152 research outputs found
The implosion of clientelistic Italy in the 1990s : a study of 'peaceful change' in comparative political economy
Digitised version produced by the EUI Library and made available online in 2020
Uma reconstrução do construtivismo nas Relações Internacionais
Como forma de evitar tanto abordagens teoricamente ecléticas, quanto abordagens teoricamente redundantes, este artigo propõe uma reconstrução possível e coerente do construtivismo, entendido como uma metateoria reflexiva. Esta reconstrução começa levando a sério a dupla virada sociológica e interpretivista nas ciências sociais. Baseado na “dupla hermenêutica”, o construtivismo pode ser mais bem compreendido distinguindo-se sua postura quanto ao nível da observação, quanto ao nível da ação propriamente dita e quanto à relação entre esses dois níveis. Com base nessa distinção, o artigo argumenta que o construtivismo trata, do ponto de vista epistemológico, sobre a construção social do conhecimento e, do ponto de vista ontológico, sobre a construção da realidade social. Além disso, o construtivismo demanda a combinação de uma teoria social do conhecimento com uma teoria intersubjetivista da ação, em detrimento de uma teoria individualista da ação. Finalmente, a análise do poder é central para compreender a ligação reflexiva que se estabelece entre os níveis da observação e da ação. Este argumento está inserido numa contextualização na qual o construtivismo é inspirado pela “modernidade reflexiva” e, mais diretamente, pelo fim da Guerra Fria
Forum: debating the Chinese school(s) of IR Theory
The papers in this Forum, along with eight papers consecutively published in previous and current issues of this journal, constitute a special symposium, which engages in a dialogue between the “Chinese School” of International Relations (IR) theory and “Western” IR theories. The contributors are renowned Western theorists representing various Western paradigms and leading Chinese theorists from the three branches of the Chinese School, namely “moral realism,” “relational theory,” and “symbiosis theory.” The dialogue between the Chinese School and Western theories has become feasible due to recent theoretical breakthroughs achieved by the former and the observed efforts to enhance theoretical diversity in the latter. Contributors from both sides are committed to fostering an equal, comprehensive, and constructive dialogue. Western theorists provide an evaluation of the Chinese School as a whole and delve into the specifics of its branches. They compare the Chinese School with Western theories, highlighting similarities and differences, reflecting on shared issues, identifying both contributions and shortcomings of the Chinese School, and proposing solutions for its further development. In response, Chinese School scholars reiterate their theoretical concerns and refine their theoretical stances accordingly. This dialogue demonstrates the potential for Chinese and Western theorists to overcome language and cultural barriers to achieve mutual understanding and valuable collaboration
Of false promises and good bets: a plea for a pragmatic approach to theory building (the Tartu lecture)
Resisting the denial of coevalness in International Relations: provincializing, perspectivism, border thinking
Legitimising Emerging Power Diplomacy: an Analysis of Government and Media Discourses on Brazilian Foreign Policy under Lula
Welche Macht darf es denn Sein? Tracing ‘Power’ in German Foreign Policy Discourse
The relationship between ‘Germany’ and ‘power’ remains a sensitive issue. While observers tend to agree that Germany has regained the status of the most powerful country in Europe, there is debate whether that is to be welcomed or whether that is a problem. Underpinning this debate are views, both within Germany and amongst its neighbours, regarding the kind of power Germany has, or should (not) have. Against this backdrop, the article reviews the dominant role conceptions used in the expert discourse on German foreign policy since the Cold War that depict Germany as a particular type of ‘power’. Specifically, we sketch the evolution of three prominent conceptions (constrained power, civilian power, hegemonic power) and the recent emergence of a new one (shaping power). The article discusses how these labels have emerged to give meaning to Germany’s position in international relations, points to their normative and political function, and to the limited ability of such role images to tell us much about how Germany actually exercises power
- …