Contextualizing the Contextualizers: How the Area Studies Controversy is Different in Different Places

Author:

Busse Jan1ORCID,Valbjørn Morten2ORCID,Doolotkeldieva Asel3,Ortmann Stefanie4,Smith Karen5,Shami Seteney6,Costa Sérgio7,Weipert-Fenner Irene8ORCID,Wolff Jonas8ORCID,Schäfer Saskia9ORCID,Osterberg-Kaufmann Norma9ORCID

Affiliation:

1. University of the Bundeswehr Munich , Germany

2. Aarhus University , Denmark

3. OSCE Academy Bishkek , Kyrgyzstan

4. University of Sussex , UK

5. Leiden University, Netherlands and University of Cape Town , South Africa

6. Arab Council for the Social Sciences , Lebanon

7. Freie Universität Berlin , Germany

8. Peace Research Institute Frankfurt , Germany

9. Humboldt University of Berlin , Germany

Abstract

Abstract As part of recent years’ efforts at reaching a more context- and diversity-sensitive study of international relations, the nexus between fields of IR and Area Studies (AS) has received a renewed attention. While AS is usually presented as the “contextualizer” of the disciplines, this forum reverses the perspective by suggesting that an awareness of both diversity and context is also relevant when it comes to understanding the evolution of the field of AS and its relations to IR. In this forum, a selection of scholars with diverse backgrounds (US, Middle East, Europe, Latin America, Africa, and Central Asia), different (inter)disciplinary trainings and regional orientations examines how various fields of AS and its relations to the disciplines vary, and what follows from a stronger attention to such kind of diversity. By contextualizing the contextualizers, the forum brings attention to how a context-sensitive field can also suffer from its own provincialism. While the US-centric narrative about AS might have been almost “hegemonic,” at closer inspection, it turns out that AS in different (sub)disciplinary and geographical settings have evolved differently, and in some places the so-called Area Studies controversy (ASC) has been almost absent. A broadening of the perspective also reveals how the challenges to a successful cross-fertilization are not limited to those outlined in the “classic” ASC, but the forum does simultaneously offer encouraging lessons on how dialogues between area specialists and discipline-oriented scholars can help to overcome epistemological, theoretical, or methodological blind spots. Rather than presenting the IR/AS nexus as a panacea per se, the aim of the forum is therefore to invite to a broader and more self-reflective discussion on some of the opportunities as well as challenges associated with this strategy for making the study of international relations more context-sensitive and attentive to different forms of diversity.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Political Science and International Relations,Geography, Planning and Development

Reference115 articles.

1. Africa and International Relations: Assembling Africa, Studying the World;Abrahamsen;African Affairs,2016

2. Zones of Theory in the Anthropology of the Arab World;Abu-Lughod;Annual Review of Anthropology,1989

3. Feature Interview with Amitav Acharya;Acharya;St Antony's International Review,2020

4. Critical Humanities in the Arab Region: Trends and Futures;ACSS—Arab Council for the Social Sciences,2023

5. Practices of Sustainability and the Enactment of Their Natures/Cultures: Ecosystem Services, Rights of Nature, and Geoengineering;Adloff;Social Science Information,2021

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3