The Re-integration of Regional Studies as a Sub-Discipline of International Relations

  • Author: Jakub Zajączkowski
  • Institution: University of Warsaw (Poland)
  • ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1459-3850
  • Year of publication: 2024
  • Source: Show
  • Pages: 5-24
  • DOI Address: https://doi.org/10.15804/ppsy202439
  • PDF: ppsy/53-4/ppsy2024401.pdf

The aim of this article is to analyse the ontological and epistemological dimensions of the main stages of the development of regional studies as a sub-discipline of international relations. The research problem of the article focuses on the interdependence and significance of regional studies as a sub-discipline within the scholarly discipline of international relations. The issue of regionalism and the region arose in the period of the establishment of international relations as a scholarly discipline during the interwar years, and was further conceptualized in the 1950s and 1960s during the Cold War period. The status of regional studies was then marginalized in methodological, ontological and epistemological discourse by the main theoretical trends of international relations. As a result, it was only after the end of the Cold War that we witnessed a gradual, systemic process of reintegration of regional studies within the discipline. This article argues that the reintegration of regional studies into the discipline of international relations is a function of two parallel processes that are interrelated: the transformation of the liberal international order after the end of the Cold War and increased pluralism in scholarly discourse within the discipline of international relations. These developments and their associated academic implications have contributed to the consolidation and strengthening of regional studies as a major subdiscipline of international relations.

REFERENCES:

  • Acharya, A. (2006). International relations and area studies: Towards a new synthesis?. Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, Nanyang Technological University.
  • Acharya, A. (2014). Global international relations (IR) and regional worlds: A new agenda for international studies. International studies quarterly, 58(4), 647-659.
  • Acharya, A. (2016). Advancing global IR: Challenges, contentions, and contributions. International studies review, 18(1), 4-15.
  • Ahram, A. I., Köllner, P., & Sil, R. (Eds.). (2018). Comparative area studies: Methodological rationales and cross-regional applications. Oxford University Press.
  • Alcaro, R. (2018). Contestation and transformation. Final thoughts on the liberal international order. In The Liberal Order and its Contestations (pp. 152-167). Routledge.
  • Alcaro, R. (2018). The liberal order and its contestations. A conceptual framework. The International Spectator, 53(1), 1-10.
  • Anderl, F., & Witt, A. (2020). Problematising the global in Global IR. Millennium, 49(1), 32-57.
  • Aning, K., & Edu-Afful, F. (2016). African agency in R2P: Interventions by African Union and ECOWAS in Mali, Cote D’ivoire, and Libya. International Studies Review, 18(1), 120-133.
  • Baldwin, D. (1993). Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate. Columbia University Press google schola, 2, 4-17.
  • Barbieri, G. (2019). Regionalism, globalism and complexity: a stimulus towards global IR?. Third World Thematics: A TWQ Journal, 4(6), 424-441.
  • Bates, R. H. (1997). Area studies and the discipline: a useful controversy?. PS: Political Science & Politics, 30(2), 166-169.
  • Bilgin, P., & Futák-Campbell, B. (2021). Introduction: Globalizing (the study of) regionalism in international relations. In Globalizing regionalism and international relations (pp. 3-26). Bristol University Press.
  • Binder, L. (1958). The Middle East as a subordinate international system. World politics, 10(3), 408-429.
  • Börzel, T. A. (2011). Comparative regionalism: A new research agenda.
  • Brecher, M. (1963). International relations and Asian studies: the subordinate state system of Southern Asia. World Politics, 15(2), 213-235.
  • Buzan B, Weaver O (2003) Regions and Power—The Structure of International Security. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  • Buzan, B. (2012). Asia: A geopolitical reconfiguration. Politique étrangère, 77(2), 13p-13p.
  • Buzan, B. (2012). How regions were made, and the legacies for world politics: an English School reconnaissance. International relations theory and regional transformation, 22-46.
  • Cantori, L.J., & Speigel, S.L. (1969). International Regions. A Comparative Approach to Five Subordinate Systems. International studies quarterly, 4, 361-380.
  • Cantori, L. J., & Spiegel, S. L. (1970). The international relations of regions. Polity, 2(4), 397-425.
  • Cantori, L.J, & Spiegel, S.L. (1973), The Analysis of Regional International Politics: The Integration Versus the Empirical Systems Approach. International Organization, 4, 465-494.
  • Carlsnaes, W., Simmons, B. A., & Risse, T. (2012). Handbook of international relations.
  • Chivvis, C. S., & Geaghan-Breiner, B. (2024). Emerging Powers and the Future of American Statecraft. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
  • Cox, K., Robinson, J., & Low, M. (2007). The SAGE handbook of political geography. The SAGE Handbook of Political Geography, 1-640.
  • Crampton, J. W., Roberts, S. M., & Poorthuis, A. (2014). The new political economy of geographical intelligence. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 104(1), 196-214.
  • Cumings, B. (1997). Boundary displacement: Area studies and international studies during and after the Cold War. Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars, 29(1), 6-26.
  • Deciancio, M. (2016). International relations from the south: A regional research agenda for global IR. International studies review, 18(1), 106-119.
  • Destradi, S., Nolte, D., & Prys-Hansen, M. (2018). Regional powers still matter!.
  • Deudney, D., & Ikenberry, G. J. (1999). The nature and sources of liberal international order. Review of international studies, 25(2), 179-196.
  • Duroselle, J. B. (1952). Area studies: Problems of method. International Social Science Bulletin, 4, 636-647.
  • Guillaume, X. (2010). International Relations and Identity: A dialogical approach. Routledge.
  • Fawcett L. (2005), Regionalism from Historical Perspective, in: Global Politics of Regionalism: Theory and Practise, ed. M. Farrell, B. Hettne, L. van Langenhove, London. 28.
  • Haliżak, E. (Ed.). (2024). Encyklopedia stosunków międzynarodowych. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
  • Haliżak E., & Zajączkowski, J. (2024). Studia regionalne, in: Encyklopedia stosunków międzynarodowych., ed. E. Haliżak, Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar. 229-244.
  • Halizak, E., & Zajączkowski, J. (2021). Regional Studies within the Discipline of International Relations to 1989. Nowa Polityka Wschodnia, 9.
  • Haliżak, E. (2019), Poland’s Participation in the Works of the International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation and the Conference of Higher International Studies in the Interwar Period (1923–1939), in: Poland in International Institutions in the Years 1918–2018, ed. E. Haliżak, T. Łoś-Nowak, A. Potyrała, J. Starzyk-Sulejewska, National Center for Culture, Polish Society for International Studies, Warsaw.
  • Haliżak, E. (2006), Regionalizm w stosunkach międzynarodowych, in: Stosunki międzynarodowe. Geneza, Struktura, Dynamika, eds. E. Haliżak, R. Kuźniar, Wydwnictwo Scholar, 282-283.
  • Hartshorne, R. (1939), Nature of Geography: A Critical Survey of Current Thought in the Light of the Past,Washington.
  • Haushofer, K. (1946). Apologie der deutschen Geopolitik. In E. Walsh (Ed.), Wahre anstatt falsche Geopolitik für Deutschland. (pp. 18-23), Frankfurt am Main, Verlag G. Schutte-Bulmke.
