Progressing Fragmentation of Political Science

International Relations vs. Global Studies

Authors

  • Kseniya Oksamityna

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22151/politikon.15.1.4

Keywords:

global studies, international relations, fragmentation, globalization

Abstract

While state has traditionally been the sole (or at least primary) unit of analysis in International Relations, scholars are increasingly recognizing non-state entities, such as interstate organizations, multinational companies, terrorist cells, religious institutions, non-governmental organizations, epistemic communities, and transnational advocacy networks as actors in international politics. A natural question arises: is International Relations, as a discipline, capable of conceptualizing and explicating complex webs of relations among a myriad of actors, or is mapping a new field of enquiry required? Transnational Studies, offered at various degree levels at several universities, positions itself as a sub-filed within Humanities, mainly preoccupied with historical, social, cultural and linguistic aspects of cross-border interactions. Global Studies seems to reconcile International Relations and Transnational Studies. However, Global Studies, as a discipline, is only in the making; its emergence is surrounded by healthy skepticism.

Views: 479Downloads: 620

Downloads

Published

2009-04-30

Issue

Section

Review Essays

How to Cite

“Progressing Fragmentation of Political Science: International Relations Vs. Global Studies”. 2009. Politikon: The IAPSS Journal of Political Science 10 (1): 70-85. https://doi.org/10.22151/politikon.15.1.4.

Similar Articles

1-10 of 304

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.