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hudson, G.F. 1966. Collective security and military alliances. In Diplomatic Investigations, ed. H. Butterfield and M. Wight, 176–180. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  34. Humphreys, A. 2013. Applying Jackson’s methodological ideal-types: Problems of differentiation and classification. Millennium-Journal of International Studies 41(02): 290–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hurrel, A. 2007. On Global Order: Power, Values, and the Constitution of International Society. United States: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jackson, P. 2016. The Conduct of Inquiry in International Relations. 2nd ed. GB: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jones, R. 1981. The English School: A Case for Closure. Review of International Studies 7(01): 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Linklater, A. 2009. The English School. In Theories of International Relations, ed. S. Burchill, et al., 4th ed., 86–110 GB: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  39. Linklater, A., and H. Suganami. 2006. The English School of International Relations: A Contemporary Reassessment. GB: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Little, R. 1991. John Vincent 1943–1990. Review of International Studies 17(01): 106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Little, R. 1999. The English School’s contribution to the study of international relations. Paper delivered to the panel ‘a reconsideration of the English school: close or reconvene?’ British International Studies Association 24th annual conference, December 20–22, Manchester.Google Scholar
  42. Little, R. 2009. History, theory and methodological pluralism in the English School. In Theorising International Society, ed. C. Navari, 78–103. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Machiavelli, N. 1989. The prince. In Machiavelli: The Chief Works and Others, vol. 1, ed. A. Gilbert, 5–96. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Manning, C. 1962. The Nature of International Society. London: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  45. Murden, S. 2009. The secondary institutions of the Middle Eastern regional interstate society. In International Society and the Middle East English School Theory at the Regional Level, ed. B. Buzan and A. Gonzalez-Pelaez, 117–139. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  46. Navari, C. (ed.). 2009. Theorising International Society. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
  47. Riemer, K. 2002. The Arrival of the European international society in the Ottoman Empire. Paper presented at the ISA annual meeting, March 23–27, New Orleans, USA.Google Scholar
  48. Roberts, A. 1986. Nations in Arms: The Theory and Practice of Territorial Defence. London: Macmillan for International Institute for Strategic Studies.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Stivachtis, Y. 2001. The Enlargement of international society: Anarchy more than culture. Paper presented at the 4th Pan-European international relations conference, September 8–10, Kent.Google Scholar
  50. Suganami, H. 2011. The English School, History and Theory. Ritsumeikan Annual Review of International Studies 9: 15–28.Google Scholar
  51. Valbjørn, M. 2009. Arab nationalism(s) in transformation: From Arab interstate societies to an Arab-Islamic world society. In International Society and the Middle East English School Theory at the Regional Level, ed. B. Buzan and A. Gonzalez-Pelaez, 140–169. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  52. Waever, O. 1999. Does the English School’s via media equal the contemporary constructivist middle ground? Paper delivered to the panel ‘a reconsideration of the English school: close or reconvene? British International Studies Association 24th annual conference, December 20–22, Manchester.Google Scholar
  53. Wendt, A. 1999. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wight, M. 1996. Why is there no international theory? In Diplomatic Investigations: Essays in the Theory of International Politics, ed. M. Wight and H. Butterfield, 17–34. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  55. Yurdusev, A. 2009. The Middle East encounter with the expansion of European international society. In International Society and the Middle East English School Theory at the Regional Level, ed. B. Buzan and A. Gonzalez-Pelaez, 70–91. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Politics and International Relations, Rutherford CollegeUniversity of KentCanterburyUK

Personalised recommendations