International relations (IR) theory is difficult to define. It is often taught as a theory that seeks both to explain past state behavior and to predict future state behavior. However, even that definition is contested by many theorists. Traditional IR theories can generally be categorized by their focus either on humans, states, or on the state system as the primary source of conflict. Any bibliography of international relations theory is bound to create controversy among its readers. Why did the author choose one theory and not the other? Why did the author choose one source and not the other? Indeed, a wide variety of permutations would be perfectly valid to provide the researcher with an adequate annotated bibliography, so why were these particular entries chosen? This article identifies Realism, Liberalism, and Constructivism as the three major branches of IR theory. These three branches have replaced the earlier realism-idealism dichotomy. The \u201cEnglish School\u201d could be considered part of any of the aforementioned three branches, and its placement in the IR theory world is the subject of some debate. It has therefore been given its own section and is not included in any of the other sections. Critical IR theory and Feminist IR theory are often considered part of constructivism; however, there is much debate over whether they constitute their own branches, and so they are included in this article (as well as in their own entries in the OBO series), though the sources are somewhat different. Post\u2013Cold War IR Theory is given its own heading because there are a number of theories that were proposed in the immediate aftermath of the Cold War that are still widely taught and discussed in the field. Perhaps the most controversial inclusion is that of Neoconservatism. Though it is quite possible to mount a case for it to be considered a theory of US foreign policy, it is theoretically distinct from other IR theories (the belief in bandwagoning instead of balancing). The final three sections are included to show how political theory has influenced IR theory, and how history and foreign policy have influenced IR theory (and vice versa). The included sections and citations represent both the mainstream of IR theory and those nonmainstream theories that have just started to break into the mainstream of IR theory. This article provides a starting point for both the beginning and the serious scholar of international relations theory.<\/p>","DOI":"10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0039","type":"reference-entry","created":{"date-parts":[[2011,6,7]],"date-time":"2011-06-07T14:47:07Z","timestamp":1307458027000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["International Relations Theory"],"prefix":"10.1093","author":[{"given":"Jonathan","family":"Cristol","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2011,3,2]]},"container-title":["International Relations"],"original-title":["International Relations Theory"],"language":"en","deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,23]],"date-time":"2021-09-23T19:30:55Z","timestamp":1632425455000},"score":16.271366,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/oxfordbibliographies.com\/view\/document\/obo-9780199743292\/obo-9780199743292-0039.xml"}},"issued":{"date-parts":[[2011,3,2]]},"ISBN":["9780199743292"],"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0039","published":{"date-parts":[[2011,3,2]]}},{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2024,5,3]],"date-time":"2024-05-03T09:58:00Z","timestamp":1714730280763},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Oxford University Press","isbn-type":[{"value":"9780199743292","type":"electronic"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"abstract":"
As progress unfolded, religion was supposed to be consigned to the dustbin of history. So argued many of the 19th-century founding fathers of the modern social sciences such as Max Weber, Karl Marx, and Sigmund Freud. This insight became conventional wisdom as modernization and secularization theorists sought to systematize and theorize more explicitly God\u2019s demise during much of the 20th century. This understanding of an ever more disenchanted world was increasingly challenged from the 1970s onward by a series of events and process that modernization and secularization theories could hardly explain let alone predict. These events included the Iranian Revolution of 1979; the rise of the Christian Right in the United States since the late 1970s; the progressive emergence of religious fundamentalisms across most world religions; the role played by a Catholic pope in Europe and the Mujahidin in Afghanistan in the fall of Soviet Communism; a new post\u2013Cold War security environment with its emphasis on the politics of identity, the so-called New Wars, the clash of civilization scenarios, and religious terrorism, all epitomized by the 11 September 2001 attacks; and not least, the contemporary growing mobilization of religious identities and values by nationalists and populists around the globe. These developments have led scholars to reconsider the role of religion in the modern world, reexamine the Eurocentric and universalist premises on which much secularization theory and the very same concept of religion had been based, and reflexively assess the secularist biases through which social scientists generally understand and explain world politics. The study of religion and its twin concept of the secular are thus currently going through a period of great vitality across the social sciences. This article focuses on debates and scholarship within the field of international relations (IR). As the study of religion is by its very nature an interdisciplinary affair, a number of studies from cognate fields that make a direct and important contribution to ongoing debates in IR are also included. The bibliography is organized along six main sections. The first section is a general overview of key books and articles, journals, and online resources in the field. The second section, titled Understanding Religion in IR, explores why the sacred had long been overlooked in IR and a range of ongoing definitional debates in the discipline. The third section, titled Religion and IR Theory, presents three broad perspectives\u2014non-paradigmatic, paradigmatic, and theological\u2014seeking to integrate religion with IR theorizing. The fourth section briefly presents major studies and debates on the Secular and Postsecular in IR. In the fifth section, titled Religion and International Issues, readers are acquainted with work exploring the complex interaction between religion and a range of issues central to the field of IR, such as the sovereign state, war, peace, and the liberal order. The sixth section dives into the scholarship examining the role of Religion in Foreign and International Policy.<\/p>","DOI":"10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0172","type":"reference-entry","created":{"date-parts":[[2016,5,4]],"date-time":"2016-05-04T15:03:26Z","timestamp":1462374206000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":1,"title":["Religion and International Relations"],"prefix":"10.1093","member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2016,4,28]]},"container-title":["International Relations"],"original-title":["Religion and International Relations"],"language":"en","deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,10,25]],"date-time":"2021-10-25T14:16:05Z","timestamp":1635171365000},"score":16.220394,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/oxfordbibliographies.com\/view\/document\/obo-9780199743292\/obo-9780199743292-0172.xml"}},"issued":{"date-parts":[[2016,4,28]]},"ISBN":["9780199743292"],"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0172","published":{"date-parts":[[2016,4,28]]}},{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,21]],"date-time":"2026-01-21T12:36:45Z","timestamp":1768999005486,"version":"3.49.0"},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Oxford University Press","isbn-type":[{"value":"9780199743292","type":"electronic"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"abstract":"
