scholarly journals The impact of colonialism on policy and knowledge production in International Relations

2022 ◽  
Vol 98 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-22
Author(s):  
Jasmine K Gani ◽  
Jenna Marshall

Abstract Is there an academic–policy divide, and does that gap need to be bridged? For decades, International Relations (IR) scholars have reflected on their roles and responsibilities towards the ‘real world’, while policy-makers have often critiqued the detachment of academic research. In response, there have been increased calls for academics to descend from their ‘ivory tower’. However, the articles in this 100th anniversary special issue of International Affairs interrogate this so-called theory–policy divide and problematize the exchange of knowledge between academics and practitioners, highlighting the colonial underpinnings of their historical entanglements. In this introductory article we bring together the core arguments of the special issue contributions to delineate three prominent dynamics in the academic–practitioner nexus: the role of academia as a supplier of knowledge for colonial policies; the influence of imperial practice and policy-makers in shaping IR and academic knowledge production; and the contestation from academics and/or practitioners against racial hierarchies in knowledge production and policy-making. Confronting the exclusions, amnesias and denials of colonialism in the theory and practice of International Relations is the necessary first step in any process of repair towards a more just and viable politics.

2012 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 473-476
Author(s):  
TAKASHI INOGUCHI

This special issue focuses on the role of civil society in international relations. It highlights the dynamics and impacts of public opinion on international relations (Zaller, 1992). Until recently, it was usual to consider public opinion in terms of its influence on policy makers and in terms of moulding public opinion in the broad frame of the policy makers in one's country. Given that public opinion in the United States was assessed and judged so frequently and diffused so globally, it was natural to frame questions guided by those concepts which pertained to the global and domestic context of the United States.


2005 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 329-352
Author(s):  
Irnerio Seminatore

The emergence and evolution of the literature dealing with interdependence in the international System is looked into. An attempt is made to show its significance and main points as well as its implications. The debates on interdependence within the North-American political context are regarded as solutions to the preceding issues on dependence. Interesting passages are dedicated to the impact of the interdependence theory on the interpretation of the international system, as illustrated by two schools of thought in foreign policy (Kissinger-Brzezinski). Linkage of the tactical and strategic aspects to the economic and political interrelation of international relations, as put forward by policy makers, has brought to the fore the difficulties and limits of negotiation in the face of competition and in the aftermath of confrontation. This paper offers subtle, yet positive, conclusions on the use of the interdependance theory in international policy.


2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. 3449 ◽  
Author(s):  
Constantine Iliopoulos ◽  
Vladislav Valentinov

Despite popular misconceptions, cooperatives present a very successful organizational form worldwide. A recent study found that in the U.S., for example, 134 agricultural cooperatives celebrated their 100th anniversary in 2014. This observation on cooperative longevity is not matched by a corresponding research effort on what makes cooperatives so successful. Most of the extant research seems to focus on intra-cooperative problems that posit significant challenges to cooperatives. This special issue of Sustainability bridges the considerable gap between scholarly work and reality. By focusing on what makes cooperatives so successful for such a long period of time, this issue sheds light on key aspects of cooperative longevity. Bridging social capital, fundamental solutions to excessive heterogeneity-induced high ownership costs, tinkering, cooperative genius, and superior capacity to adapt to shocks and changes are among the factors identified to explain extended cooperative longevity. The insights thereby gained are useful to students of cooperatives, practitioners, and policy makers.