  • He, J. (2016). Normative Power in the EU and ASEAN: Why they Diverge. International Studies Review, 18(1), 92-105.
  • Hellmann, G., & Wolf, R. (1993). Neorealism, neoliberal institutionalism, and the future of NATO. Security Studies, 3(1), 3-43.
  • Hettne, B., & Söderbaum, F. (1998). The new regionalism approach. Politeia, 17(3), 6-21.
  • Hettne B. (2005), Beyond the “New Regionalism”. New Political Economy, 4, 543-571.
  • Hodgett, S., & James, P. (2018). Context–Theorizing the New Area Studies. Necessary Travel, 1.
  • Hurrell, A. (2007). One world? Many worlds? The place of regions in the study of international society. International affairs, 83(1), 127-146.
  • Hurrell, A. (2016). Beyond critique: How to study global IR?. International Studies Review, 18(1), 149-151.
  • Hurrell, A. (2020). Why international relations and area studies need each other. St Antony’s International Review, 16(1), 191-196.
  • Kaczmarska, K., & Ortmann, S. (2021). IR theory and area studies: A plea for displaced knowledge about international politics. Journal of International Relations and Development, 24(4), 820-847.
  • Kaplan, M. A. (1969). Macropolitics. Ardent Media.
  • Katzenstein, P. J. (2002). Area studies, regional studies, and international relations. Journal of East Asian Studies, 2(1), 127-137.
  • Kelly, R. E. (2007). Security theory in the “new regionalism”. International studies review, 9(2), 197-229.
  • Kubik, J. (2015). Between Contextualization and Comparison: A Thorny Relationship between East European Studies and Disciplinary “Mainstreams”. East European Politics and Societies, 29(2), 352-365.
  • Lahteenmaki, K., & Kakonen, J. (1999). Regionalization and its Impact on the Theory of International Relations. In Globalism and the new regionalism (pp. 203-227). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
  • Long, D. (2006). Who Killed the International Studies Conference?. Review of International Studies, 32(4), 603-622.
  • Łukaszuk, T.  (2018), The Concept of Maritime Governance in International Relations, Stosunki Międzynarodowe-International Relation, 4, 123-144.
  • Mackinder, H. J. (2004). The geographical pivot of history (1904). The geographical journal, 170(4), 298-321.
  • Mahan, A. T. (1890). The influence of sea power upon history, 1660-1783. Read Books Ltd.
  • Morgenthau, H. J. (1952). Area studies and the study of international relations. International Social Science Bulletin, 4, 647-654.
  • Onuf, N. (2013). Making sense, making worlds: Constructivism in social theory and international relations. Routledge.
  • Paul, T. V. (Ed.). (2012). International relations theory and regional transformation. Cambridge University Press.
  • Pike, A. (2007). Whither regional studies?. Regional Studies, 41(9), 1143-1148.
  • Pike, A. (Ed.). (2009). Whither regional studies?. London: Routledge.
  • Prys-Hansen, M., & Frazier, D. (2024). The regional powers research program: a new way forward. International Politics, 61(1), 1-12.
  • Reus-Smit, C., & Snidal, D. (Eds.). (2008). The Oxford handbook of international relations. Oxford University Press.
  • Riemens, M. (2011). International academic cooperation on international relations in the interwar period: the International Studies Conference. Review of International Studies, 37(2), 911-928.
  • Riggirozzi, P. (2012). Region, regionness and regionalism in Latin America: towards a new synthesis. New Political Economy, 17(4), 421-443.
  • Russett, B. M. (1968). Components of an operational theory of international alliance formation. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 12(3), 285-301.
  • Saran, S. (2018). India’s role in a liberal post-western world. In The Liberal Order and its Contestations (pp. 92-108). Routledge.
  • Schmidt, B. C., Wight, C., Fearon, J., Wendt, A., Snidal, D., Adler, E., ... & Baldwin, D. A. (2002). Handbook of international relations (pp. 3-22). Sage. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848608290.
  • Shaw, T. M. (2013). Roads to Regionalism: Genesis, Design, and Effects of Regional Organizations. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.
  • Spykman, N. (2017). Heartland and rimland. In The Structure of Political Geography (pp. 170-177). Routledge.
  • Sui, D. Z. (1994). GIS and urban studies: positivism, post-positivism, and beyond. Urban geography, 15(3), 258-278.
  • Szanton, D. L. (Ed.). (2004). The politics of knowledge: Area studies and the disciplines. Univ of California Press.
  • Thompson, W. R. (1973). The regional subsystem: a conceptual explication and a propositional inventory. International Studies Quarterly, 17(1), 89-117.
  • Tickner, A. B. (2013). Core, periphery and (neo) imperialist International Relations. European Journal of International Relations, 19(3), 627-646.
  • Väyrynen, R. (2003). Regionalism: old and new. International Studies Review, 5(1), 25-51.
  • Waltz, K. N. (1979). The anarchic structure of world politics. International politics: enduring concepts and contemporary issues, 29-49.
  • Weingast, B. R., & Wittman, D. (2008). The Oxford handbook of political economy. Oxford University Press.
  • Wright, Q. (1955). The Study of International Relations. Appleton-Century-Crofts.
  • Zajączkowski J. (2013), Poziomy analizy regionalnej w nauce o stosunkach międzynarodowych, in: Poziomy analizy stosunków międzynarodowych, ed. E. Haliżak, M. Pietraś, Polskie Towarzystwo Studiów Międzynarodowych, Wydawnictwo Rambler, 65-88.
  • Zartman, I. W. (1967). Africa as a subordinate state system in international relations. International Organization, 21(3), 545-564.

Liberal International Order Sub-discipline Regional and Global Studies discipline of international relations regional studies

Message to:

 

 

© 2017 Adam Marszałek Publishing House. All rights reserved.

Projekt i wykonanie Pollyart