European Workshops in International Studies (EWIS)

4th European Workshops in International Studies (EWIS)
Cardiff, 07-10 June 2017

CALL FOR PAPERS

The European Workshops in International Studies (EWIS) 2017 take place at Cardiff University, UK from 07-10 June 2017. There will be 24 workshops. You can find a full list of workshops with convenors and a short description below. Please submit your abstracts using the conftool electronic submission system and ensure that your abstracts - of 200 words or less - address the relevant workshop call.

WS A: The politicisation of expertise: Contentious knowledge politics in international organizations

WS A: Foreign Policy Analysis and Public Policy: Towards Theoretical Dialogue and Integration

Convenors: Katharina Glaab (Norwegian University of Life Sciences), Lisbeth Zimmermann (PRIF/Goethe University)

Expertise and knowledge matter in global governance and are depicted as the basis for reasoned political decision-making in international organizations. Whilst advice based on science, statistics and quantifiable data is the most conventional basis of expertise, expertise and knowledge come from various facets, from scientific to political and cultural, and from knowledge of procedures to knowledge of practices and knowledge of technologies.

This workshop explores how expertise and knowledge become contentious and asks how knowledge and expertise are legitimised, how they circulate and become authoritative in international organizations. This workshops brings together scholars from a broad range of policy fields, such as environment, security, development, peacebuilding and international trade and finances.

The workshop aims at exploring (but is not limited to) the following questions:

  • How is expertise and knowledge understood and institutionalised in IOs ranging from formal to informal practices? In other words, who counts as an expert, how are such experts involved and with what effects?
  • How does knowledge and expertise circulate, translate and ‘move’ within and between international organisations?
  • What forms of knowledge and expertise become authoritative in IOs? How are claims to knowledge performed? When and how does expertise become contentious?
  • Are claims to expertise and knowledge dealt with as complementary or as competitive? What role does technology and data play in the performance of expertise? How do IOs legitimize expertise towards a broader public?
  • What is our own role in knowledge production and writing on IOs?

WS B: “The good, the bad and the ugly” - Exploring boundaries between the informal, the criminal and the immoral

WS B: “The good, the bad and the ugly” - Exploring boundaries between the informal, the criminal and the immoral

Convenors: Alessandra Russo (University of Pisa) and Abel Pollese (Tallin University)

We are looking for contributions that engage with the theme of informality by deconstructing this manifold concept. We welcome papers presenting new empirical materials and methodologies to trace informal practices, actors, institutions, networks, at different level of analysis. We appreciate papers to be potentially connected to at least one of the following themes:

  1. The social morality of crime, focusing on the social and economic embeddedness of organised crime, its relevance for as a survival strategy of some communities and individuals, and the emergence of grey areas of connivance and collusion between criminals and state agents.
  2. Opposition of “us” (the people, often informally organised) against “them” (the elites, formally representing the state), focusing on the romanticisation of the role of criminals and outlaws, and the construction of alternative societal narratives.
  3. Informality and resistance, focusing on instances of contestation of state structures and institutions and the process through which informal and loosely organized actions may gradually turn social or protest movements, contentious politics and even insurgency.

WS C: Museums, Exhibitions and the Representation of the International

WS C: Museums, Exhibitions and the Representation of the International

Convenors: Audrey Reeves (University of Bristol) and Charlotte Heath-Kelly (University of Warwick)

Museums, memorials, and exhibitions are sites through which societies represent and enact the international. Historical museums document the history of warfare, often glorifying warrior masculinities and domesticated femininities. Ethnographic and maritime museums narrate colonial pasts and postcolonial presents. Memorials to the victims of terrorism, war, genocide and slavery naturalise narratives of resilience in the aftermath of disaster. Art exhibitions and biennales gather the international elite under the banner of culture, often showcasing provocative and controversial artists, but barely concealing the context of city marketing and urban regeneration.

As privileged sites for diplomatic visits, state ceremonies, and international tourism, all provide salient arenas for transnational communication on questions ranging from military intervention, migration, environmental protection, economy and global justice. However, museums, memorials and art exhibitions have generated little analysis within IR. To paraphrase Christine Sylvester, Art/Museums is where IR is least expected to be found. Building on an ISA 2017 panel convened by Lene Hansen and Cecelia Lynch, this workshop invites papers that interrogate these sites as political spaces and/or as opportunities to push forward theoretical debates in IR. We invite submissions that address, amongst other topics, the use of art-inspired methods in research on world politics; the politics of curation; the place of museums, galleries and memorials in economies of affect and emotion; relics and materiality, and the international political significance of the cultural realm.