Author(s):  
Angelo Paletta ◽  
Christopher Bezzina ◽  
Genc Alimehmeti

The changes that are affecting public education imply the need to incorporate into principal’s leadership practices two opposing forces: on the one hand, the accountability systems, which require responsibility for centrally managed achievement testing, compliance with standard procedures of self-evaluation, planning teaching improvement, and reporting of the results; and on the other hand, the expectations that come from within the school, namely those of teachers, students, families, and other stakeholders. This presents the challenge of coproducing authentic learning (problem solving, soft skills, civic knowledge, and citizenship) that is not easily measurable and therefore difficult to bring to light, rationalize, systematize, and report. Principals react differently to the demands of centralized policy-making initiatives. Some see them as opportunities for growth and only formally adopt them, whereas others entrench themselves into particular practices aimed at focusing on the immediate, on being conservative and minimizing risk taking and setting less ambitious goals that can take their schools forward. Managerial accountability can end up “colonizing” the organizations (and those who lead them), with the consequence that time and attention is devoted to what is being measured or observed by the central administrative systems. The “colonized” leaders develop or bend their managerial practices primarily in response to the expectations of accountability systems. On the opposite side, accountability systems can produce the effect of “decoupling”: the actual activities are separated from the rituals of accountability requested by the central or local government. In this case, school principals conform only formally to the demands of accountability systems. Other school leaders can capture opportunities from an accountability system, integrating it into a comprehensive management approach that balances opposing requests and organizational principles into a “systemic” model. Thus, the accountability practices in the field of education introduced in Italy can leave both a positive or negative impact on the way school principals lead their organizations. Studying the impact that the introduction of such policies can have on individuals as a result of the way leaders execute such directives are deemed important as they shed light on the link between policy and practice, and help us gain deeper insights into the so-called theory and practice divide. The move toward greater forms of accountability presents an ideal opportunity for policy makers and educational leaders working at different levels to appreciate the importance of systemic leadership and engage in a discourse that enlightens its value to school improvement initiatives. Rather than focusing on the self, on merely following directives and working independently, the school principal that is able to understand how things and people are connected and can come together to transform their schools can make a difference to school development and school improvement. Bringing policy makers and implementers together can help in understanding the realities faced by educators at the school level, the former often oblivious to the challenges educators face on a day-to-day basis.


2015 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Smith

Based on ethnographic research at five Czech universities from 2011 to 2013, this article explores how academics make sense of and claims to three qualitatively distinct temporal regimes in which their activities as knowledge producers are inscribed: disciplinary time, career time and project time. This conceptual framework, a modification of Shinn’s distinction between disciplinary, transitory and transversal knowledge-production regimes, seeks to replace images of competition and succession between regimes with images of their recombination and intersection. It enables an interpretation of the empirical findings beyond the indigenous complaint that excessive speed is compromising the quality of knowledge production. The relationship between projects, careers and disciplines emerges from the study as problematic rather than synergistic. In this respect the paper does not contradict the claim by critical theorists that we are witnessing the disintegration of what used to be a functional relationship between the multiple temporalities of academic knowledge production based on standardized career scripts, nor the related claim that this may reflect a deeper crisis of modernity as a predictive regime for the production of futures. It proposes, however, that transversal projects can still be mediators of ‘disciplinary respiration’ insofar as their timeframes are available for variable calibration commensurate with the increasingly heteronomous ways of knowing and knowledge routines that academic researchers practise.


2009 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rianne Mahon ◽  
Stephen McBride

If ‘knowledge is power’, it is unsurprising that the production, legitimation, and application of social scientific knowledge, not least that which was designed to harness social organization to economic growth, is a potentially contentious process. Coping with, adapting to, or attempting to shape globalization has emerged as a central concern of policy-makers who are, therefore, interested in knowledge to assist their managerial activities. Thus, an organization that can create, synthesize, legitimate, and disseminate useful knowledge can play a significant role in the emerging global governance system. The OECD operates as one important site for the construction, standardization, and dissemination of transnational policy ideas. OECD staff conducts research and produces a range of background studies and reports, drawing on disciplinary knowledge (typically economics) supplemented by their ‘organizational discourses’. This paper probes the contested nature of knowledge production and attempts to evaluate the impact of the OECD’s efforts to produce globally applicable policy advice. Particular attention is paid to important initiatives in the labour market and social policy fields – the Jobs Study and Babies and Bosses.


2015 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denis Harrington ◽  
Jeremy C. Short ◽  
Briga Hynes

Abstract Oscar Wilde once quipped, ‘Education is an admirable thing, but it is well to remember from time to time that nothing that is worth knowing can be taught.’ Whilst business scholars have challenged this premise, debate rages concerning what elements are most worth knowing. Specifically, the value of rigorous academic research is often weighed against the merits of specific student experiences that may have more immediate value in the marketplace. Within this changed context, academics are challenged to embrace collaborative forms of research activity and re-imagine the nature of the academic-practitioner exchange and accompanying knowledge transfer. We explore this changing role of the business school with an eye towards outlining potential bridges between academic knowledge and benefits of interactions with practice. Specifically, we consider the academic-practitioner interface in the context of the wider debate on ‘rigour and relevance’ in management education and research. Participatory modes of knowledge production are discussed, and current ideas on the ‘management practice’ gap are discussed. We conclude that more innovative forms of research engagement are required to encourage academic-practitioner collaboration. To that end, we discuss a number of potential approaches to help foster co-learning and discovery and debate their student, educator and broader instructional implications.