The literature on cities and international relations (IR), or \u201cglobal urban politics,\u201d as it is sometimes termed, is a diverse stream of social science research that has developed in response to major demographic and economic shifts that began in second half of the 20th century and continue to today. During this time the world has witnessed dramatic globalization and urbanization, centralizing populations in cities. It is predicted that by 2050 close to 70 percent of the world\u2019s population will live in urban areas, meaning that 21st-century challenges will be largely urban in nature. Across areas such as migration, health, environmental sustainability, and economic development, citizens and city governments are constantly exposed, and need to respond to, the impacts of globalization on cities. At the international level, multilateral organizations have recognized this shift and are increasingly involving cities, or networks of cities, as interlocutors in global forums. IR has been slow to acknowledge the increasing importance of cities in international affairs, as it conflicts with the state-centric paradigm of mainstream theory. Most early scholarship on cities and globalization came from urbanists and political economists, who studied the development of \u201cglobal cities\u201d that were acting as the critical nodes in the architecture of the world economy. This literature predominately identified cities as the sites of global processes, with limited capacity to influence or shape them. It also offered a narrow, economistic conception of cities that vastly prioritized the experiences of wealthy cities in the Global North. More recently, scholars have begun to study and theorize the role of cities as actors in global affairs, particularly through forms of networked governance and involvement in key multilateral discussions. This bibliography tracks the evolution of this research agenda from its conception to the present day. It begins with a limited background in the study of urban politics, providing a crucial framework for understanding how the diverse streams of research developed. It then details the continuing work on \u201cglobal cities,\u201d which recognized the increasing importance of cities to international affairs in the late 20th century, although largely defined in narrow economic terms. What follows is a broader theorization of the role of cities in global governance, which begins to afford some agency to cities to shape international affairs across a range of policy areas and brings them directly into the purview of IR. While most of this literature has still been driven by, and focused on, cities of the Global North, there have been efforts to broaden the geographic focus and recognize the way globalization and urbanization have been experienced differently in cities across the globe. Finally, the bibliography draws on a recent literature exploring some of the political and legal implications of this shift to the \u201curban century.\u201d<\/p>","DOI":"10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0283","type":"reference-entry","created":{"date-parts":[[2020,4,22]],"date-time":"2020-04-22T10:56:04Z","timestamp":1587552964000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":2,"title":["Cities and International Relations"],"prefix":"10.1093","author":[{"given":"Daniel","family":"Pejic","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2020,4,22]]},"container-title":["International Relations"],"original-title":["Cities and International Relations"],"language":"en","deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,23]],"date-time":"2021-09-23T19:31:54Z","timestamp":1632425514000},"score":16.06188,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/oxfordbibliographies.com\/view\/document\/obo-9780199743292\/obo-9780199743292-0283.xml"}},"issued":{"date-parts":[[2020,4,22]]},"ISBN":["9780199743292"],"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0283","published":{"date-parts":[[2020,4,22]]}},{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2024,9,15]],"date-time":"2024-09-15T21:05:26Z","timestamp":1726434326325},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Oxford University Press","isbn-type":[{"type":"electronic","value":"9780199743292"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"abstract":"
Reflexivity has in the past few decades become a core concept and concern in the social sciences and has increasingly shaped (meta) theoretical debates in the field of International Relations (IR) since the 1980s. While there is no single understanding of what reflexivity (sometimes referred to as reflectivity or self-reflexivity) means or entails, a broad consensus identifies reflexivity as the capacity to reflect on one\u2019s own epistemic situation and process, and how these affect the nature and meaning of the knowledge one produces. As such, there are different strands of reflexive or reflexivist scholarship in IR, based on how these different elements are envisaged and addressed. Expanding beyond mere \u201ccontrol against bias,\u201d which was a core concern of American behavioralist scholars in the 1950s, reflexivity has turned from a standard for the pursuit of \u201cobjective\u201d knowledge to a problematization of, and response to, the historicity and social-situatedness of knowledge. Discussions of reflexivity in IR are thus typically generated within self-labelled post-positivist intellectual traditions, wherein reflexivity becomes a fundamental epistemological, methodological, and\/or ethical problem that requires constant engagement as an integral part of the research process, and that also affects other aspects of the scholarly vocation and practice, including pedagogy and public engagement. Within this broad literature, this annotated bibliography will cover works that have contributed to clarifying and promoting reflexivity as a metatheoretical standard for IR (i.e., reflexivity as a core question for epistemology, ontology, methodology, and ethics), but also works that have contributed to an empirical understanding of IR\u2019s historical and social embeddedness. The reason for including the latter within reflexivist IR\u2014in the broad sense of the term\u2014despite the fact that many authors of such works have not necessarily self-identified as reflexivists, is that they in effect provide an important empirical basis upon which the problematization and clarification of the problem of reflexivity become possible in philosophical and praxical terms. Indeed, in most social sciences such empirical investigation of the embeddedness of knowledge within social structures and orders is provided by historiographical and sociological studies on the sociohistorical conditions of the \u201cproduction\u201d or \u201cconstitution\u201d of knowledge. But IR scholars have in the past few decades developed an in-house historiographical and \u201cscience studies\u201d agenda that has increased the whole community\u2019s understanding of the specific sociopolitical and institutional contexts and factors that shape its nature and evolution. The two literatures are therefore conceptually and practically connected, and together contribute to whatever level of reflexivity IR as a field can now be said to enjoy.<\/p>","DOI":"10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0276","type":"reference-entry","created":{"date-parts":[[2020,2,26]],"date-time":"2020-02-26T11:56:06Z","timestamp":1582718166000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Reflexivity and International Relations"],"prefix":"10.1093","author":[{"given":"Inanna","family":"Hamati-Ataya","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2020,2,26]]},"container-title":["International Relations"],"original-title":["Reflexivity and International Relations"],"language":"en","deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,23]],"date-time":"2021-09-23T19:34:36Z","timestamp":1632425676000},"score":16.0164,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/oxfordbibliographies.com\/view\/document\/obo-9780199743292\/obo-9780199743292-0276.xml"}},"issued":{"date-parts":[[2020,2,26]]},"ISBN":["9780199743292"],"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0276","published":{"date-parts":[[2020,2,26]]}},{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2024,5,3]],"date-time":"2024-05-03T09:57:39Z","timestamp":1714730259399},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Oxford University Press","isbn-type":[{"value":"9780199743292","type":"electronic"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"abstract":"
