Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

International Relations as a Scholarly Discipline

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
International Relations in Poland

  • 310 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter presents International Relations as a scholarly discipline and its developmental models in different states. It analyzes the historical development of the field, institutional setups, disciplinary power, as well as the theoretical and methodological preferences in the discipline in the USA, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Spain, Germany and Nordic states. It identifies distinctive IR models in continental Europe, i.e., “self-reliant,” “resigned marginalization,” and “multi-level research collaboration.” These models serve as a background for the presentation of Polish IR later in this book. The aim is to establish which of these models is the closest to IR in Poland. Finally, this chapter discusses IR in the Soviet Union, which, like Poland, remained under the influence of communist ideology in the Cold War period. There is no single way of organizing the discipline; the existing setups are deeply embedded in the history of the given country, the broad organization of its academia, as well as the position of the country within the global political and economic order.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Acharya, A., & Buzan, B. (2010). Conclusion: On the possibility of a non-western international relations theory. In A. Acharya & B. Buzan (Eds.), Non-western international relations theory: Perspectives on and beyond Asia (pp. 221–239). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amstrup, N. (1989). The study of international relations. Old or new? A historical outline (1500 to 1939) (Working Paper). Aarhus: Department of Political Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashworth, L. M. (2009). Interdisciplinarity and international relations. European Political Science, 8(1), 16–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, A. (2013). The mother of all isms: Causal mechanisms and structured pluralism in international relations theory. European Journal of International Relations, 19(3), 459–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biersteker, T. J. (2009). The parochialism of hegemony. Challenges for “American” international relations. In Arlene B. Tickner & Ole Wæver (Eds.), International relations scholarship around the world (pp. 308–327). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breitenbauch, H. Ø. (2013). International relations in France: Writing between discipline and state. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breitenbauch, H. Ø., & Wivel, A. (2004). Understanding national IR disciplines outside the United States. Political culture and the construction of international relations in Denmark. Journal of International Relations and Development, 7(4), 414–443.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bull, H. (1966). International theory: The case for a classical approach. World Politics, 18(3), 361–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buzan, B. (1999). The English school as a research programme. Paper for the BISA Conference, Manchester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buzan, B. & Little, R. (2001). Why international relations has failed as an intellectual project and what to do about it, Millennium, 30(1), 19–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buzan, B., & Little, R. (2010). World history and the development of non-western international relations theory. In A. Acharya & B. Buzan (Eds.), Non-western international relations theory: Perspectives on and beyond Asia (pp. 197–221). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chilland, M. (2009). International Relations in France: The ‘usual suspects’ in a French scientific field of study? European Political Science, 8, 239–253.

    Google Scholar 

  • C.A.S.E. Collective. (2006). Critical approaches to security in Europe: A networked manifesto. Security Dialogue, 37(4), 443–487.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, W. S., & Nossal, K. R. (2009). The “crimson world”: The Anglo core, the post-imperial non-core, and the hegemony of American IR. In A. B. Tickner & O. Wæver (Eds.), International relations scholarship around the world (pp. 287–307). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, R. M. A. (2001). Where Have All the Theorists Gone – Gone to Britain, Every One? The story of two Parochialisms in International Relations. In: Crawford & Jervis, International Relations – Still an American Social Science? Towards Diversity on International Thought, New York: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Czaputowicz, J. (2012). Czy interdyscyplinarność jest właściwym kierunkiem rozwoju stosunków międzynarodowych w Polsce? [Is interdisciplinarity the proper direction for the development of international relations in Poland?]. In A. Gałganek, E. Haliżak & M. Piertaś (Ed.), Wielo- i interdyscyplinarność nauki o stosunkach międzynarodowych [Multi- and interdisciplinarity in the study of international relations] (pp. 229–246). Warszawa: Polskie Towarzystwo Studiów Międzynarodowych, Wydawnictwo Rambler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Czaputowicz, J., & Ławniczak, K. (2015). Ankieta teaching, research and international policy 2014 w Polsce. Raport z badań. Warszawa: Wydział Dziennikarstwa i Nauk Politycznych, Uniwersytet Warszawski.

