| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
121229
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Since the morning of 11 September 2001, the temptation to interpret the
attacks as a hallmark of our individual and collective lives, to infuse the
events with transformational properties, has been ever present. An Ekos
poll published on 27 September 2001 showed that 77 percent of Canadians
believed that their "lives would be deeply and permanently changed by
these terrorist attacks."1
David Bercuson rightly noted that, "[as] with all
such sweeping generalizations, no one will really know until many years
have passed."2
Now, over a decade later, one can examine the effects of these
events on Canadian security and defence policy with the sobriety the passing
of a decade can bring. One common interpretation of Canada's response
to 9/11 is that Canada experienced the events by proxy, through the United
States.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
094586
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
134665
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
According to Imre Lakatos, progressive research programs are centred on the notion of an empirical knowledge foundation where new theories and methods lead to novel factual discoveries. Only through advanced but diverse methodologically sound strategies can one hope for a “better” understanding of events. With Lakatosian analysis in mind, this paper examines the state of Canadian foreign policy scholarship. The author has collected 531 peer-reviewed articles pertaining to Canadian foreign policy published between 2002 and 2012 in five leading peer-reviewed publications: Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, International Journal, the Canadian Journal of Political Science, the American Review of Canadian Studies, and Études Internationales. He has differentiated these articles based on five methodological approaches: description, quantitative analysis, comparative study, critical study, and qualitative analysis. The results suggest a disheartening lack of diversity in the methodological approaches guiding Canadian foreign policy scholarship. Moreover, the overwhelming preference for descriptive methods indicates clear signs of a degenerative research program.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|