\u201cHuman nature\u201d is not a notion that has originated from theories of world politics. On the contrary, it represents one of the oldest points of reference in various cultural traditions of thought. An aspect, however, that makes the current status of the human in international relations (IR) interesting is the fact that since the 1980s, the discipline has undergone a rigorous and critical examination of its core terminologies. Above all, this effort has led scholars to become aware of the concurrent appropriations of their terms: once as scientific concepts and once as ontological facts. However, while various aspects of the human have always found their way into the theorization of world politics, so far the actual impact of the equally diverse \u201cmodels of man\u201d on the latter has hardly been subjected to systematic consideration. Observing \u201chuman nature\u201d not only as a \u201cnaturally given fact\u201d but also as an observational concept connects IR with the broader literatures on how the (political) world may be interpreted and analyzed. The proposition to begin a reappraisal of \u201chuman nature\u2019s\u201d framing effects on the basis of the distinction of anthropological and post-anthropological approaches (Human Beings in International Relations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2015) calls upon IR scholars to appreciate what happens when they study world politics through a lens that either places the human at the center of its observations or one that opts to decenter it to different extents. A reflection on the distinction of an international political anthropology and an international political post-anthropology as a starting point for theory building then not only draws attention to what is included and excluded in regard to the human when studying world politics. It moreover exposes how different views on the (post)human come to shape different theoretical architectures. What is more, it also reveals that such foundations do not run parallel to the classical IR heuristic of distinct paradigms. A closer look at their post-human foundations then shows how much these schools of thought, once conceived as highly coherent, have now been differentiated internally. The said absence of a systematic debate on the status of the human in the IR theories also poses a challenge to this article. Not only is the human still rarely reflected upon as a theoretical core concept; at the same time, parallel debates exist that are guided less by theoretical frameworks but rather by the problems that arise from specific ideas about the post-human. In this sense, this article also pursues a dual strategy: on the one hand, the listing either of obvious or subtle uses of post-human views by various theoretical traditions, and on the other hand, the identification of specific core problems that have formed in the wake of specific angles on the post-human. Since inquiries into the post-human also include an intersection of IR theories with other scientific literatures, the article also features text references that will help readers find their way into the state of the art of those important adjacent debates.<\/p>","DOI":"10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0286","type":"reference-entry","created":{"date-parts":[[2020,4,22]],"date-time":"2020-04-22T10:56:14Z","timestamp":1587552974000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Human Nature in International Relations"],"prefix":"10.1093","author":[{"given":"Daniel","family":"Jacobi","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2020,4,22]]},"container-title":["International Relations"],"original-title":["Human Nature in International Relations"],"language":"en","deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,23]],"date-time":"2021-09-23T19:32:01Z","timestamp":1632425521000},"score":15.999118,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/oxfordbibliographies.com\/view\/document\/obo-9780199743292\/obo-9780199743292-0286.xml"}},"issued":{"date-parts":[[2020,4,22]]},"ISBN":["9780199743292"],"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0286","published":{"date-parts":[[2020,4,22]]}},{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2024,5,3]],"date-time":"2024-05-03T09:57:26Z","timestamp":1714730246715},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Oxford University Press","isbn-type":[{"value":"9780199743292","type":"electronic"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"abstract":"
The publication of the special issue of the journal Millennium on Women and International Relations (Vol. 17, no. 3, 1988) and the appearance of the pathbreaking book Bananas, Beaches and Bases: Making Feminist Sense of International Politics (Enloe 1989, cited under Textbooks) marked the beginnings of the project to gender international relations (IR). There has subsequently been a substantial growth in research and scholarship, which bears testimony to the dynamism of the field. Indeed, the growth and vibrancy of feminist scholarship in IR was evidenced by the establishment of a specialist journal, International Feminist Journal of Politics, in 1999. Although there is a distinctive body of feminist literature with a recognizable international relations disciplinary focus, feminists often draw on scholarship from across a range of academic disciplines. For this reason, the indicative literature included in this bibliography includes some texts written by feminists working in other fields of study such as sociology, geography, and international law. Similarly, many feminist IR texts are useful to students studying global gender issues and global gender politics in other disciplinary contexts. Feminist IR embraces a range of approaches, which, in distinctive ways, interrogate gender as a site of power and social regulation. Feminist analyses interrogate how identities are constructed and reproduced, and how power relations and social and cultural norms, specifically heteronormative and patriarch norms, are constructed and maintained in varied contexts pertinent to international relations. In short, feminists study the difference gender makes in international relations. Often this entails embracing a normative commitment to progressive gender politics and, therefore, feminists are interested in tracking the trajectory of political and social developments that further, or conversely, impede, this project. The intellectual origins of feminist IR are rooted in distinctive traditions of feminist theory. Some strands of feminist scholarship also draw from critical work on gender identities and sexualities, including queer theory. However, feminist IR must also be seen as integral to the \u201ccritical\u201d and \u201ccultural\u201d turns in IR in the 1980s; specifically, feminist IR emerged in the wake of the intellectual and political space opened up by the \u201cfourth debate\u201d (positivist-post-positivist debate) in IR. As such, feminists share with constructivists and critical theorists broadly conceived concern with ethical issues of exclusion and hierarchy; issues inherent in boundary-marking processes, notably the making of states and nations; and practices of \u201cothering.\u201d<\/p>","DOI":"10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0044","type":"reference-entry","created":{"date-parts":[[2014,5,7]],"date-time":"2014-05-07T18:17:38Z","timestamp":1399486658000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Feminist Theories of International Relations"],"prefix":"10.1093","author":[{"given":"Jill","family":"Steans","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2014,5,29]]},"container-title":["International Relations"],"original-title":["Feminist Theories of International Relations"],"language":"en","deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,23]],"date-time":"2021-09-23T19:25:12Z","timestamp":1632425112000},"score":15.932116,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/oxfordbibliographies.com\/view\/document\/obo-9780199743292\/obo-9780199743292-0044.xml"}},"issued":{"date-parts":[[2014,5,29]]},"ISBN":["9780199743292"],"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0044","published":{"date-parts":[[2014,5,29]]}},{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2024,5,3]],"date-time":"2024-05-03T09:58:07Z","timestamp":1714730287571},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Oxford University Press","isbn-type":[{"value":"9780199743292","type":"electronic"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"abstract":"
