|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
124406
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Chinese scholars are debating whether, and how, to innovate a Chinese theory of International Relations (IR). This article examines the driving forces behind this theoretical debate. It challenges the commonsensical link between external events in the subject matter (i.r.) and theorizing (IR), which suggests that the innovation of a Chinese IR theory is a natural product of China's geopolitical rise, its growing political ambitions, and discontent with Western hegemony. We propose instead a sociological approach to intellectual innovation which opens the black box of knowledge production, and argue that theoretical innovation, in China and elsewhere, is best understood as an interplay between internal and external layers. The internal academic context comprises intellectuals pursuing prominence, with each intellectual trying to carve out a maximally distinct position in order to receive attention from their peers-theorizing a Chinese IR theory being one important way of doing this. The external layer-which ranges from power politics to sociopolitical developments-affects this process indirectly by providing more research funds and autonomy to the more immediate institutional environment where control over rewards such as research funds, promotion, and publications affects what kind of work is done, with theorizing being increasingly rewarded.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
111970
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
International Relations (IR) has cultivated an image as a discipline with strong divisions along paradigmatic, methodological, metatheoretical, geographical, and other lines. This article questions that image analyzing the latent structures of communication in IR. It uses citation data from more than 20,000 articles published in 59 IR journals to construct a network among IR journals and finds a discipline with a center consisting of pedigreed IR journals, albeit closely related to political science. Divisions are identifiable as specialty areas that form clusters of specialized journals along the periphery of the network-security studies and international political economy in particular-but communication is also divided along the lines of geography and policy/theory. The article concludes that divisions notwithstanding, IR communication remains centered around American, general, and theoretical IR journals and that to practice this particular kind of communication is an important dimension of being an IR scholar.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|