WS D: Norms and Practices of Peace Operations: Evolution and Contestation

WS D: Norms and Practices of Peace Operations: Evolution and Contestation

Convenors: Ksenyia Oksamytna (University of Warwick) and John Karlsrud (Norwegian Institute of International Affairs)

Peace operations have experienced an unprecedented expansion after the Cold War, not only in quantitative but also qualitative terms. Peacekeepers have organised elections, protected civilians, facilitated community reconciliation, advised on security sector reform, and apprehended war criminals. The question of why peace operations take the shape that they do has attracted sustained scholarly interest only recently, despite the fact that these multi-billion-dollar operations fundamentally reshaping the lives of people around the world.

In seeking to answer this question, we welcome contributions that explore the evolution of one the following:

  • The traditional peacekeeping principles (consent, minimum use of force and impartiality);
  • Substantive tasks of peace operations (for instance, human rights and democratisation, the protection of vulnerable populations, stabilisation and the extension of state authority, assistance in combating criminality, or early peacebuilding);
  • Mission organisation and enablers (for example, integrated planning, strategic communications, intelligence, or technology).

We are especially interested in contributions that focus on the UN or compare it with other international organisations. Besides documenting the changes that have taken place, we expect the contributions to include an explicit theoretical perspective. They may focus on the role of different actors – states, IO officials at headquarters and in the field, and non-state actors, such as NGOs and experts – in developing norms and practices of peace operations. They may look at institutionalisation and the accompanying contestation. They may discuss how implementation changes norms or ‘feeds back’ into global discussions on the future of peace operations.

WS E: Theory as Ideology

WS E: Theory as Ideology

Convenors: Benjamin Martill (University College London) and Sebastian Schindler (University of Frankfurt)

In a famous article published in 1981, Robert Cox argued that “theory is always for someone and for some purpose”. But who is this ‘someone’, and what are these purposes, to which Cox refers? In this workshop we want to explore the role that theorisations and theoretical explanations play in (and for) political practice. In particular, we want to consider the relationship between theory and ideology, and to examine both the potentials and the limits of analyzing IR theory as ideology. Although the dominant view in the discipline sees IR as necessarily ‘non-ideological’ – wedded as it is to scientific modes of explanation – the growing strength of interpretive, constructivist, linguistic and historical methodologies in IR has opened up significant space for a more critical (and more reflexive) analysis of the theory/ideology nexus. Our intention in this workshop is to bring together contributors from a wide variety of different theoretical and methodological perspectives, all of whom are interested in inquiring into theory as ideology. By doing so we hope to foster interdisciplinary engagement and a more self-reflective research programme in the study of theory, ideology, and practice.

Possible questions addressed by the papers include, but are by no means limited to, the following:

  1. How are theory and ideology related?
  2. How do practitioners theorise and explain world politics?
  3. What effects do academic theories have on world politics outside the ‘ivory tower’?
  4. To what extent do the terms theory/thought/philosophy/ideology connote important differences?
  5. How should theory as ideology be studied?

WS F: Social Network Analysis & Digital Diplomacy

WS F: Social Network Analysis & Digital Diplomacy

Convenors: Corneliu Bjola (University of Oxford) and Ilan Manor (University of Oxford)

We invite submissions to the workshop on “Social Network Analysis and Digital Diplomacy”. The goal of this workshop is to explore the use of social network analysis (SNA) to the study of diplomacy in general, and digital diplomacy in particular. The workshop seeks papers from scholars working in diverse fields (e.g., diplomacy, data science, sociology and security studies) so as to facilitate a multi-disciplinary evaluation of the use of SNA in diplomatic studies. Papers are expected to demonstrate the manner in which this novel methodology may be employed to further the study of diplomacy. This may include questions regarding the impact of digital diplomacy, re-conceptualisations of traditional concepts in diplomacy (e.g., power, hierarchy, representation, prestige, etc. ), investigations of structural changes in diplomacy brought about by digitisation, and examinations of SNA contributions to the management of change in the international system (including strategies for countering state-sponsored propaganda and for combating violent extremism).In addition, we encourage submissions that identify both the theoretical and practical limitations of social network analysis. All papers are expected to offer either a theoretical or methodological contribution to the study of (digital) diplomacy. Doctoral students are also encouraged to submit papers to this workshop. Paper length should not exceed 8,000 words. Papers that have already been published in academic publications are not acceptable. This call for papers will close on 16/12/2016. Acceptance decisions will be finalised by 13/01/2017.