Causal claims are bound into the fabric of international relations (IR). Efforts to explain past outcomes, to predict future developments, to comprehend the range of options open to international actors, to advance policy prescriptions, and to evaluate policy decisions vis-\u00e0-vis possible alternatives all typically rely, explicitly or implicitly, on causal claims. Moreover, politicians, policymakers, and other state and nonstate actors who seek to manipulate particular aspects of world politics are also (whether they realize it or not) typically acting on causal claims. Acquiring reliable causal knowledge is therefore extremely valuable. It is, however, a challenging task. The content of causal claims is shaped not only by relevant facts about the world, but also by ideas about causation itself\u2014for example, about what \u2018causing\u2019 is, about the kinds of things that can be causes (and effects), about how causes can be identified, and about what constitutes an adequate Causal Explanation. These are tricky and controversial issues which are often submerged below the surface of our thinking. The challenge of arriving at a clear understanding is reflected in the divisions within work which explicitly engages with questions about causation in IR, divisions which are also found within the philosophical literature on which this work draws. It is also reflected in the tendency, within the broader discipline, to set questions about causation to one side, either because they are viewed as too hard to answer or because it is not obvious how answering them will improve our knowledge of world politics. In order to gain a full picture of debates about causation in IR and their implications for substantive topics it is helpful to explore three broad kinds of literature: first, the philosophical texts which provide the backdrop against which discussions of causation in IR take place; second, existing debates about causation in IR, encompassing both mainstream discussions of methods for causal inference and more specialist literatures on causal realism, the nature of causal explanation, and the relationship between historical and causal inquiry; and third, literature in IR which explicitly examines how positions on underlying questions about causation can and do shape positions on substantive topics in IR.<\/p>","DOI":"10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0274","type":"reference-entry","created":{"date-parts":[[2020,2,26]],"date-time":"2020-02-26T11:57:49Z","timestamp":1582718269000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Causation in International Relations"],"prefix":"10.1093","author":[{"given":"Adam R. C.","family":"Humphreys","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2020,2,26]]},"container-title":["International Relations"],"original-title":["Causation in International Relations"],"language":"en","deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,23]],"date-time":"2021-09-23T19:33:46Z","timestamp":1632425626000},"score":15.883841,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/oxfordbibliographies.com\/view\/document\/obo-9780199743292\/obo-9780199743292-0274.xml"}},"issued":{"date-parts":[[2020,2,26]]},"ISBN":["9780199743292"],"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0274","published":{"date-parts":[[2020,2,26]]}},{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,6,1]],"date-time":"2025-06-01T07:00:36Z","timestamp":1748761236471},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Oxford University Press","isbn-type":[{"value":"9780199743292","type":"electronic"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"abstract":"
Max Horkheimer, one of the founders of the Frankfurt Institute of Social Research established in 1923, coined the term critical theory in 1937. While the school failed to produce what could be called a systematic theory, it drew on, and interweaved, various philosophical strands and prominent themes of political and social thought, including historical materialism (Marxism\/Western Marxism), Freudian analysis, cultural disenchantment, Hegelian dialectics, and totality. Yet by the 1940s, many of the first-generation Frankfurt school thinkers sought to counter the emasculation of critical reason, dialectics, and self-conscious theory with a focus on the negativity of dialectics. Later critics would claim that they had abandoned the progressive platform of the Enlightenment, or the project of emancipation from social and political oppression. In the 1980s, J\u00fcrgen Habermas\u2019s communicative action theory would provide a so-called critical turn in Frankfurt school critical theory by resituating reason and social action in linguistics. It was during this time that international relations (IR) theorists would draw on Habermas\u2019s theory and that of other critical theorists to critique the limits of realism, the dominant structural paradigm of international relations at the time. The first stages of this critical theory intervention in international relations included the seminal works of Robert Cox, Richard Ashley, Mark Hoffman, and Andrew Linklater. Linklater, perhaps more than any other critical IR theorist, was instrumental in repositioning the emancipatory project in IR theory, interweaving various social and normative strands of critical thought. As such, two seemingly divergent critical IR theory approaches emerged: one that would emphasize the role of universal principles, dialogue, and difference; the other focusing predominantly on the revolutionary transformation of social relations and the state in international political economy (historical materialism). Together, these critical interventions reflected an important \u201cthird debate\u201d (or \u201cfourth,\u201d if one counts the earlier inter-paradigm debate) in IR concerning the opposition between epistemology (representation and interpretation) and ontology (science and immutable structures). Perhaps more importantly, they stressed the need to take stock of the growing pluralism in the field and what this meant for understanding and interpreting the growing complexity of global politics (i.e., the rising influence of technology, human rights and democracy, and nonstate actors). The increasing emphasis on promoting a \u201crigorous pluralism,\u201d then, would encompass an array of critical investigations into the transformation of social relations, norms, and identities in international relations. These now include, most notably, critical globalization studies, critical security studies, feminism, postmodernism, and postcolonialism.<\/p>","DOI":"10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0095","type":"reference-entry","created":{"date-parts":[[2013,3,19]],"date-time":"2013-03-19T18:03:26Z","timestamp":1363716206000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":2,"title":["Critical Theory of International Relations"],"prefix":"10.1093","author":[{"given":"Steven C.","family":"Roach","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2012,8,29]]},"container-title":["International Relations"],"original-title":["Critical Theory of International Relations"],"language":"en","deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,23]],"date-time":"2021-09-23T19:21:22Z","timestamp":1632424882000},"score":15.848713,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/oxfordbibliographies.com\/view\/document\/obo-9780199743292\/obo-9780199743292-0095.xml"}},"issued":{"date-parts":[[2012,8,29]]},"ISBN":["9780199743292"],"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0095","published":{"date-parts":[[2012,8,29]]}},{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2024,5,3]],"date-time":"2024-05-03T09:57:42Z","timestamp":1714730262256},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Oxford University Press","isbn-type":[{"value":"9780199743292","type":"electronic"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"abstract":"
