International Studies Review
Latest Publications


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

1794
(FIVE YEARS 229)

H-INDEX

46
(FIVE YEARS 4)

Published By Oxford University Press

1468-2486, 1521-9488

2022 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anton Peez

Abstract The study of international norms from a social constructivist perspective has been one of the major conceptual innovations to the discipline of international relations (IR) over the past forty years. However, despite the concept's ubiquity, there is only a limited understanding of the large-scale trends in research associated with its rise. This analytic essay interrogates conventional wisdom, using a dataset of 7,795 mainstream, English-language journal articles from the Teaching, Research and International Policy Journal Article Database, supplemented with data from Web of Science. How have international norms been studied substantively and methodologically, what are major contributions and blind spots, and which opportunities for future innovation might exist? Although norms research has historically helped expand the scope of issues covered in IR (e.g., gender issues and public health), others have evidence gaps relative to the broader discipline of IR (e.g., terrorism and public opinion). Over the years, the proportion of empirical studies has increased, while purely theoretical, epistemological, and methodological work and innovation have decreased. Despite calls for methodological pluralism, norms research is significantly more qualitative and conceptual than mainstream IR in general and far less multi-method. While more international and less US-based than IR in general, norms research in mainstream journals seems to be no closer to a “Global IR,” measured by regional focus and author affiliation. This suggests three promising avenues for future innovation: greater attention to specific substantive blind spots, more multi-method research, and increased attention to the agenda of Global IR. Beyond these individual insights, this review illustrates the general utility of complementing narrative literature reviews with ones based on quantitative data. It also provides a case study on conceptual proliferation and innovation in IR.


2022 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey S Lantis ◽  
Carmen Wunderlich

Abstract Constructivist theories of norm dynamics offer a variety of analytical tools to understand the complex processes of norm emergence, diffusion, and evolution over time. As the literature has developed, though, it lacks a general framing of the interconnections between norms, norm clusters or configurations, and principles or “normativity.” This article advances a new three-dimensional model of constructivist theories of norms that emphasizes the spatial dimensions of norm meanings, legitimacy, and impact and identifies promising avenues for research progress. First, individual norms represent a primary intersubjective structural component that is both developed and contested. Second, theories of norm interrelations or norm clusters provide additional critical dimensions of structuration that may promote resiliency in the face of contestation. Third, norms exist within a larger constellation of norm structures, representing the broadest dimension in world politics. Collisions can occur in this environment, but broader normativity and institutionalization often become activated in the face of serious challenges. As demonstrated using the illustration of international responses to the Syrian civil war (2011 till present), only by attending to all three dimensions of norms can we gain a more accurate understanding of real-world circumstances of norm connections, norm collisions, and the variable effects of norm contestation. The article concludes by identifying promising research avenues building from the three-dimensional framework.


2022 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas C Walker
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Ines A Ferreira ◽  
Rachel M Gisselquist ◽  
Finn Tarp

Abstract Inequality is a major international development challenge. This is so from an ethical perspective and because greater inequality is perceived to be detrimental to key socioeconomic and political outcomes. Still, informed debate requires clear evidence. This article contributes by taking stock and providing an up-to-date overview of the current knowledge on the impact of income inequality, specifically on three important outcomes: (1) economic growth; (2) human development, with a focus on health and education as two of its dimensions; and (3) governance, with emphasis on democracy. With particular attention to work in economics, which is especially developed on these topics, this article reveals that the existing evidence is somewhat mixed and argues for further in-depth empirical work across disciplines. It also points to explanations for the lack of consensus embedded in data quality and availability, measurement issues, and shortcomings of the different methods employed. Finally, we suggest promising future research avenues relying on experimental work for microlevel analysis and reiterate the need for more region- and country-specific studies and improvements in the availability and reliability of data.