WS G: Theory and practice of non-Western regionalism

WS G: Theory and practice of non-Western regionalism

Convenors: Marcin Kaczmarski (University of Warsaw) and Shaun Breslin (University of Warwick)

The early 21st-century international politics has been marked by the rise in non-Western regional projects, in the form of new or redesigned regional institutions, which provide for governance in a specific geographic space, and as non-institutionalised means of influencing patterns and processes of regional interactions. Regional designs have become an intrinsic part of a multilevel governance system.

This workshop aspires to explore non-Western regional projects and their mutual interactions, drawing on the fields of comparative regionalism, area studies, and studies of empire. We aim to develop approaches that could capture and explain the diversity of regions, stepping away from EU-centrism. We invite contributions from scholars working on comparative and theoretical aspects of regionalism as well as those with expertise on particular regional projects. We welcome papers dealing with theoretical, empirical and normative aspects of regional-level international politics. Possible topics include, but are not to be limited to, such issues as:

  • drivers of integration, material (economic and political benefits) and ideational (ideas, identities, external norms);
  • discursive constructions of regions;
  • the role of great-power identity in shaping regional projects;
  • the interplay between the global script of regionalism and its local applications;
  • the role of domestic politics in shaping the content of regionalism;
  • the choice between advancing hegemon’s interests or paying for integration;
  • followership of leaders and the role of coercion in shaping regional projects;
  • contribution of studies on empire to the field of comparative regionalism;
  • the relations between particular regional projects.

WS H: Responsibility and International Relations Theory: Power, Authority and Legitimacy

WS H: Responsibility and International Relations Theory: Power, Authority and Legitimacy

Convenors: Antje Vetterlein (Copenhagen Business School)

The concept of ‘responsibility’ has become increasingly significant in world politics. Yet, while related concepts such as accountability or legitimacy have received considerable scholarly attention in international relations (IR) theory, the concept of responsibility is predominantly discussed in relation to specific policy areas such as the responsibility to protect or corporate responsibility. In times of global crises and observed governance gaps, responsibility might be on the rise because underlying moral values seem to receive increased attention in politics. Responsibility therefore needs reassessment.

In order to pin down the notion of responsibility in IR and to explore its multifaceted meaning, potential and impact as well as its social praxis the workshop will approach the phenomenon from three different angles: power, authority and legitimacy.

  1. With power, one says, comes responsibility. Yet, is the reverse true as well, that is do actors gain more power by taking on responsibilities?
  2. Authority derives from the responsibilities and duties awarded to a specific position, which raises questions of accountability as well as moral agency, and their possibilities and limits in a system of global governance.
  3. Responsibility is closely tied to questions of legitimacy. Sometimes, decisions might be legal but not legitimate, or the other way around. This dimension thus highlights the normative foundation of governance in world politics.

With this broad focus we invite papers on the theme of responsibility in international relations across theoretical divides, disciplines and policy fields in order to reflect upon an emerging field of research.

Possible themes could include:

  • The concept of responsibility: its meaning, historical origin and transformation (different disciplinary/theoretical approach more than welcome)
  • The ideological and normative underpinnings of responsibility
  • Different types of responsibility, such as guilt, care, obligation or duty
  • Individual, corporate and collective responsibility
  • Conceptual questions regarding responsibility, i.e. moral agency in international relations
  • Ethics, responsibility and legitimacy
  • The relationship between accountability and responsibility
  • Responsibility in global governance
  • Powerful states/actors and responsibility
  • Sources and actors of responsible behavior: civil society, firms, states, transnational organisations and regimes
  • The social, political and legal dimensions of responsibility
  • Responsibility and compliance
  • The rhetoric and performativity of responsibility
  • Various policy fields (welfare/social policies, security, environment, migration, poverty, science & technology …) and responsibility
  • Responsibility and the global commons

WS I: Recovering the Middle East in/from International Relations

WS I: Recovering the Middle East in/from International Relations

Convenors: Clemens Hoffmann (University of Stirling) and Cemal Burak Tansel (University of Sheffield)

Despite the manifest importance of the Middle East for global politics, the region has endured an uneven relationship with the discipline of International Relations (IR). While IR scholarship continually discusses Middle Eastern politics, it often does so in ways that carefully selected examples from Middle Eastern states, societies and cultures are employed to test hypotheses and substantiate theoretical premises. These fragmented cases are frequently developed from within Western (White), Anglophone academia based on little sustained exposure to the region’s dynamics. Simultaneously, the attempts that are made to explain and understand these dynamics are often framed within theoretical perspectives that regard such processes as the ramifications of developments happening elsewhere, thus minimising the role of actors and processes operating within the region. These shortcomings have further intensified since the Arab Uprisings, which revealed the deficiencies of many approaches and concepts that are utilised in the study of the Middle East.