In international relations, hierarchy is understood in two related ways. In the most general usage, hierarchy refers to any ranked ordering, most commonly conceptualized in international relations as status rankings. In a more narrow usage, hierarchy refers to relations of authority in which a dominant state sets rules for or possesses more or less authority over one or more subordinate states. So defined, hierarchy in international relations is the antonym to the more common concept of anarchy. This bibliography focuses on the second, more narrow conception of hierarchy. The broader usage is examined in the Oxford Bibligraphies article Status in International Relations by Jonathan Renshon. There have been, of course, historical international systems structured by hierarchy, including the Roman Empire and China, examined by scholars of international relations for their own dynamics or as a contrast to the present international system. We address these historical systems in Hierarchical Systems. Since the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, however, the European international system and, through the diffusion of norms and practices, the global system have been understood as characterized by anarchy, or the absence of any authority higher than the nation-state. While not disputing that the current international system as a whole is anarchic, contemporary scholars of international hierarchy claim it is a fallacy of composition to assume that what is true of the system must also be true of its parts. Rather, this emerging literature allows for relations of authority between states at the level of dyads or sometimes regions. Hierarchy is a form of power but differs from power-as-coercion as understood in theories of international politics. Many studies of international relations place power at the center of their analyses, seeing it as the primary determinant of international diplomacy and bargaining outcomes. Authority, however, implies more than just the ability to coerce or even create incentives for states to alter their behavior. Rather, authority implies a \u201cright to rule\u201d in which subordinates accept that the dominant state can regulate legitimately certain limited actions, that they have an obligation to comply when possible with those regulations, and that the dominant state has the right to enforce its regulations in the event of non-compliance. In this way, authority constitutes a social relationship in which limited duties and obligations are recognized by both dominant and subordinate states. A now substantial literature has emerged that aims to explain when and how hierarchy between states will arise, how it functions, and with what consequences. After outlining works that contribute to this unfolding of hierarchy, we turn to historic international systems that were more clearly organized hierarchically.<\/p>","DOI":"10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0285","type":"reference-entry","created":{"date-parts":[[2020,4,22]],"date-time":"2020-04-22T10:55:58Z","timestamp":1587552958000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":1,"title":["Hierarchies in International Relations"],"prefix":"10.1093","author":[{"given":"David A.","family":"Lake","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Feng","family":"Liu","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2020,4,22]]},"container-title":["International Relations"],"original-title":["Hierarchies in International Relations"],"language":"en","deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,23]],"date-time":"2021-09-23T19:32:14Z","timestamp":1632425534000},"score":15.813776,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/oxfordbibliographies.com\/view\/document\/obo-9780199743292\/obo-9780199743292-0285.xml"}},"issued":{"date-parts":[[2020,4,22]]},"ISBN":["9780199743292"],"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0285","published":{"date-parts":[[2020,4,22]]}},{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2024,5,3]],"date-time":"2024-05-03T09:57:57Z","timestamp":1714730277969},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Oxford University Press","isbn-type":[{"value":"9780199743292","type":"electronic"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"abstract":"
The state is one of the most used terms in international relations (IR) theory, and yet IR scholars influenced by both sociology and political philosophy have complained that the state and the states-system have been inadequately theorized in the field. What does the discipline mean when referring to the state? Why should state theorizing be part of IR at all? Need all state theorizing in IR be \u201cstate-centric\u201d? There are two kinds of thinking about the state and the states-system in IR. One strand examines the history of thought about the purpose of the state and the states-system as political communities. Another explains the causes of events and transformations in the state and the states-system. These two approaches to studying the state largely translate to (1) political theory about the state and the states-system, and (2) social scientific theories of the state and the states-system in IR. Recently, both traditions have been significantly revisited in IR, and new productive synergies are emerging.<\/p>","DOI":"10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0128","type":"reference-entry","created":{"date-parts":[[2013,3,19]],"date-time":"2013-03-19T18:03:26Z","timestamp":1363716206000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["State Theory in International Relations"],"prefix":"10.1093","author":[{"given":"Lucas G.","family":"Freire","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Marjo","family":"Koivisto","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2012,8,29]]},"container-title":["International Relations"],"original-title":["State Theory in International Relations"],"language":"en","deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,23]],"date-time":"2021-09-23T19:25:27Z","timestamp":1632425127000},"score":15.6689625,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/oxfordbibliographies.com\/view\/document\/obo-9780199743292\/obo-9780199743292-0128.xml"}},"issued":{"date-parts":[[2012,8,29]]},"ISBN":["9780199743292"],"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0128","published":{"date-parts":[[2012,8,29]]}},{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2024,5,3]],"date-time":"2024-05-03T09:57:53Z","timestamp":1714730273574},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Oxford University Press","isbn-type":[{"value":"9780199743292","type":"electronic"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"abstract":"
By \u201cSinophone and Japanese International Relations Theory,\u201d this article means nascent theoretical constructs about the \u201cinternational\u201d in Sinophone and Japanese International Relations (IR) epistemic communities that draw mainly on their local ideas, experiences, and practices. \u201cSinophone IR\u201d here is not limited to the community of IR researchers in the People\u2019s Republic of China (PRC); it also includes that of Taiwan and other overseas Chinese-speaking researchers, including non-ethnic-Chinese academics who substantially engage with \u201cChinese\u201d thought and traditions in their own right, i.e., not for testing established, mainstream IR theories. Similarly, \u201cJapanese IR\u201d is not narrowly defined as a group of IR scholars with Japanese citizenship. Rather, it includes IR researchers based in Japan and their overseas colleagues who take \u201cJapanese\u201d ideas and history seriously. It is thus possible to research and write from these two epistemic communities simultaneously; so to speak, their boundaries are neither fixed nor immutable. The majority of the IR academics in these communities are not concerned with, or involved in, homegrown theorizing, and scholars associated with the \u201cChinese School of IR\u201d have not engaged with ostensibly Japanese resources for inspiration. However, some homegrown theorists have started drawing on ideas and practices from the other side or shared resources, e.g., Buddhism. Such theorizing synergy and cross-fertilization are likely to continue, especially over such notions as ontology and relationality. This article maps out the literature on homegrown knowledge production in Japanese and Sinophone IR communities and their theorizing endeavors. It will assist readers in comparing and evaluating the originality and contribution of Sinophone and Japanese IR scholarship to global IR knowledge, as well as their shortcomings. Following this introduction, the second section locates the interests of constructing alternative theories in Japanese and Sinophone IR in the wider context of ongoing debates on how to make the theory and practice of global politics more diverse and equitable. The third section introduces key journals and reference resources, followed by the fourth covering the state of the field in Japanese and Sinophone IR. The fifth reviews the debates over the creation of a \u201cnational school of IR\u201d in their respective epistemic communities. The last four sections focus on theorizing efforts in Japanese and Sinophone IR as well as their uses of local resources in academic and policy discourses. For the sake of stylistic clarity, surname precedes given name for all East Asian individuals mentioned in the following commentary paragraphs and annotations.