logo for Georgetown University Press
International Institutions and Power Politics
Bridging the Divide
Anders Wivel and T.V. Paul, Editors
Georgetown University Press, 2019

This book moves scholarly debates beyond the old question of whether or not international institutions matter in order to examine how they matter, even in a world of power politics. Power politics and international institutions are often studied as two separate domains, but this is in need of rethinking because today most states strategically use institutions to further their interests. Anders Wivel, T.V. Paul, and the international group of contributing authors update our understanding of how institutions are viewed among the major theoretical paradigms in international relations, and they seek to bridge the divides. Empirical chapters examine specific institutions in practice, including the United Nations, International Atomic Energy Agency, and the European Union. The book also points the way to future research. International Institutions and Power Politics provides insights for both international relations theory and practical matters of foreign affairs, and it will be essential reading for all international relations scholars and advanced students.

[more]

front cover of Interpretive Quantification
Interpretive Quantification
Methodological Explorations for Critical and Constructivist IR
J. Samuel Barkin and Laura Sjoberg, editors
University of Michigan Press, 2017
Countering the growing divide between positivists who embrace quantitative, numerical approaches and post-positivist scholars who favor qualitative, interpretive approaches, J. Samuel Barkin and Laura Sjoberg argue that both methods are more widely adaptable than is commonly assumed by either camp.

In Interpretive Quantification, ten highly regarded scholars in the field of International Relations apply quantitative methods and formal models to specific constructivist and critical research questions. In this way, each chapter serves not only as evidence that methods can productively be applied across paradigms, but also as a guide as to how this may be done. In sum, the contributors make a compelling case that when researchers cordon off particular methods for merely ideological reasons, they circumscribe their own paradigms and hinder their own research agenda.

[more]


Send via email Share on Facebook Share on Twitter