The workshop thus aims to address the unstable relationship between IR and one of its core field of study, the Middle East, by examining relevant conceptual and methodological issues. It will provide a platform to discuss the ways in which Middle Eastern intellectuals, social movements and scholars themselves approach the questions of international relations, and examine how we can reshape IR’s engagement with the Middle East. We aim to promote discussions on how the IR literature can learn from the advances in other branches of the social sciences and humanities. To this end, we particularly encourage submissions and contributions from those who work in the Middle East.

Please send 300 words abstracts speaking to the workshop’s core themes as set out above and a short biographical note to the workshop conveners by December 16, 2016. Successful participants will be informed by January 13, 2016.

WS J: Illuminating the Backstage

WS J: Illuminating the Backstage

Convenors: Lilliane Boer (University of Amsterdam) and Sofia Stolk (University of Amsterdam)

This workshop focuses on the ‘backstage’ practices of transnational law. Practices such as treaty negotiations or the performance of international criminal trials – usually considered the ‘frontstage’ of transnational practice – are themselves made possible by practices considered marginal to these more familiar ones. The overarching goal of the workshop is to explore and make tangible these unexplored practices and interactions, and to critically observe what these ‘doings do’. We invite contributions that focus on one specific practice; examples of existing contributions include footnote styles; airplane travel; handshakes, and moot courts. What unites these examples is their focus on a practice that usually remains outside of the scope of inquiry, yet in themselves they are crucial for what happens on the ‘frontstage’. In other words, what we scrutinize as ‘the transnational’ would look very different if the backstage disappeared or took on a different form. The contribution should (1) engage with one particular backstage practice others may recognize as their own or as part of the field they study (2) bring to the fore its aesthetics and (3) suggest how it facilitates/interferes with what happens on the frontstage and explore the (permeability of) this boundary. Overarching themes that are to be discussed in the workshop include recognition, access, production, mimesis, façade, and aesthetics.

WS K: Security entanglements: materiality and temporality

WS K: Security entanglements: materiality and temporality

Convenors: Dagmar Rychnovská (Metropolitan University Prague & Charles University) and Jan Daniel (Institute of International Relations Prague & Charles University)

This workshop aims to put the dynamics of re-assembling socio-material networks to the center of critical reflection on security and focus on entanglements of actors, materials, technologies and temporalities in constructing (in)security. How can we explain and analyze the re-assembling and re-stabilizing material artifacts, infrastructures, corporeal bodies, and expertise connected with these objects, left behind by past securitizations? How can we explore the afterlives of security objects and what they do in and on the world? Going beyond the discursive approaches and drawing on the burgeoning scholarship that engages insights from sociology, philosophy, STS, and anthropology, this workshop shall bring together scholars interested in how to approach the connections between practice, materiality and temporality of security. Specifically, we look for empirical studies as well as further theorization related to topics such as:

  • Securitization: How are securitization, de-securitization, and re-securitization related to socio-material networks? How does materiality mediate the construction of (in)security and emergence or disappearance of certain threats?
  • Temporality and socio-material networks of (in)security: What kind of temporalities are enacted by socio-material networks of (in)security? Can there be an ‘after’ in security?
  • Afterlives of security socio-material networks: What happens to various types of security objects when the threats they were designed to tackle fade out? How do they act in their respective contexts?
  • Lifecycles of socio-material networks of security: How can we study the shifts in networks connecting security knowledge, material objects, and practices? What can security studies learn from STS, sociology of science, and history regarding the theorization of temporality?

WS L: Ambiguity in International Society

WS L: Ambiguity in International Society

Convenors: Thomas Diez (University of Tuebingen) and Bettina Ahrens (University of Tuebingen)

In this workshop we want to explore the inherent ambiguity of norms and practices in international society. For instance, what often seems to be a positive normative development in international society, such as the increasing relevance of individual human rights, at the same time has problematic consequences such as the increase in the number of military interventions or the reproduction of rather problematic power relations. Such ambiguities for instance also come to the fore in diplomatic practices that must conform to old standards of inter-state engagement as much as speak to a broader audience of transnational publics. In this workshop, we want to explore these ambiguities and the analytical and political challenges that they pose in more detail. Are they inescapable? Are they always problematic or can they be used productively to strengthen cooperation and normative change? Where do they exactly come from, how do they develop over time and what are their effects and implications for a changing global order? How should states and other actors respond to ambiguities?

We are looking forward to your proposals. Submission deadline for abstracts is 16 December 2016!