<\/p>","DOI":"10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0271","type":"reference-entry","created":{"date-parts":[[2019,11,26]],"date-time":"2019-11-26T07:30:18Z","timestamp":1574753418000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Sinophone and Japanese International Relations Theory"],"prefix":"10.1093","author":[{"given":"Ching-Chang","family":"Chen","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2019,11,26]]},"container-title":["International Relations"],"original-title":["Sinophone and Japanese International Relations Theory"],"language":"en","deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,23]],"date-time":"2021-09-23T19:30:35Z","timestamp":1632425435000},"score":15.666973,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/oxfordbibliographies.com\/view\/document\/obo-9780199743292\/obo-9780199743292-0271.xml"}},"issued":{"date-parts":[[2019,11,26]]},"ISBN":["9780199743292"],"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0271","published":{"date-parts":[[2019,11,26]]}},{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2024,5,3]],"date-time":"2024-05-03T09:57:26Z","timestamp":1714730246365},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Oxford University Press","isbn-type":[{"value":"9780199743292","type":"electronic"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"abstract":"
This entry discusses the dominant academic theories of international relations (IR) from World War II onward. The focus is on theories that have largely developed within a formal academic setting, though there is no suggestion that these theories have no purchase or effect outside the academy. Some very clearly do. The chief claim is that theoretical debate, almost from the beginning of the field as a self-conscious area of study, has been a mixture of methodological and more general philosophical concerns\u2014both ontological and epistemological. For the heuristic purposes of this section, however, these two areas are separated. After a brief overview, and a brief discussion of the most influential journals and textbooks, the bibliography concentrates first on the major ontological debates that have shaped academic IR theory since 1945, before moving on to consider the methodological debates, and then finally looking at the major substantive theoretical approaches to IR within the academy, not in terms of an approach-by-approach framework, but rather through major theoretical debates.<\/p>","DOI":"10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0043","type":"reference-entry","created":{"date-parts":[[2011,6,7]],"date-time":"2011-06-07T14:47:07Z","timestamp":1307458027000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Academic Theories of International Relations Since 1945"],"prefix":"10.1093","author":[{"given":"Nick","family":"Rengger","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2011,3,2]]},"container-title":["International Relations"],"original-title":["Academic Theories of International Relations Since 1945"],"language":"en","deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,23]],"date-time":"2021-09-23T19:30:07Z","timestamp":1632425407000},"score":15.635666,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/oxfordbibliographies.com\/view\/document\/obo-9780199743292\/obo-9780199743292-0043.xml"}},"issued":{"date-parts":[[2011,3,2]]},"ISBN":["9780199743292"],"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0043","published":{"date-parts":[[2011,3,2]]}},{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,10,17]],"date-time":"2025-10-17T13:51:35Z","timestamp":1760709095262},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Oxford University Press","isbn-type":[{"value":"9780199743292","type":"electronic"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"abstract":"
Forecasting has always been a central aspiration in the study of international relations. Early efforts to develop a \u201cscience of politics\u201d typically emphasized the ability to anticipate future events as a key advantage. The behavioral revolution likewise gave strong prominence to the positivist equivalence between explaining phenomena and the ability to predict. However, despite many programmatic statements, predictions have largely remained aspirations until relatively recently. In this bibliography, we will provide an overview of the existing literature on forecasting, and on applications to conflict in particular. This overview will be organized around differences in specific approaches to forecasting, largely categorized by methodology. However, forecasts can differ along a number of dimensions that cut across specific methods. First, there are differences in the scope of forecasts. Some predictions are highly case-specific and predict outcomes for a single unit and particular issue area. Other models have global scope and seek to assess the risks of some general phenomenon across a wide range of units. Between these two extremes there are various more delineations, focusing on a confined sets such as regions or specific groups of actors. Second, forecasts differ considerably in their time horizons, ranging from daily to periods as long as 100 years. Third, forecasts differ in the scope of what analysts try to predict. Many forecasts are limited to predicting the value of the main response variable of interest, based entirely on what is known about predictors ex ante. Other forecasts entail more ambitious efforts to predict larger systems of variables, including the relevant predictors. Finally, one can distinguish between model- and data-driven approaches to forecasting. Purely model-driven forecasts are based on simplified theoretical or mathematical models and a priori assumptions, sometimes devoid of any empirical inputs at all. At the other extreme, there are purely data-driven models, possibly without any assumptions about the structure or functional form of the relationships at work. In between these two extremes, there is a wide range of forecasting approaches, combining a priori modeling assumptions with parameters that are calibrated by empirical data. This article concludes with an overview of the interests in forecasts among policy and applied communities, including some of the barriers that have prevented effective communication of research results, pointing to future directions of forecasting conflict. Nils W. Metternich acknowledges support from the Economic and Social Research Council (ES\/L011506\/1). Kristian Skrede Gleditsch acknowledges support from the European Research Council (313373).<\/p>","DOI":"10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0179","type":"reference-entry","created":{"date-parts":[[2016,6,30]],"date-time":"2016-06-30T17:50:39Z","timestamp":1467309039000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":3,"title":["Forecasting in International Relations"],"prefix":"10.1093","author":[{"given":"Nils W.","family":"Metternich","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Kristian Skrede","family":"Gleditsch","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Christoph","family":"Dworschak","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2016,6,28]]},"container-title":["International Relations"],"original-title":["Forecasting in International Relations"],"language":"en","deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,23]],"date-time":"2021-09-23T19:39:37Z","timestamp":1632425977000},"score":15.602631,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/oxfordbibliographies.com\/view\/document\/obo-9780199743292\/obo-9780199743292-0179.xml"}},"issued":{"date-parts":[[2016,6,28]]},"ISBN":["9780199743292"],"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0179","published":{"date-parts":[[2016,6,28]]}},{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,2,27]],"date-time":"2026-02-27T05:13:28Z","timestamp":1772169208176,"version":"3.50.1"},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Policy Press","isbn-type":[{"value":"9781529210965","type":"print"},{"value":"9781529211009","type":"electronic"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,12,8]]},"abstract":"