Author(s):  
Fulya Hisarlıoğlu ◽  
Lerna K Yanık ◽  
Umut Korkut ◽  
İlke Civelekoğlu

Abstract This article explores the link between populism and hierarchies in international relations by examining the recent foreign policy-making in Turkey and Hungary—two countries run by populist leaders. We argue that when populists bring populism into foreign policy, they do so by contesting the “corrupt elites” of the international order and, simultaneously, attempt to create the “pure people” transnationally. The populists contest the “eliteness” and leadership status of these “elites” and the international order and its institutions, that is, the “establishment,” that these “elites” have come to represent by challenging them both in discourse and in action. The creation of the “pure people” happens by discursively demarcating the “underprivileged” of the international order as a subcategory based on religion and supplementing them with aid, thus mimicking the distributive strategies of populism, this time at the international level. We illustrate that when populist leaders, insert populism into foreign policies of their respective states, through contesting the “corrupt elites” and creating the “pure people,” the built-in vertical stratification mechanisms of populism that stems from the antagonistic binaries inherent to populism provide them with the necessary superiority and inferiority labels allowing them to renegotiate hierarchies in the international system in an attempt to modify the existing ones or to create new ones.


Author(s):  
Tobias Lenz

Abstract How and with what effects do institutions diffuse between international organizations (IOs)? An emerging literature extends a key insight of the study of diffusion processes among states to the international level, establishing that the adoption of institutions in IOs is regularly conditioned by the choices of other IOs. Yet, this literature neglects a key contextual difference between the two settings: unlike in the hierarchically structured organizations that have dominated the literature on diffusion, institutional creation, and change in IOs are the result of decentralized bargaining among sovereign governments. This paper develops a heuristic model that shows how diffusion between IOs shapes decision-making within them through its impact on the institutional preferences of individual governments. The model establishes that, unlike in diffusion processes among states, convergence is an unlikely outcome of diffusion between IOs. By implication, studies that take institutional convergence as their starting point are likely to underestimate the pervasiveness of diffusion effects. I demonstrate these arguments with a case study of the establishment of a regional dispute settlement system in Mercosur, a regional organization in Latin America.


Author(s):  
Niklas Karlén ◽  
Vladimir Rauta ◽  
Idean Salehyan ◽  
Andrew Mumford ◽  
Belgin San-Akca ◽  
...  

Abstract This forum provides an outlet for an assessment of research on the delegation of war to non-state armed groups in civil wars. Given the significant growth of studies concerned with this phenomenon over the last decade, this forum critically engages with the present state of the field. First, we canvass some of the most important theoretical developments to demonstrate the heterogeneity of the debate. Second, we expand on the theme of complexity and investigate its multiple facets as a window into pushing the debate forward. Third, we draw the contours of a future research agenda by highlighting some contemporary problems, puzzles, and challenges to empirical data collection. In essence, we seek to connect two main literatures that have been talking past each other: external support in civil wars and proxy warfare. The forum bridges this gap at a critical juncture in this new and emerging scholarship by offering space for scholarly dialogue across conceptual labels.


Author(s):  
Dahlia Simangan ◽  
Ayyoob Sharifi ◽  
Shinji Kaneko

Abstract Despite broad recognition that peace and sustainability are interrelated, the pathways of their relationship remain ambiguous or nascent at best. We synthesized the literature relevant to the linkages between the two by framing our analysis around the pillars of positive peace and the dimensions of sustainability. Our review reveals that while the existing studies describe the conditions where peace and sustainability considerations interact, empirical evidence of their causal linkages appears limited. Nevertheless, this framing enabled us to consider some of the environmental, social, economic, and institutional conditions that influence the relationship between peace and sustainability. It also shows how our understanding of the peace–sustainability nexus can benefit from integrating environmental sustainability as one of the pillars of positive peace and negative peace as one of the dimensions of sustainability. This review presents opportunities for epistemic communities to navigate the factors and contexts that influence the pursuit of peace and sustainability.


Author(s):  
Abbas Farasoo

Abstract This paper explores the question of what drives proxy alignment in war and argues that current proxy war scholarship needs further thinking to go beyond focusing on the principal–agent theory and individual actors’ motivation analysis. Rather, there is a need to look at the generative mechanisms of proxy alignment as a process that constitutes patterns of friend–enemy relations. The paper argues securitization patterns from domestic to regional and international levels drive actors to re-evaluate their positions and define their enemies and friends. This is a process of securitization alignment and confluence, which serves as a generative mechanism for proxy alignment in a conflict. Securitization alignment is based on a convergence of securitizations by different actors that create a friend–enemy dynamic and convergence of security interests between actors. The confluence of securitizations from the domestic level to regional and beyond also connects actors across different levels to be in alignment and impact the conflict.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document