WS M: Critical Global Health: A New Research Agenda

WS M: Critical Global Health: A New Research Agenda

Convenors: João Nunes (University of York) and Simon Rushton (University of Sheffield)

Global Health is now a well-established field that cuts across multiple disciplinary boundaries. This workshop seeks to bring together scholars whose work critically engages with this field, through papers that respond to the need to decolonize global health and to challenge the Western-centric perspectives that dominate both scholarship and practice.

We seek contributions that engage theoretically and/or empirically with themes that include, though are not limited to:

  • The political processes by which global health governance is translated and resisted at the regional, national and local levels;
  • The effects of global health governance upon state and non-state actors, particularly in the developing world;
  • The constitutionalization of global health governance in the legal systems of developing countries;
  • The limits of global health: gender, class, race, sexual orientation, age and disability ;
  • Power, agency and the politics of knowledge in global health governance;
  • Issues of justice, inequality, vulnerability and neglect in global health.

We aim to attract scholars from a wide range of disciplines and theoretical perspectives adopting a (broadly defined) ‘critical’ approach to global health. This may include postcolonial studies, post-structuralism, feminist and queer theory approaches, Marxist approaches, subaltern studies, and others. We particularly encourage applications from early career researchers and scholars from the Global South. We have a small amount of funding available to contribute towards the participation of scholars from those groups.

WS N: Technologies of Power: The EU’s External Relations as Governmentality

WS N: Technologies of Power: The EU’s External Relations as Governmentality

Convenors: Hendrik Huelss (University of Kent) and Hanna L. Muehlenhoff (VU Amsterdam, ACCESS EUROPE)

Conceptualisations of the EU as an international actor have significantly advanced in the past two decades, including constructivist concepts such as normative power Europe or postmodern/poststructuralist critiques of the EU’s normative (self-)image. However, most approaches neglect how the EU implements its policies through employing various instruments and technologies or, in other words, how different (normative) objectives are operationalised through specific technologies of governing in the context of (neo-)liberal governing. Although an increasing number of scholars turn to governmentality as an approach accommodating the interrelatedness of the rationality and the technology of governing, the overall research agenda is empirically and theoretically fragmented. This contrasts with the salient role governmentality-related concepts such as biopower/bio-politics, apparatuses of security or surveillance techniques occupy in other areas of IR and EU studies. This workshops aims to bring together scholars working on the governmentality of EU external relations. It intends to take stock of the emergent governmentality research agenda in this field and to provide a platform for discussing theoretical and empirical approaches to study governmentality. We welcome papers on theoretical-conceptual and methodological questions of studying governmentality as well as empirical analyses on the interplay and effects of rationalities and technologies in EU governing. We further invite papers discussing what the study of governmentality has to offer to EU external governing scholarship. The workshop will serve as a forum for discussing options for future research projects and/or publication activities.

WS O: Foreign Policy Analysis and Public Policy: Towards Theoretical Dialogue and Integration

WS O: Foreign Policy Analysis and Public Policy: Towards Theoretical Dialogue and Integration

Convenors: Klaus Brummer (University of Eichstätt-Ingolstadt) and Kai Oppermann (University of Sussex)

This workshop on “Foreign Policy Analysis and Public Policy: Towards Theoretical Dialogue and Integration” invites original and innovative papers that:

  1. address in more general terms the feasibility and desirability as well as the challenges and opportunities (regarding ontology, epistemology and methodology) of bringing together insights from FPA and Public Policy in a comprehensive framework to make sense of political decision making and policy making across policy domains;
  2. (b) use analytical concepts from either FPA or Public Policy to explain decision-making processes and/or concrete policies in the respective “other” field (i.e., use FPA concepts to analyze non-foreign policy decisions or Public Policy to analyze foreign policy); or
  3. (c) propose new analytical concepts that integrate insights from FPA and Public Policy.

Possible concepts from Public Policy that are worth exploring in more depth for their value in studying foreign policy include multiple streams, advocacy coalitions, policy diffusion, veto players or punctuated equilibrium theory. Concepts from the FPA toolbox which can potentially be utilised in Public Policy include historical analogies, leadership trait analysis, operational codes, bureaucratic politics or two-level games.

As regards methods, the workshop takes a pluralist perspective. We particularly encourage participants to explore the feasibility of multi-method strategies.

By bringing together scholars who conduct such bridge-building exercises and are interested in exploring the potential of such exercises, this workshop establishes a network that enables a systematic exchange across sub-disciplinary boundaries and builds up research capacity which promises better research in FPA and Public Policy for the future.

