scholarly journals International refugee protection and the primary institutions of international society

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 256-277 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olivia Nantermoz
Keyword(s):  
International Society ◽  
The United States ◽  
English School ◽  
Territorial State ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
State Practice ◽  
Politics Of Contestation ◽  
The One ◽  
Methodological Considerations ◽  
Primary Institutions

AbstractRefugees are often considered as a source of disorder if not fundamental threat to international society. In contrast, and drawing from an English School approach, this article argues that the figure of the refugee is foundational to the constitution of both modern international society and its agent, the sovereign territorial state; hence refugee protection represents a primary institution of international society. Starting with conceptual and methodological considerations for studying primary institutions, the article then highlights the longstanding and widespread state practice of granting asylum. It is shown that on the one hand, the figure of the refugee serves to consolidate and naturalise the nation/state/territory trinity underpinning the modern state system; and on the other hand, protecting refugees plays a central role in the construction of statist self-identities as liberal, humanitarian, and altruistic agents. The last section of the article turns to the politics of contestation of refugee protection, examining domestic, regional, and international reactions to ‘anti-refugee’ policies in the United States, Hungary, and Australia. The considerable amount of criticism generated by these restrictive policies, it is argued, evidence the enduring importance and relevance of refugee protection in (and for) international society.

The International Society – World Society Distinction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Williams
Keyword(s):  
Immanuel Kant ◽  
International Society ◽  
International System ◽  
World Society ◽  
English School ◽  
Regime Theory ◽  
Ir Theory ◽  
Hugo Grotius ◽  
State Organizations ◽  
The One

The English School, or society of states approach, is a threefold method for understanding how the world operates. According to English School logic, there are three distinct spheres at play in international politics, and two of these are international society and world society—the third being international system. On the one hand, international society (Hugo Grotius) is about the institutionalization of shared interest and identity amongst states, and rationalism puts the creation and maintenance of shared norms, rules, and institutions at the centre of international relations (IR) theory. This position has some parallels to regime theory, but is much deeper, having constitutive rather than merely instrumental implications. On the other hand, world society (Immanuel Kant) takes individuals, non-state organizations, and the global population as a whole as the focus of global societal identities and arrangements, and revolutionism puts transcendence of the state system at the centre of IR theory. Revolutionism is mostly about forms of universalist cosmopolitanism. This position has some parallels to transnationalism but carries a much more foundational link to normative political theory. International society has been the main focus of English School thinking, and the concept is quite well developed and relatively clear, whereas world society is the least well developed of the English School concepts and has not yet been clearly or systematically articulated.

scholarly journals The emergence of environmental stewardship as a primary institution of global international society

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 131-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Falkner ◽  
Barry Buzan
Keyword(s):  
International Society ◽  
Environmental Stewardship ◽  
The Other ◽  
English School ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Normative Order ◽  
Primary Institutions ◽  
The Impact

This article develops an English School framework for analysing the emergence of new primary institutions in global international society, and applies this to the case of environmental stewardship. The article traces the impact that global environmentalism has had on the normative order of global international society, examines the creation of secondary institutions around this norm and identifies the ways in which these developments have become embedded in the constitution and behaviour of states. It assesses the ways in which environmental stewardship has interacted with the other primary institutions that compose global international society, changing some of the understandings and practices associated with them. The conclusions argue that environmental stewardship is likely to be a durable institution of global international society, and that it might be a harbinger of a more functional turn in its priorities.

scholarly journals The Safe Third Country Agreement and Global Order

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zoe Wilkins
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
The United States ◽  
English School ◽  
Global Order ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
Bilateral Agreement ◽  
Principles Of Justice ◽  
International Refugee Regime

The Safe Third Country Agreement (SCTA) is a bilateral agreement between Canada and the United States that involves the mutual recognition of each party as an effective refugee host. This paper argues that although the agreement appears to be pro-refugee protection, in practice it functions as a non-arrival measure, barring refugees from entering Canada. The paper invokes the English School approach to investigate how both parties use the STCA to capitalize on values of order, while appearing to empower the principles of justice prevalent in international refugee norms. Using SCTA provisions, different theoretical approaches, and a thorough inventory of international refugee regime norms, the analysis seeks to contextualize the SCTA. The paper concludes that civil society’s push towards justice and refugee protection forces governments to consider values outside of order, with the potential of addressing both concerns harmoniously.