2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 417-422 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pedro Soto-Acosta ◽  
Juan-Gabriel Cegarra-Navarro

Purpose The purpose of this special issue is to point out the possibilities of new information and communication technologies (ICTs) for knowledge management (KM) in organizations, offering different perspectives on and approaches for the role of new ICTs for KM, as well as measuring the impact and diffusion of new ICTs for KM within organizations. Design/methodology/approach The selection of the papers included in this special issue is largely based on the work of the conference “7th European Conference on Intellectual Capital - ECIC” (April 2015, Cartagena, Spain), where the special issue editors organized a track on “New ICTs for Knowledge Management in Organizations”. The conference gathered leading scholars in the fields of intellectual capital and KM, dealing with the acquisition, creation and sharing of collective intelligence and how to utilize increased academic knowledge and networking in promoting economic and organizational innovations and changes. Findings The collection of papers covered in this special issue identifies challenging problems on the role of new ICTs for KM and their role in the design and implementation of innovative products, services or processes in organizations. Research limitations/implications The special issue tries to offer some new relevant advances for the academic and practice communities in the growing body of research analyzing new ICTs for KM. However, the theoretical and empirical advances showed represent only a partial view, which corresponds to the impact of new ICTs for KM at the organizational level of analysis. Practical implications The nature of new ICTs, such as social networking tools, wikis, internal blogging and the way they are used, suggest that nowadays they may differ from traditional organizational systems in two critical ways: the voluntary (typically not mandatory) use and their lack of activity or process orientation. Originality/value The special issue explores the phenomena by integrating different perspectives and approaches, including qualitative and quantitative empirical. This integration overcomes some limitations about the understanding of the issues under investigation.


2022 ◽  
Vol 98 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-143
Author(s):  
Jan Wilkens ◽  
Alvine R C Datchoua-Tirvaudey

Abstract This article addresses the broader question of the special issue by reflecting on the coloniality of knowledge production in a context of global climate governance. Drawing on the rationale of the special issue, we highlight key dynamics in which knowledge shape climate policies and propose a decolonial approach at the nexus of academic knowledge production and policy formation by accounting for diverse ways of knowing climate justice. To this end, the article asks how to develop a decolonial approach to researching climate justice in order to identify the meaning-in-use of climate justice by affected people in what we describe as sensitive regions of the Arctic and the Mediterranean. To this end, the article develops a research design that accounts for diverse ways of knowing. The article proceeds as follows: first, we will discuss how diverse ways of knowing are related to global climate governance and climate justice; second, we outline our practice-based research framework that addresses research ethics, decolonial approaches and norm contestation; and third, we discuss how our approach can inform not only the co-production of research in climate governance, but also current debates on climate justice.


Author(s):  
L. L. Fituni

Through the recent decades, the use of asymmetric and hybrid measures in international relations has acquired a qualitatively new scale and system. Today such measures have turned into one of the leading forms of external pressure and subsequent coercion, often exceeding the effectiveness of such straightforward instruments as the threat of potential use of force and almost equal to real power actions. Arguably, among those asymmetric and hybrid measures, Western countries assign a key role to the pressure of international sanction upon competitor nations and uncooperative actors on the world arena. The article is devoted to a critical analysis of some common approaches to the study of the problems of «targeted» sanctions in the theory and practice of international relations and the use of sanctions as a means of achieving geostrategic objectives, including such ambitious ones as social constructivism and social engineering on national, regional and global scales. Particular attention is paid to the contribution of Thomas Biersteker to the development of the theory and of practical designs of «targeted sanctions» in international relations. The author disputes with him over some issues related to the effectiveness of targeted sanctions and the impact they produce upon various sectors of the targeted societies. Based on the author’s schematic matrix of sanctional influences upon national elites and possible limits of their responses, the article formulates the principles of segmentation of the national elites both for the purposes of identifying the layers most susceptible to sanctional pressure and singling out most effective and capable strata from the point of view of practical implementation of the indented outcomes of the undertaken pressure from the outside.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document