WS P: Accountability in Global Governance: constraining and legitimating authority

WS P: Accountability in Global Governance: constraining and legitimating authority

Convenors: Gisela Katharina Hirschmann (European University Institute / Ruhr University Bochum)

The exercise of authority in a complex system of global governance has raised demands for accountability. The policies and actions of international organisations and their partners increasingly affect the lives and rights of individuals and may thus – unintendedly or purposefully – violate core international norms. This is most clearly illustrated by the sexual exploitation and abuse by humanitarian aid workers and United Nations peacekeepers. Further examples are the economic austerity policies of the International Monetary Fund and the European Union in Southern Europe, which have caused economic hardship and severe effects on citizens’ living conditions, in particular their right to health. Public-private health partnerships came under fire when pharmaceutical companies were using global vaccination campaigns for low-cost clinical trials for instance in India and South Africa, thereby abusing the situation of infected individuals. As a consequence of these rights violations, the legitimacy of global governance has come under strain.

Accountability has become a buzzword in IR scholarship when debating constraints of authority in global governance. However, traditional accountability mechanisms are difficult to achieve in global governance. Instead, alternative forms of accountability have evolved, labelled external, diagonal, horizontal or surrogate accountability. This workshop intends to systematize the conceptual thinking on accountability in IR research and seeks to outline specific types of and conditions for accountability across a variety of empirical fields in global governance. Moreover, it encourages engaging with important work from other research strands, such as International Law, political philosophy, sociology or public administration. Finally, it also aims at fostering a normative debate on how accountability should look like to render global governance more legitimate.

We welcome contributions that address one or several of the following aspects or questions:

  • Accountability for what? In which instances of the exercise of authority in global governance have demands for greater accountability been raised?
  • How can specific types of accountability be conceptualized in the context of global governance?
  • What are the conditions for, the limits and constraints of accountability in global governance?
  • How can we measure accountability in global governance?
  • What is the relationship between accountability and legitimacy? How and under what circumstances can it legitimate or de-legitimate global governance?
  • How should accountable global governance look like?

The workshop invites contributions from IR research, with diverse methodological approaches, as well as from related disciplines. We will also consider the possibility of a joint publication, e.g. a special issue in a major IR journal.

WS Q: Anthropology and IR: Interdisciplinary explorations of money, security and the infrastructures of world order

WS Q: Anthropology and IR: Interdisciplinary explorations of money, security and the infrastructures of world order

Convenors: Kai Koddenbrock (University of Aachen) and Mario Schmidt (University of Cologne)

While IR and political science more broadly has had a hard time moving beyond its state and organizations-centered social ontology and is only slowly discovering the virtues of tracing connections and networks from bottom-up, complexity theory and actor-network theory have been highly influential in anthropology for decades. Yet, both anthropologists and political scientists have by and large refrained from controversial arguments on the bigger picture of contemporary world society, global capitalism in crisis, or the processes of migration affecting Africa, Europe and the Middle East at war.
In contrast, our workshop explores the virtues of moving from the minutiae of social processes to the bigger structures of world society and back again by focusing on three broad – but not exclusive – issue areas – and their interlinkages: Money, security and infrastructures. Money as a prime means of Vergesellschaftung is crucial for the study of international relations and anthropology. Security, which has all but dominated IR for the last decades, conjures up the questions of external warfare and the securitization of our societies in the wake of terrorism and the challenges of migration. The focus on infrastructures opens our vista towards essential building blocks of our social lives that we usually take for granted like container ships, satellites or cross-continental cables.
Scholars from all the social sciences are welcome to join this collegial debate!

WS R: Exploring Methodological Frontiers in Global Environmental Politics

WS R: Exploring Methodological Frontiers in Global Environmental Politics

Convenors: Hannah Hughes (Cardiff University) and Alice Vadrot (Cambridge University)

The global response to challenges like climate change and biodiversity loss are characterised by a complex range of actors, activities and arenas. These are producing new forms of political and economic relations and reproducing old patterns of inclusion and exclusion. Scholarly attempts to analyse these complexities have led to a number of important conceptual innovations. Attempts to understand the role of non-state actors and the power of knowledge in the construction of environmental problems have generated concepts such as epistemic community, knowledge brokers and discourse coalitions that have proven to have wider explanatory power for the study of IR. More recently, scholarship interested in the influence of international bureaucracies has clearly demonstrated that secretariats need to be understood as more than mere functionaries. As well as offering new conceptual tools for illuminating secretariats as actors in world politics, this scholarship highlights the significance of Global Environmental Politics (GEP) as a site for methodological innovation in international studies. However, there remains much work to be done to develop the conceptual apparatus required for untangling the myriad activities constituting the field of global environmental politics today.