The political international society: Change in primary and secondary institutions

2014 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 601-622 ◽  
Author(s):  
KILIAN SPANDLER
Keyword(s):  
Institutional Change ◽  
International Society ◽  
Path Dependence ◽  
Deep Structure ◽  
The Political ◽  
English School ◽  
International Organisations ◽  
Continuity And Change ◽  
Autonomous Objects ◽  
Primary Institutions

AbstractThis article intends to contribute to the theorising of institutional change. Specifically, it asks how dynamics in the ‘deep structure’ of international society correspond to changes in more specific institutions as embodied by regimes and international organisations. It does so by taking up the distinction of primary and secondary institutions in international society advocated by scholars of the English School. It argues that, while the differentiation offers analytical potential, the School has largely failed to study secondary institutions such as international organisations and regimes as autonomous objects of analysis, seeing them as mere materialisations of primary institutions. Engaging with the concepts of structuration and path dependence will allow scholars working in an English School framework to explore more deeply the relation between the two kinds of institutions, and as a consequence devise more elaborate theories of institutional change. Based on this argument, the article develops a theoretical model that sees primary and secondary institutions entangled in distinctive processes of constitution and institutionalisation. This model helps to establish international organisations and regimes as a crucial part of the English School agenda, and to enlighten the political mechanisms that lead to continuity and change in international institutions more broadly.

scholarly journals Regional Order in the Arctic: Negotiated Exceptionalism

Politik ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Heather Exner-Pirot ◽  
Robert W. Murray
Keyword(s):  
International Society ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
The Past ◽  
Transnational Ties ◽  
Regional Order ◽  
Western Arctic ◽  
The One

Traditional theories of International Relations have thus far failed to explain the unusual degree of cooperation seen in the Arctic between Russia on the one hand, and the seven Western Arctic states led by the United States on the other.  Rather than witnessing a devolution into competition and conflict over strategic shipping routes and hydrocarbon resources, regional Arctic institutions have continued to grow in strength and number in the past several years, and transnational ties have deepened. This has prompted some observers to describe the Arctic as ‘exceptional’ – somehow immune to or isolated from global political competition.This paper argues that the Arctic regional order is exceptional insofar as Arctic states and those states with involvement in the region have worked to negotiate an order and balance of power predicated on norms such as cooperation and multilateralism. The establishment of an Arctic international society has seen great powers and smaller powers come together to form an order aimed at promoting norms and institutions not seen elsewhere in the world. By using an English School approach to understand the Arctic, we contend that Arctic international society has been deliberately negotiated in a way that promotes cooperation between Arctic states. However this order can be disrupted if Arctic international society does not take conscious steps to maintain a strong institutional framework that protects Arctic internationalism.

scholarly journals The English School: History and Primary Institutions as Empirical IR Theory?

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barry Buzan ◽  
George Lawson
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Society ◽  
Normative Theory ◽  
English School ◽  
Ir Theory ◽  
Historical Approach ◽  
School Work ◽  
School History ◽  
Primary Institutions ◽  
Historical Accounts

How does the English School work as part of Empirical International Relations (IR) theory? The English School depends heavily on historical accounts, and this article makes the case that history and theory should be seen as co-constitutive rather than as separate enterprises. Empirical IR theorists need to think about their own relationship to this question and clarify what “historical sensitivity” means to them. The English School offers both distinctive taxonomies for understanding the structure of international society, and an empirically constructed historical approach to identifying the primary institutions that define international society. If Empirical IR is open to historical-interpretive accounts, then its links to the English School are in part strong, because English School structural accounts would qualify; they are, in other ways, weak because the normative theory part of the English School would not qualify. Lying behind this judgement is a deeper issue: if Empirical IR theory confines itself to regularity-deterministic causal accounts, then there can be no links to English School work. Undertaking English School insights will help open up a wider view of Empirical IR theory.

