The Women, Peace, and Security Agenda and Feminist Institutionalism: A Research Agenda

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 598-613 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Thomson
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Political Institutions ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
Legal Studies ◽  
Design And Implementation ◽  
Peace And Security

Abstract Since the inception of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 (UNSCR 1325) in 2000, feminist academia has been closely interested in the developing women, peace, and security (WPS) agenda in international affairs. The majority of this work has emerged from within feminist international relations (Mcleod 2015; Shepherd 2008) and feminist legal studies. Less attention has been paid to the WPS agenda by feminist political science. As a result, less consideration has been given to political institutions within the WPS framework. This paper argues that the design and implementation of postconflict political institutions is an important component of the WPS agenda and one which deserves greater attention. It demonstrates that using certain tenets of feminist political science, and feminist institutionalism in particular, can offer key insights into greater understanding of the importance of political institutions within postconflict societies. The article illustrates how political institutions have been underconsidered within academic work on the WPS agenda. It then argues that political institutions are an important part of the puzzle when it comes to implementing the WPS agenda. It shows how feminist institutional theory can help to provide key insights into the nature of postconflict institutions.

scholarly journals Research Agenda for Political Science in China in an Era of Great Change

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guangbin Yang
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Political Institutions ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
World Order ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Traditional Role ◽  
State Governance ◽  
Governance Models

AbstractThe world order is undergoing tumultuous changes amid the Sino–US trade war and a global pandemic. During these epochal times for political science, The American school of social sciences needs an intellectual revolution and a repositioning of the research agenda for political science. Comparative political studies must shift their focus from their traditional role of comparison of political institutions to that of state governance models, as the former can no longer advance new knowledge in political science while the latter represents a greater challenge for such studies. Likewise, studies of international relations in the traditional sense should take a step further and explore studies of world politics, i.e., studies of international relations and world order as shaped by institutional changes triggered by political trends within certain countries. The research approach of historical political science is indispensable, whether it is comparison of state governance models or of world politics.

scholarly journals The Women, Peace and Security Agenda: The Unfinished Story of Feminist Revolution versus Compromise in Global Politics

2019 ◽  
Vol 54 (4) ◽  
pp. 47-65
Author(s):  
Míla O'Sullivan
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
Security Council Resolution ◽  
Global Politics ◽  
Global Order ◽  
Security Governance ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
The United Nations

The adoption of the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 on women, peace and security (WPS) in 2000 has prompted the development of an extensive WPS scholarship within the field of feminist International Relations. The dynamic scholarly debate is characterised by certain tensions between two feminist groups – the radical revolutionary one which advocates a redefinition of the global order and is more sceptical of the agenda, and the pragmatist one accentuating the compromise towards the existing peace and security governance. This article explores the two main subjects of the WPS research – the discourse and implementation, as they have been informed by the revolutionary and pragmatist approaches. The article shows that while the academic inquiries into the WPS discourse reveal disappointment with the compromises made regarding the revolutionary vision, this disappointment is also present in the literature on implementation. The latter literature nonetheless acknowledges feminist pragmatism as a way forward given the realities on the ground.

Global Governance

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Caney
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
World Bank ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Fair Trade ◽  
Political Institutions ◽  
World Trade ◽  
International Institutions ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
The World ◽  
Dangerous Climate Change

In recent years, a number of powerful arguments have been given for thinking that there should be suprastate institutions, and that the current ones, such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, and United Nations Security Council, need to be radically reformed and new ones created. Two distinct kinds of argument have been advanced. One is instrumental and emphasizes the need for effective suprastate political institutions to realize some important substantive ideals (such as preventing dangerous climate change, eradicating poverty, promoting fair trade, and securing peace). The second is procedural and emphasizes the importance of political institutions that include all those subject to their power in as democratic a process as possible, and builds on this to call for democratically accountable international institutions. In this chapter, the author argues that the two approaches need not conflict, and that they can in fact lend support to each other.

