Lost in translation: a critique of constructivist norm research

被引:35
|
作者
Hofferberth, Matthias [1 ]
Weber, Christian [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Texas San Antonio, Dept Polit Sci & Geog, San Antonio, TX 78249 USA
[2] Fernuniv, Univ Hagen, Dept Polit Sci, D-58084 Hagen, Germany
关键词
constructivism; international relations theory; norms; WORLD; PRAGMATISM; WEST;
D O I
10.1057/jird.2014.1
中图分类号
D81 [国际关系];
学科分类号
030207 ;
摘要
In their attempt to explain change in international politics, an emerging group of scholars in the 1990s emphasised the importance of 'non-material factors'. Questions about the creation, evolution, and impact of norms obtained a prominent place in their theorising. Cast in a constructivist frame, this norm research promised to be a viable alternative to established approaches and while it has indeed broadened the perspective on state behaviour in International Relations, we argue that at the same time it entailed major conceptual and methodological problems which have not yet been spelled out comprehensively. Mainly, the insight that norms are constantly renegotiated in social interaction has been lost in the translation of social-theoretical claims of early constructivism into empirical research agendas. The ensuing research is best characterised as a cultural-determinist framework which is ultimately ill-equipped for the initial proposition of explaining change. We develop this critique by reconstructing the theoretical and methodological decisions of constructivist norm research. We then propose to re-conceptualise the connection between norms and action and suggest an interpretive methodology that allows delivering on the ambitious promise to explain processes of normative change in international politics. We illustrate this claim by reviewing constructivist norm research on 'humanitarian interventions' and by outlining a relational-processualist perspective on this issue.
引用
收藏
页码:75 / 103
页数:29
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Lost in translation: a critique of constructivist norm research
    Matthias Hofferberth
    Christian Weber
    [J]. Journal of International Relations and Development, 2015, 18 : 75 - 103
  • [2] On Lost in Translation A Pessimistic Critique of Consumerism
    Brence, Steven
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SPECULATIVE PHILOSOPHY, 2022, 36 (01): : 34 - 50
  • [3] Research - Lost in translation?
    Mitchell, PH
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL NURSING, 2004, 20 (04) : 214 - 215
  • [4] Research - not lost in translation
    Lund, Valerie J.
    [J]. RHINOLOGY, 2006, 44 (04) : 225 - 226
  • [5] A critique of “Forest School” or something lost in translation
    Leather M.
    [J]. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 2018, 21 (1) : 5 - 18
  • [6] Writing Norms: Constructivist Norm Research and the Politics of Ambiguity
    Engelkamp, Stephan
    Glaab, Katharina
    [J]. ALTERNATIVES, 2015, 40 (3-4) : 201 - 218
  • [7] Surgical research: Lost in translation?
    Watson, David I.
    [J]. ANZ JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2008, 78 (05) : 358 - 359
  • [8] Research in Action Lost without translation?
    Watts, Geoff
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2010, 341
  • [9] Research in neurological diseases: lost in translation?
    Griffin, JW
    [J]. NATURE CLINICAL PRACTICE NEUROLOGY, 2006, 2 (02): : 59 - 59
  • [10] Mental Health Research - "Lost in Translation?"
    Fegert, Joerg M.
    Baumeister, Harald
    Brieger, Peter
    Gallinat, Juergen
    Grabe, Hans J.
    Guendel, Harald
    Haerter, Martin
    Oexle, Nathalie
    Prestin, Elke
    Rassenhofer, Miriam
    Riedel-Heller, Steffi G.
    Ruesch, Nicolas
    Schaefer, Ingo
    Schomerus, Georg
    Schulz, Holger
    Speck, Andreas
    Steinhart, Ingmar
    Stengler, Katarina
    Becker, Thomas
    [J]. PSYCHIATRISCHE PRAXIS, 2019, 46 (02) : 70 - 72