\n This chapter addresses explicitly the issue of the discipline\u2019s origin and distribution, specifically the multiple gardens in which gardeners cultivate and nurture it. In turn, this raises the issue of the terroir, that is, the soil in which it grows and which cause distinct characteristics, for instance universalism and parochialism. The chapter argues that the discipline actually\n Scholars from disparate traditions in political science and international relations (IR) agree that status\u2014standing or rank in a hierarchy\u2014is a critical element of international politics. It has three critical attributes\u2014it is positional, perceptual, and social\u2014that combine to make any actor\u2019s status position a function of the higher-order, collective beliefs of a given community of actors. The term is commonly used in two ways. The first refers to status in its most purely positional sense: standing, an actor\u2019s rank or position in a hierarchy. \u201cStatus community\u201d is defined as a hierarchy composed of the group of actors that a state perceives itself as being in competition with. \u201cRank\u201d is one\u2019s ordinal position and is determined by the collective beliefs of members of that community. Status has long been a focus of IR scholars, dating back to (at least) the beginning of the \u201cscientific study of international relations\u201d that developed in the 1960s. Since then, two different strains of work\u2014status inconsistency theory and social identity theory\u2014have provided the basic theoretical scaffolding for much of the empirical research done since then. After the initial wave of research in the 1960s and 1970s, IR scholars seemingly moved on from the subject for a few decades. However, recent years have seen a renaissance in the study of status, with novel work being done across methodological and epistemological boundaries.<\/p>","DOI":"10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0254","type":"reference-entry","created":{"date-parts":[[2019,2,26]],"date-time":"2019-02-26T12:32:11Z","timestamp":1551184331000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Status in International Relations"],"prefix":"10.1093","author":[{"given":"Jonathan","family":"Renshon","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2019,2,27]]},"container-title":["International Relations"],"original-title":["Status in International Relations"],"language":"en","deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,23]],"date-time":"2021-09-23T19:25:53Z","timestamp":1632425153000},"score":15.534048,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/oxfordbibliographies.com\/view\/document\/obo-9780199743292\/obo-9780199743292-0254.xml"}},"issued":{"date-parts":[[2019,2,27]]},"ISBN":["9780199743292"],"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0254","published":{"date-parts":[[2019,2,27]]}},{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2024,8,2]],"date-time":"2024-08-02T00:38:28Z","timestamp":1722559108420},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Oxford University Press","isbn-type":[{"value":"9780198784890","type":"print"},{"value":"9780191852237","type":"electronic"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2024,1,25]]},"abstract":" This chapter introduces the concepts of postcolonialism and international relations (IR) to the debate. Postcolonialism revolves around colonialism and its complex legacy in contemporary global politics. The chapter traces the history of imperialism and colonialism to show how the concept of race emerges from the processes of colonization and how racism becomes endemic to the practices of imperial control and colonization. It also considers the interplay between Eurocentrism and racism and the decolonial approaches which seek to expose and challenge colonialist assumptions which still underpin much of contemporary IR thinking. Frantz Fanon, Edward Said, and Homi K. Bhabha are some of the most notable contributors to the emergence and development of contemporary postcolonial thought.<\/p>","DOI":"10.1093\/hepl\/9780198784890.003.0009","type":"book-chapter","created":{"date-parts":[[2024,8,1]],"date-time":"2024-08-01T21:33:57Z","timestamp":1722548037000},"page":"321-372","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["9. Postcolonialism And International Relations"],"prefix":"10.1093","author":[{"given":"Peter","family":"Lawler","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,8]]},"container-title":["International Relations Theories"],"original-title":["9. Postcolonialism And International Relations"],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.oxfordpoliticstrove.com\/display\/10.1093\/hepl\/9780198784890.001.0001\/hepl-9780198784890-chapter-9","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2024,8,1]],"date-time":"2024-08-01T21:33:58Z","timestamp":1722548038000},"score":15.464102,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.oxfordpoliticstrove.com\/display\/10.1093\/hepl\/9780198784890.001.0001\/hepl-9780198784890-chapter-9"}},"issued":{"date-parts":[[2024,1,25]]},"ISBN":["9780198784890","9780191852237"],"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/hepl\/9780198784890.003.0009","published":{"date-parts":[[2024,1,25]]}},{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2024,8,2]],"date-time":"2024-08-02T00:39:01Z","timestamp":1722559141281},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Oxford University Press","isbn-type":[{"value":"9780198784890","type":"print"},{"value":"9780191852237","type":"electronic"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2024,1,25]]},"abstract":" This chapter focuses on constructivism relates it to international relations (IR). The core argument of the constructivist perspective revolves around the idea that the world people find themselves in is socially constructed rather than simply given. Moreover, constructivism underscores the ideational aspects of international politics. The chapter compares this to the predominantly materialist explanations offered by mainstream IR theory. The chapter examines the application of constructivism to the analysis of international politics. It then highlights the importance of identity and norms, which are emphasized within constructivism and international politics, before considering the nuclear weapons debate as related to the perspective of constructivism.<\/p>","DOI":"10.1093\/hepl\/9780198784890.003.0008","type":"book-chapter","created":{"date-parts":[[2024,8,1]],"date-time":"2024-08-01T21:33:54Z","timestamp":1722548034000},"page":"277-320","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["8. Constructivism And International Relations"],"prefix":"10.1093","author":[{"given":"Peter","family":"Lawler","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,8]]},"container-title":["International Relations Theories"],"original-title":["8. Constructivism And International Relations"],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.oxfordpoliticstrove.com\/display\/10.1093\/hepl\/9780198784890.001.0001\/hepl-9780198784890-chapter-8","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2024,8,1]],"date-time":"2024-08-01T21:33:55Z","timestamp":1722548035000},"score":15.443947,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.oxfordpoliticstrove.com\/display\/10.1093\/hepl\/9780198784890.001.0001\/hepl-9780198784890-chapter-8"}},"issued":{"date-parts":[[2024,1,25]]},"ISBN":["9780198784890","9780191852237"],"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/hepl\/9780198784890.003.0008","published":{"date-parts":[[2024,1,25]]}},{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2024,5,3]],"date-time":"2024-05-03T09:57:44Z","timestamp":1714730264490},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Oxford University Press","isbn-type":[{"value":"9780199743292","type":"electronic"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"abstract":" Critical and poststructural theories were introduced to global politics in early to mid-1990s. Since then there has been a proliferation of critical thinking in global politics with Derridean and Foucauldian approaches being the most popular. While psychoanalysis made its appearance and gained in popularity alongside other critical approaches to international politics in mid-1995, it has never become one of the \u201cgo to\u201d theories. However, since 2010 psychoanalysis has been slowly reemerging on the global politics scene. If initially psychoanalytic approaches focused on a number of different theorists such as Castoriadis, Jung, Freud, and Lacan, the most recent thinking draws most significantly on the contribution of Lacanian psychoanalysis and thinkers such as \u017di\u017eek, Butler, or Kristeva, all of whom heavily rely on Lacan. In postcolonial studies a distinct psychoanalytic account was also developed by Frantz Fanon. This contribution provides an overview of psychoanalytic approaches in the study of global politics with a focus on Lacanian psychoanalytic theory and its derivatives (\u017di\u017eek, Fanon, Butler, and Kristeva). The reason for the selected focus is simple\u2014this has been the most popular approach since the introduction of this thinking to the discipline. Lacanian theory revolves around concepts such as desire, jouissance (radical\/excess enjoyment), fantasy, and drive, and is concerned with explaining the social bond\u2014that is how the subject comes to existence and what social factors determine the subject\u2019s existence in society. Its distinct contribution to the field of global politics is its focus on conscious and unconscious factors. In other words, it focuses on that which can be represented and that which remains unrepresented but still impacts the world. Affects, symptoms, or unconscious material impact the way the subject (and society) behaves. While the theory\u2019s foundations are in psychiatry (and many critiques of psychoanalysis point that out vehemently), psychoanalysis is not a theory of the individual and neither is it concerned with the individual psyche. It is a theory of society; Lacan even characterized it as antiphilosophy. Psychoanalysis has appeared in a number of different contexts in global politics. The presented selection is not exhaustive though the aim was to include the most significant contributions the theory has made to the discipline\u2019s different subfields. Key areas include the state, sovereignty, ontology, Political Subjectivity, law and foreign policy; and subdisciplines such as postcolonialism (the theories of Frantz Fanon), racism, affect, Radical Politics and Cultural Criticism, and development and aid, as well as trauma, populism and nationalism.<\/p>","DOI":"10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0300","type":"reference-entry","created":{"date-parts":[[2021,2,23]],"date-time":"2021-02-23T15:37:03Z","timestamp":1614094623000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Psychoanalysis in Global Politics and International Relations"],"prefix":"10.1093","author":[{"given":"Andreja","family":"Zevnik","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Moran","family":"Mandelbaum","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2021,2,24]]},"container-title":["International Relations"],"original-title":["Psychoanalysis in Global Politics and International Relations"],"language":"en","deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,9,23]],"date-time":"2021-09-23T19:39:11Z","timestamp":1632425951000},"score":15.421407,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/oxfordbibliographies.com\/view\/document\/obo-9780199743292\/obo-9780199743292-0300.xml"}},"issued":{"date-parts":[[2021,2,24]]},"ISBN":["9780199743292"],"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/obo\/9780199743292-0300","published":{"date-parts":[[2021,2,24]]}},{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2024,8,2]],"date-time":"2024-08-02T00:38:19Z","timestamp":1722559099805},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Oxford University Press","isbn-type":[{"value":"9780198784890","type":"print"},{"value":"9780191852237","type":"electronic"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2024,1,25]]},"abstract":" This chapter looks at the origin of poststructuralism and its correlation with international relations (IR). It references the works of poststructuralist scholars, Jacques Derrida and Michel Foucault, exploring the key themes of deconstruction and discourse in poststructuralist scholarship and its historical and theoretical contexts. Poststructuralist IR scholarship represents and interprets international and global politics while challenging the practices of international politics, especially those concerned with sovereign statehood. The chapter also mentions the criticisms surrounding poststructuralist IR, such as nihilism and the idea that poststructuralist IR has little value in the world of international policy-making. It explains the counterargument that argues for change through critiquing existing exclusionary theories and practices, which opened up the exploration into alternative ways of being.<\/p>","DOI":"10.1093\/hepl\/9780198784890.003.0007","type":"book-chapter","created":{"date-parts":[[2024,8,1]],"date-time":"2024-08-01T21:33:52Z","timestamp":1722548032000},"page":"231-276","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["7. Poststructuralism And International Relations"],"prefix":"10.1093","author":[{"given":"Peter","family":"Lawler","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,8]]},"container-title":["International Relations Theories"],"original-title":["7. Poststructuralism And International Relations"],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.oxfordpoliticstrove.com\/display\/10.1093\/hepl\/9780198784890.001.0001\/hepl-9780198784890-chapter-7","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2024,8,1]],"date-time":"2024-08-01T21:33:53Z","timestamp":1722548033000},"score":15.418524,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.oxfordpoliticstrove.com\/display\/10.1093\/hepl\/9780198784890.001.0001\/hepl-9780198784890-chapter-7"}},"issued":{"date-parts":[[2024,1,25]]},"ISBN":["9780198784890","9780191852237"],"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/hepl\/9780198784890.003.0007","published":{"date-parts":[[2024,1,25]]}},{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2024,8,2]],"date-time":"2024-08-02T00:38:18Z","timestamp":1722559098367},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Oxford University Press","isbn-type":[{"value":"9780198784890","type":"print"},{"value":"9780191852237","type":"electronic"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2024,1,25]]},"abstract":" The chapter tackles the interplay between Marxism and international relations (IR). It then discusses how Marxism grew relevant in line with the emergence of the Third World as an international political force. Unlike realism, Marxism is a progressive political philosophy, but it radically parts company with liberalism on how significant change might come about and the extent of the change needed. The chapter mentions that Marxist and Marxist-influenced scholarship became more visible during the aftermath of the Cold War era. The chapter also looks into the key concepts of capitalism, imperialism, dependency theory, world systems theory (WST), neo-Gramscianism, and critical theory.<\/p>","DOI":"10.1093\/hepl\/9780198784890.003.0005","type":"book-chapter","created":{"date-parts":[[2024,8,1]],"date-time":"2024-08-01T21:33:47Z","timestamp":1722548027000},"page":"149-187","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["5. Marxism And International Relations"],"prefix":"10.1093","author":[{"given":"Peter","family":"Lawler","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,8]]},"container-title":["International Relations Theories"],"original-title":["5. Marxism And International Relations"],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.oxfordpoliticstrove.com\/display\/10.1093\/hepl\/9780198784890.001.0001\/hepl-9780198784890-chapter-5","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2024,8,1]],"date-time":"2024-08-01T21:33:48Z","timestamp":1722548028000},"score":15.397066,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.oxfordpoliticstrove.com\/display\/10.1093\/hepl\/9780198784890.001.0001\/hepl-9780198784890-chapter-5"}},"issued":{"date-parts":[[2024,1,25]]},"ISBN":["9780198784890","9780191852237"],"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/hepl\/9780198784890.003.0005","published":{"date-parts":[[2024,1,25]]}}],"items-per-page":20,"query":{"start-index":0,"search-terms":"International+relations"}}}