22. NGOs in world politics

2019 ◽  
pp. 349-364
Author(s):  
Jutta Joachim
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
World Politics ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
Search And Rescue ◽  
International Level ◽  
Governmental Organizations ◽  
Non Governmental Organizations ◽  
Peace And Security

This chapter examines the role of transnational non-governmental organizations (TNGOs) in world politics. It considers what distinguishes TNGOs from other actors in international politics, what types of influence NGOs exert in international relations, and whether TNGOs contribute to more democratic policy-making at the international level. The chapter also discusses the growing importance of TNGOs and presents two case studies that illustrate how they contribute to the emergence of new norms through their engagement with international governmental organizations (IGOs), provide assistance to those in need, but also highlight the diversity that exists among the organizations. The first is about the adoption of United Nations Security Council resolution 1325 ‘Women, Peace, and Security’ to which TNGOs contributed in a significant manner, while the second is about the search and rescue missions of migrants which TNGOs undertake in the Mediterranean Sea. There is also an Opposing Opinions box that asks whether TNGOs contribute to more democracy at the international level.

Rationalizing Politics: The Emerging Synthesis of International, American, and Comparative Politics

1998 ◽  
Vol 52 (4) ◽  
pp. 759-786 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen V. Milner
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Comparative Politics ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
International System ◽  
Ir Theory ◽  
Strategic Interactions ◽  
The Past ◽  
Cross Fertilization ◽  
Separate Discipline

International relations has often been treated as a separate discipline distinct from the other major fields in political science, namely American and comparative politics. A main reason for this distinction has been the claim that politics in the international system is radically different from politics domestically. The degree of divergence between international relations (IR) and the rest of political science has waxed and waned over the years; however, in the past decade it seems to have lessened. This process has occurred mainly in the “rationalist research paradigm,” and there it has both substantive and methodological components. Scholars in this paradigm have increasingly appreciated that politics in the international realm is not so different from that internal to states, and vice versa. This rationalist institutionalist research agenda thus challenges two of the main assumptions in IR theory. Moreover, scholars across the three fields now tend to employ the same methods. The last decade has seen increasing cross-fertilization of the fields around the importance of institutional analysis. Such analysis implies a particular concern with the mechanisms of collective choice in situations of strategic interaction. Some of the new tools in American and comparative politics allow the complex, strategic interactions among domestic and international agents to be understood in a more systematic and cumulative way.

scholarly journals On the concept of international disorder

2020 ◽  
pp. 004711782092228
Author(s):  
Aaron McKeil
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
International Order ◽  
World Politics ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
Order And Disorder ◽  
Recent Interest ◽  
History Of ◽  
International Systems

International relations today are widely considered to be experiencing deepening disorder and the topic of international disorder is gaining increased attention. Yet, despite this recent interest in international disorder, in and beyond the academy, and despite the decades-long interest in international order, there is still little agreement on the concept of international disorder, which is often used imprecisely and with an alarmist rather than analytical usage. This is a problem if international disorder is to be understood in theory, towards addressing its concomitant problems and effects in practice. As such, this article identifies and explores two ways international order studies can benefit from a clearer and more precise conception of international disorder. First, it enables a more complete picture of how orderly international orders have been. Second, a greater understanding of the problem of international order is illuminated by a clearer grasp of the relation between order and disorder in world politics. The article advances these arguments in three steps. First, an analytical concept of international disorder is developed and proposed. Second, applying it to the modern history of international order, the extent to which there is a generative relationship between order and disorder in international systems is explored. Third, it specifies the deepening international disorder in international affairs today. It concludes by indicating a research agenda for International Relations and international order studies that takes the role of international disorder more seriously.

scholarly journals How Can We Criticize International Practices?

2019 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 1014-1024 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Schindler ◽  
Tobias Wille
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Military Intervention ◽  
Practice Theory ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
Social Progress ◽  
Social Critique ◽  
Political Debates ◽  
Multilateral Diplomacy

Abstract In this article, we elaborate two distinct ways of criticizing international practices: social critique and pragmatic critique. Our argument is that these two forms of critique are systematically opposed to each other: They are based on opposing epistemic premises, they are motivated by opposing political concerns, and they pursue opposing visions of social progress. Scholars of International Relations (IR) who want to work with the conceptual tools of practice theory are thus confronted with a consequential choice. Understanding the alternatives can help them to be more self-reflexive in their research practices and intervene more forcefully in contemporary political debates. We illustrate these advantages through a discussion of the scholarly debate on the practices of multilateral diplomacy through which the United Nations Security Council authorized a military intervention in Libya in 2011.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document