Primary Institutions, Secondary Institutions, and Moral Obligation

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Youde
Keyword(s):  
Global Health ◽  
International Society ◽  
Moral Obligation ◽  
English School ◽  
Global Health Governance ◽  
Health Governance ◽  
Formal Organizations ◽  
Primary Institutions

Institutions are foundational to the English School and to the very concept of international society, so it makes sense that scholars would pay attention to them. What’s curious, though, is how much ambiguity permeates the discussion of primary and secondary institutions within English School theorizing. There is a lack of agreement among authors about what constitutes a primary institution, and secondary institutions receive almost no attention because they are merely formal organizations with no independent power within international society. This chapter distinguishes between primary and secondary institutions, describes the emergence of moral obligation and responsibility as a primary institution, explains why secondary institutions are constitutive of international society, and makes the case for global health governance as a secondary institution.

The Institutions of International Society

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tonny Brems Knudsen
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Institutional Change ◽  
International Society ◽  
English School ◽  
The Subject ◽  
1960S And 1970S ◽  
Interdisciplinary Scholarship ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
Primary Institutions ◽  
Hedley Bull

The “fundamental” or “primary” institutions of international society, among them sovereignty, diplomacy, international law, great power management, the balance of power, trade, and environmental stewardship, have been eagerly discussed and researched in the discipline of international relations (IR), at the theoretical, meta-theoretical, and empirical levels. Generations of scholars associated with not only the English School, but also liberalism and constructivism, have engaged with the “institutions of international society,” as they were originally called by Martin Wight and Hedley Bull in their attempt to develop a historically and sociologically informed theory of international relations. The fact that intense historical, theoretical, and empirical investigations have uncovered new institutional layers, dynamics, and complexities, and thus opened new challenging questions rather than settling the matter is part of its attraction. In the 1960s and 1970s, the early exponents of the English School theorized fundamental institutions as historical pillars of contemporary international society and its element of order. At the turn of the 21st century, this work was picked up by Kal Holsti and Barry Buzan, who initiated a renaissance of English School institutionalism, which specified the institutional levels of international society and discussed possibilities for institutional change. Meanwhile, liberal and constructivist scholars made important contributions on fundamental institutions in key engagements with English School theory on the subject in the late 1980s. These contributions and engagements have informed the most recent wave of (interdisciplinary) scholarship on the subject, which has theorized the room for fundamental institutional change and the role of international organizations in relation to the fundamental institutions of international society.

Entry into international society reconceptualised: the case of Russia

2010 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 463-484 ◽  
Author(s):  
IVER B. NEUMANN
Keyword(s):  
International Society ◽  
Subject Position ◽  
English School ◽  
Mongol Empire ◽  
The One

AbstractThis article addresses how entry into international society has been conceptualised, suggests a reconceptualisation that will make the concept more relational, and illustrates with a case study. Part one attempts a summary of relevant debates without the English School, and directs attention to the importance of how entrants draw on memories of its subject position in the suzerain system that it left as it entered international society. Part two discuses the experiences of Russia's predecessor polities, with the focus being on the place of Russian principalities within the suzerain system of the Golden Horde (ca. 1240–1500). I argue that Russia's basic stance towards European polities in the 16th and early 17th centuries is readily understandable in terms of a key memory, namely the one of being dominated by this polity, which was itself an outgrowth of the Mongol empire. Part three demonstrates how the resulting understanding of politics was confirmed by Russian experiences in the 16th and 17th centuries. I suggest that Russia never really let go of its memories of being part of a suzerain system, and that it is therefore still suspended somewhere in the outer tier of international society.

The English School and Institutions: British Institutionalists?

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laust Schouenborg
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Society ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
English School ◽  
International Institution ◽  
Functional Perspective ◽  
Primary Institutions ◽  
Hedley Bull

The argument can be made, and has in fact been made, that the English School is primarily concerned with the study of institutions. The institutions of international society are social in a fundamental sense. That is, they are something above and beyond what one usually associates with an international institution. There are three dominant perspectives on what the primary institutions of international society are: functional, historical/descriptive, and typological. Hedley Bull was the major proponent of the functional perspective, and he identified five primary institutions of international society: the balance of power, international law, diplomacy, war, and the great powers. However, the historical/descriptive perspective appears to be the prevailing one. Nevertheless, various authors have started to think about the institutions of international society typologically. This has certain implications for how one views the cognitive objectives of the English School. The adherence to functional, historical/descriptive, or typological perspectives involves a positioning in relation to where international relations (IR), as a discipline, and the English School, as an approach to it, should locate itself in wider academia.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document