| ID | 140876 |
| Title Proper | What pivot? international relations scholarship and the study of East Asia |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Hundley, Lindsay ; Kenzer, Benjamin |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | Scholars of international relations (IR) simultaneously believe that their work is policy-relevant and that a gap exists between the academic and policy worlds of IR. Using data from the 2011 Teaching, Research, and International Policy (TRIP) survey and the TRIP journal article database, we explore this disjuncture in one specific area, research on East Asia. If US scholars' work addresses policy-relevant issues, as they believe, we would expect academic work to provide insights on a region that US policy makers have long thought to be growing in strategic importance. We find that academics recognize the strategic significance of East Asia, but comparatively few scholars teach about or do research on the region. Compared with the IR discipline more broadly, published research on East Asia is more paradigmatic, qualitative, and oriented toward the study of international political economy. The neglect of East Asia and the systematic differences in the way it is studied have potentially important consequences for the study and practice of IR. |
| `In' analytical Note | International Studies Perspectives Vol. 16, No.3; Aug 2015: p.286–301 |
| Journal Source | International Studies Perspectives 2015-09 16, 3 |
| Key Words | East Asia ; International Relations Discipline |