The aim of this workshop is to identify both new methodological approaches and popular research tools that have been adapted for study within GEP. The workshop will explore these innovations and adaptations in two directions. First, to what extent do these approaches provide an avenue for dealing with the complexities that the study of global environmental politics presents? Second, to what extent are these methodological innovations useful to the broader study of international relations?

WS S: (Re-)Politicizations of Security: Concepts and Practices

WS S: (Re-)Politicizations of Security: Concepts and Practices

Convenors: Hendrik Hegemann (University of Osnabrueck) and Andrew Neal (University of Edinburgh)

Large parts of the critical security studies discourse tend to imply that security is a way to escape the contention of (democratic) politics, be it through existential threats justifying exceptional measures or technocratic risk management routines by unaccountable security professionals. This workshop seeks to reopen questions about this supposedly negative or pathological relationship between security and politics by engaging with concepts and practices of (re-)politicization in the security field. It thereby responds to the diverse forms of security politics at play in various attempts to address current-day security concerns. These may involve different actors from parliaments, courts, media, industry, academia and social movements, and encompass manifold practices of legitimation and contestation. The workshop seeks papers that study these diverse practices of security politics. It also invites proposals that move beyond existing conceptual frameworks in security studies such as those offered by securitization, governmentality, or risk, and instead consider the utility of thinking about security politics with concepts and theories from elsewhere in politics scholarship, such as ‘normal politics’ and ‘politicization’. Questions to be asked include: Are we today witnessing a (re-)politicization of security? Is security becoming more akin to what we might call ‘normal’ politics, as opposed to the exceptional or anti-politics of security hitherto imagined? Which practices of security politics are emerging? And how does this affect the democratic legitimacy of contemporary security governance? We invite paper proposals addressing these and related questions in different areas from a theoretical, empirical, and/or normative perspective.

WS T: Memory Games in International Relations: between Security and Justice

WS T: Memory Games in International Relations: between Security and Justice

Convenors: Maria Mälksoo (University of Kent) and Karl Gustafsson (Swedish Institute of international Affairs)

Transitional justice (TJ) is a multi-disciplinary approach to redressing past human rights violations and international crimes in post-conflict or post-authoritarian/-totalitarian settings through a variety of judicial and non-judicial means of accountability, ranging from trials to truth commissions, reparations, institutional reform, memorialisation measures and acts of contrition. The theory and practice of TJ is a major topic in IR, International Law, Peace and Conflict studies and Comparative Politics. Yet, the lack of systematic attention paid to the connection between states’ approaches to particular TJ measures domestically and their foreign policies and international behaviour remains a glaring oversight in mainstream scholarship.
This workshop aims at deepening the dialogue between different disciplines and bringing together scholars working on distinct issue-areas that could be incorporated under the broader concept of TJ. Bringing together two burgeoning literatures – on ontological security (OS) in IR and TJ/memory politics in the transdisciplinary crossroads of cognate fields, the workshop will seek to unpack OS-seeking as a generic social mechanism in international politics. This concept, we suggest, allows us to productively conceptualise the connection between states’ TJ, foreign, security and defence policies. Our methodological objective is to further hone the parameters of state OS-seeking and the related mnemonical (de)securitisation processes, to make these notions operative in the study of the international politics of TJ. The workshop invites papers that explore the links between OS-seeking and narratives of transition, temporalities of TJ and othering, mutual recognition in bilateral relations and status-seeking in international society in any empirical setting.

WS U: New Frontiers in International Development Assistance: Interdisciplinary Explorations of Financing Sustainable Development

WS U: New Frontiers in International Development Assistance: Interdisciplinary Explorations of Financing Sustainable Development

Convenors: Celine Tan (University of Warwick) and Ambreena Manji (Cardiff University)

The adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals by the global community in 2015 marked a milestone in the landscape for international development finance. The challenge of implementing the ambitious new international development targets is shifting existing frameworks for mobilising, delivering and regulating international development flows and creating greater plurality of actors and mechanisms of cooperation in the international development sector.

This workshop seeks to engage in interdisciplinary conversations on the changing architecture of international development assistance in its historical and contemporary contexts. As a subject intimately connected with broader paradigms of power in the exercise of international relations, international economic law, foreign policy and the imperial legacy, international development finance as a field of study has traditionally been subsumed under wider disciplinary and sub-disciplinary umbrellas. This workshop aims to facilitate a broader yet more cohesive platform for discussions to address the challenges brought on by emerging frontiers in international development assistance.

We invite contributions to the workshop addressing the following, non-exhaustive, themes:

  • the politics, economic, laws and sociology of development finance;
  • historical and contemporary perspectives of the changing landscape of aid and international development cooperation;
  • comparative studies, including empirical studies, on aid policy and practice from different geographical and political and economic constituencies;
  • constitution of global and national frameworks for aid accountability and frameworks of aid regulation and governance;
  • the role of aid and international development in international relations, foreign policy and international law
  • intersections between international development finance and global economic governance and international economic law
  • aid, international humanitarian interventions and global security

WS V: European Diplomatic Practices: Contemporary Challenges and Innovative Approaches

WS V: European Diplomatic Practices: Contemporary Challenges and Innovative Approaches

Convenors: Niklas Bremberg (Swedish Institute of International Affairs) and Nina Græger (Norwegian Institute of International Affairs)

The aim of this workshop is to advance the research agenda on practice approaches applied to the study of European diplomacy, security and foreign policy. Practice approaches are gaining increased attention as an innovative way of studying core questions and concerns in IR. Our departure point is that, although there is no unified theory of practice in social science, there are several more or less compatible approaches to practice. In order to foster conversation, practices are defined broadly as “socially meaningful patterns of action” although we do not expect all participants to agree, only that they accept to start the conversation there. As a substantial body of literature has emerged, it is time to take stock of it and understand the implications for scholars interested in IR theories as well as in European and EU studies. In a nutshell, the workshop aims to bring together scholars to discuss in-depth how practice approaches can be done in order to study European diplomacy, security and foreign policy. Key questions to be addressed are: what are the patterns, mechanisms and processes of European diplomatic, security and foreign policy practices? How is European security “done” across a number of policy fields? How do foreign policy practices “work” and what are their effects? We expect that a set of other questions will emerge from the workshop as participants engage in discussions on the advantages and limitations of applying insights gained from practice approaches in their research.

WS W: Intelligence on the frontier between state and civil society

WS W: Intelligence on the frontier between state and civil society

Convenors: Karen Lund Petersen (University of Copenhagen) and Miriam Dunn Cavelty

Past debates on intelligence and other security organisations have mostly focused either on institutional structures, reforms, legal and parliamentary oversight or on the techniques and methods used for addressing possible threat. An increasing call for more and new data, as well as an indentified need for civil society to ‘tip in’ in the fight against today’s more pervasive threats, have however broadened and changed the role of these services in society.

This workshop asks to this new role of security agencies (intelligence, homeland security organisations and military institutions) in society by exploring how conventional understandings of security expertise is challenged by new information and communications technologies and by asking how the many communication strategies vis-à-vis the public construct new roles for civil society in security politics.

We would very much like for the participants to reflect upon and relate to some of the questions listed below, covering intelligence expertise and communication as an organisational and democratic challenge.

  • What role is big data playing in today’s ‘security communication’ ?
  • How are citizens brought into security work though partnerships, data mining from social media and other more subtle forms of data mining happening through their engagement with private enterprises. With what effect?
  • What happens to the concept of oversight and political control in an intelligence world characterized by big data, resilience and precaution.
  • But what happened to this idea of secrecy and national security in a world where data mining is an increasingly used tool? Is the concept of secrecy expanding into a public domain and, if so, what democratic challenges do this involves?

The aim is to publish the proceedings

WS X: International Relations and Migration (MigratingIR)

WS X: International Relations and Migration (MigratingIR)

Convenors: Tamar Todria (Tblisi State University), Lasha Matiashvilli (Tblisi State University), Polly Pallister Wilkins (University of Amsterdam).

Recent migratory trends have raised important questions about the role of mobility in international relations. As a discipline IR is understood to have its foundations in a particular understanding of state sovereignty that reifies sovereign territorial borders and minimizes the agency of mobile populations, often choosing to read such mobility through the lens of security. Meanwhile in critical IR, sociology and political geography there has been a focus on mobility as a key organizing principle of the international that takes its cue from the central role of mobility/circulation in Foucauldian inspired critical security studies. Alongside this there have been repeated calls from feminist and postcolonial scholars to bring people and their agency back into focus. This workshop aims to interrogate migration in international relations empirically and theoretically, asking what recent events and scholarship can tell us about the role of mobility in the international today. Does the mobility and migration of people in the present day challenge the foundations of international relations scholarship rooted in the sovereign territorial state or do such forces help constitute sovereignty itself? Is migration an issue of the domestic or the international and what does mobility looked like when viewed from these differing perspectives?

Each workshop may accept up to 20 participants. Please note that participants are expected to attend their workshop for the entire period of the event. The deadline for paper proposals is 30 December 2016. Proposals MUST be submitted via this link.
Applicants will be notified about the outcome of the selection process by the end of January 2017.

Please contact info@eisa.org for general enquiries about EWIS2017.