    Google Scholar 

  • Czaputowicz, J., & Stasiak, D. (2013). Political expertise in Poland in the field of foreign policy and the emergence of think tanks. In S. Brooks, D. Stasiak, & T. Żyro (Eds.), Policy expertise in contemporary democracies (pp. 165–182). Farnham: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Madariaga, S. (1937). Theory and practice of international relations. Philadelphia, PA: Swarhmore College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drulák, P. (2009). Introduction to international relations (IR) in Central and Eastern Europe Forum. Journal of International Relations and Development, 12(2), 168–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, Y. H. (2014). The transatlantic tennis match in IR Theory: Personal reflections. European Review of International Studies, 1(1), 18–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira-Pereira, L. C., & Freire, M. R. (2009). International relations in Portugal: The state of the field and beyond. Global Society. doi:10.1080/13600820802556850.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedrichs, J. (2004). European approaches to international relations theory: A house with many mansions. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedrichs, J. (2006). The Nordic countries. In: Jørgensen & Knudsen (Eds.). International Relations in Europe. Traditions, perspectives and destinations. London, New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedrichs, J., & Wæver, O. (2009). Western Europe. Structure and strategy at the national and regional levels. In A. B. Tickner & O. Wæver (Eds.), International relations scholarship around the world (pp. 261–286). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • George, A. L., & Bennett, A. (2005). Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giesen, K.-G. (2006). France and other French-speaking countries (1945−1994). In K. E. Jørgensen & T. B. Knudsen (Ed.), International relations in Europe. Traditions, perspectives and destinations (pp. 19–46). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golovin, I. (1844). Science de la politique. Paris: Éditeur Cappelle. Retrieved April 12, 2015, from http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k37011x.

  • Groom, A. J. R., & Lequesne, C. (2014). Foreword. European Review of International Studies, 1(1), 5–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grosser, A. (1965). L’étude des relations internationales: spécialité Américaine? Revue française des science politique, 6(3), 634–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guzzini, S. (2013). The periphery starts in our heads. Przegląd Europejski, 1(27), 14–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, K. J., Baum, M. A., & Breuning, M. (2013). Women and pre-tenure scholarly productivity in international studies: An investigation into the leaky career pipeline. International Studies Perspectives, 14(4), 507–527.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hellmann, G. (1994). Für eine problemorientiere Grundlagenforschung: Kritik und Perspektiven der Disziplin. Zeitschrift für Internationale Bezeihungen, 1(1), 65–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann, S. (1977). An American social science. International relations. Daedalus, 106(3), 41–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humrich, C. (2006). Germany. In K. E. Jørgensen & T. B. Knudsen (Ed.), International relations in Europe. Traditions, perspectives and destinations. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • International relations study in six European countries: The United Kingdom, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands, Italy: Reports to Ford Foundation. (1976). New York: Ford Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen, K. E. (2004). Towards a six continents social science: International relations. Journal of International Relations and Development, 6(4), 330–343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen, K. E., & Knudsen, T. B. (Eds.). (2006). International relations in Europe: Traditions, perspectives and destinations. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karran, T. (2007). Academic freedom in Europe: A preliminary comparative analysis. Higher Education Policy, 20(3), 289–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, G., Keohane, R. O., & Verba, S. (1994). Designing social inquiry. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohler-Koch, B. (Ed.). (1989). Regime in den Internationalen Beziehungen. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kristensen, P. M. (2012). Dividing discipline: Structures of communication in international relations. International Studies Review, 14(1), 32–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy, J. (1997). Too important to the other: History and political science in the study of international relations. International Security, 22(1), 22–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucarelli, S., & Menotti, R. (2006). Italy. In K. E. Jørgensen & T. B. Knudsen (Ed.), International relations in Europe. Traditions, perspectives and destinations (pp. 47–71). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mearsheimer, J., & Walt, S. (2013). Leaving theory behind: Why simplistic hypothesis testing is bad for international relations. European Journal of International Relations, 19(3), 427–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgenthau, H. J. (1959). The nature and limits of a theory of international relations. In W. T. R. Fox (Ed.), Theoretical aspects of international relations (pp. 15–28). Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, H. (1994). Internationale Beziehungen als kommunikatives Handeln, Zur Kritik der utilitaristischen Handlungstheorien. Zeitschrift für Internationale Bezeihungen, 1(1), 15–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, H. (2014). US and European IR communities and foreign policy. A comparative speculation. European Review of International Studies, 1(1), 88–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nye, J. S. (2008). The relevance of theory to practice. In C. Reuss-Smit & D. Snidal (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of international relations (pp. 648–660). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nye, J. S. (2009, April 13). Scholars on the sidelines. Washington Post.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, S., Tierney, M. J., & Maliniak, D. (2005). Teaching and research practices, views on the discipline, and policy attitudes of international relations faculty at U.S. Colleges and Universities. Williamsburg: College of William and Mary.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rittberger, V. (Ed.). (1993). Regime theory of international relations. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, C. B. (1998). The political discourse of anarchy: A disciplinary history of international relations. New York: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarzenberger, G. (1941). Power politics: An introduction to the study of international relations and post-war planning. London: Jonathan Cape.

