Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
33,169
result(s) for
"International relations theory"
Sort by:
International relations theory : the game theoretic approach
\"Written for advanced undergraduate and graduate students, this is the first textbook on international relations theory to take a specifically game theoretic approach to the subject, and provide the material needed for students to understand the subject thoroughly, from its basic foundations to more complex models. International relations theory is presented and analysed using simple games, which allow students to grasp the concepts and mechanisms involved with the rationalist approach without the distraction of complicated math. Chapter exercises reinforce key concepts and guide students to extend the models discussed. Drawing examples from international security, international political economy and environmental negotiations, this introductory textbook examines a broad array of topics in international relations courses, including state preferences, normal form games, bargaining, uncertainty and communication, multilateral cooperation and the impact of domestic politics\"-- Provided by publisher.
Book
The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory
Hopf discusses the constructivist challenge to neorealism and neoliberal institutionalism and offers a constructivist research agenda that seeks a middle ground between mainstream international relations and critical theory.
Journal Article
Critical international theory : an intellectual history
This book tells the story of critical theory's introduction into the study of international relations.
Book
Why Is There No Reactionary International Theory?
Why is there no reactionary international theory? International relations has long drawn on a range of traditions in political thought. However, no current, or even recent, major school of international-relations theory embraces reactionary doctrine. This is more surprising than some might assume. Reaction was once common in the field and is now increasingly common in world politics. In this note, we define reaction and show that no active and influential school of international-relations theory falls within its ideological domain. Nonetheless, reactionary ideas once deeply shaped the field. We identify two distinct kinds of reactionary international politics and illustrate them empirically. We argue that the current lack of reactionary international relations undermines the field’s ability to make sense both of its own history and of reactionary practice. Finally, we offer some preliminary thoughts about why reactionary ideas hold little sway in contemporary international-relations theory.
Journal Article
Practice Theory and Relationalism as the New Constructivism
In this theory note, I address two new approaches in international relations theory gaining adherents and producing insightful applications: practice theory and relationalism. Practice theory draws attention to everyday logics in world politics.It stresses how international actors are driven less by abstract notions of the national interest, identities, or preferences than by context-dependent practical imperatives. Relationalism rejects the idea that entities—like states and international organizations—are the basic units of world politics. It replaces them with a focus on ongoing processes. Noting similarities in their arguments to those advanced by early constructivists, I argue that, taken together, practice theory and relationalism represent the New Constructivism in International Relations (IR). A practice-relational turn became necessary because the meaning of constructivism narrowed over time, becoming tied to a specific scientific ontology focusing on the role of identity, norms, and culture in world politics. This ontology unduly narrowed constructivism's theoretical lenses, which practice theory and relationalism productively reopen.
Journal Article
The Im/Possibility of Building Indigenous Theories in a Hegemonic Discipline: The Case of Japanese International Relations
A growing number of Asian scholars have been engaging in indigenous theory-building that seeks to gain wider recognition for their local experiences and intellectual traditions in an international relations discipline that is still dominated by Western theories and methods. After examining recent attempts to develop a distinctive Japanese approach to world politics, I argue that such attempts should proceed with great caution, for their epistemological underpinnings remain Eurocentric. A close look at the Japanese conceptions of international society indicates that they reproduce, rather than challenge, a normative hierarchy embedded in the English school between the creators of Westphalian norms and those at the receiving end. To take seriously the agency role of non-Western ideas in gearing the discipline in a truly international, less hegemonic direction, Japanese IR should recognize the plural origins and constitutional structures of international society and learn from social science and humanities communities in Asia and beyond.
Journal Article
Why Don't We Have Coherent Theories of International Relations About Globalization?
This article offers a systematic and critical attempt to consider the question of why the discipline of international relations is at something of a loss to deal with the concept of globalization at a theoretical level. The article discusses this theoretical deficit by raising the following questions: How should we cope with globalization from an IR perspective? Why don't we have coherent theories of IR about globalization? What should we do about that? We argue that although there is a theoretical need to theorize globalization in the framework of conventional IR theories, there are serious impediments that preclude us from developing coherent IR theories about globalization, mainly due to the inherent incompatibility between the features of conventional IR theories and the concept and realities of globalization.
Journal Article