Historically, the International Relations (IR) discipline has established its boundaries, issues, and theories based upon Western experience and traditions of thought. This series explores the role of geocultural factors, institutions, and academic practices in creating the concepts, epistemologies, and methodologies through which IR knowledge is produced. This entails identifying alternatives for thinking about the "international" that are more in tune with local concerns and traditions outside the West. But it also implies provincializing Western IR and empirically studying the practice of producing IR knowledge at multiple sites within the so-called ‘West’.
We welcome book proposals in areas such as:
Series Editors: Arlene B. Tickner, Universidad del Rosario, Colombia, David Blaney, Macalester College, USA and Inanna Hamati-Ataya, University of Cambridge, UK
Founding Editor: Ole Wæver, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Thinking International Relations Differently
Arlene B. Tickner, David L. Blaney
February 07, 2012
A host of voices has risen to challenge Western core dominance of the field of International Relations (IR), and yet, intellectual production about world politics continues to be highly skewed. This book is the second volume in a trilogy of titles that tries to put the "international" back into IR ...
Arlene B. Tickner, Ole Wæver
June 19, 2009
It has become widely accepted that the discipline of International Relations (IR) is ironically not "international" at all. IR scholars are part of a global discipline with a single, shared object of study - the world, and yet theorizing gravitates around a number of concepts that have been ...