    Google Scholar 

  • Segura, C. G. (2006). Spain. In K. E. Jørgensen & T. B. Knudsen (Ed.), International relations in Europe. Traditions, perspectives and destinations (pp. 100–124). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sergounin, A. (2009). Russia. IR at the crossroads. In A. B. Tickner & O. Wæver (Eds.), International relations scholarship around the world (pp. 223–241). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharman, J. C., & Weaver, C. E. (2013). Between the covers: International relations in books. Political Science and Politics, 46(1), 124–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, S. (2000). The discipline of international relations: Still an American social science? British Journal of International Relations, 2(3), 374–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smouts, M. -C. (1998). Introduction. La Mutation d’une discipline. In M. -C. Smouts (Ed.), Les Nouvelles Relations Internationales. Pratiques et théories (pp. 11–33). Paris: Presses de Sciences PO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soutou, G.-H. (2014). A French whisper among European voices. European Review of International Studies, 1(1), 111–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsygankov, A. P., & Tsygankov, P. A. (2004). New directions in Russian international studies: Pluralization, westernization, and isolationism. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 37(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsygankov, A., & Tsygankov, P. (2014). Russian IR theory: The crisis of a globally-pluralist discipline. European Review of International Studies, 1(2), 92–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turton, H. L. (2015). International relations and American dominance: A diverse discipline. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Volgy, T. J. (2014). A cautious but optimistic view from the other side of the water’s edge. European Review of International Studies, 1(1), 141–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wæver, O. (1998). The Sociology of not so international discipline. American and European developments in international relations. International Organization, 52(4), 687–727.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wemheuer-Vogelaar, W., & Risse, T. (2016). International relations scholars in Germany: Young, internationalised, and non-paradigmatic. German Politics. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09644008.2016.1253683.

  • Wight, M. (1991). International theory: The three traditions. Leicester: Leicester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wojciuk, A. (2014). International dimensions of higher education in the age of knowledge. Stosunki Międzynarodowe, 1(49), 219–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wojciuk, A., Michałek, M., & Stormowska, M. (2015). Education as a source and tool of soft power in international relations. European Political Science, 14(3), 298–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmern, A. E. (Ed.). (1939). L’Enseignement Universitaire des Relations Internationales. Paris: Institute International de Cooperation Intellectuelle.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zürn, M. (1994). We can do much better! Aber muss es auf amerikanisch sein? Zeitschrift für Internationale Bezeihungen, 1(1), 91–114.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of European Studies, Faculty of Political Sciences and International Studies, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland

    Jacek Czaputowicz

  2. Institute of International Relations, Faculty of Political Sciences and International Studies, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland

    Anna Wojciuk

Authors
  1. Jacek Czaputowicz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anna Wojciuk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jacek Czaputowicz .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Czaputowicz, J., Wojciuk, A. (2017). International Relations as a Scholarly Discipline. In: International Relations in Poland. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60564-7_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation