The customer is always right? Flags of convenience and the assembling of maritime affairs

IF 1.5 3区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS International Relations Pub Date : 2023-11-20 DOI:10.1177/00471178231211509
Alex Gould
{"title":"The customer is always right? Flags of convenience and the assembling of maritime affairs","authors":"Alex Gould","doi":"10.1177/00471178231211509","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The concept of ‘flag of convenience’ is ubiquitous in literature on maritime governance. First popularised by the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF), it has served as a touchstone concept in maritime policy discourse, and as a metaphor for the interaction between state and corporate actors in both maritime affairs and the globalised economy more broadly. This article argues, however, that the conceptions of public and private as ontologically separate that underpin existing literature on maritime governance have obscured notable shifts in the practices of flags of convenience in recent decades. More specifically (and drawing on assemblage theory), it argues that while flags of convenience have been framed exclusively as entities that allow shipping interests to escape regulatory control, certain open registers have been re-constituted as hubs of knowledge and materiality that ease and accelerate commercial circulation in a variety of ways. The article concludes by drawing attention to the volatility of the politics and practices of flag statehood at large; additionally, it highlights the insights that can be yielded for International Relations by the examination of maritime governance using novel theoretical tools.","PeriodicalId":47031,"journal":{"name":"International Relations","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Relations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00471178231211509","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The concept of ‘flag of convenience’ is ubiquitous in literature on maritime governance. First popularised by the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF), it has served as a touchstone concept in maritime policy discourse, and as a metaphor for the interaction between state and corporate actors in both maritime affairs and the globalised economy more broadly. This article argues, however, that the conceptions of public and private as ontologically separate that underpin existing literature on maritime governance have obscured notable shifts in the practices of flags of convenience in recent decades. More specifically (and drawing on assemblage theory), it argues that while flags of convenience have been framed exclusively as entities that allow shipping interests to escape regulatory control, certain open registers have been re-constituted as hubs of knowledge and materiality that ease and accelerate commercial circulation in a variety of ways. The article concludes by drawing attention to the volatility of the politics and practices of flag statehood at large; additionally, it highlights the insights that can be yielded for International Relations by the examination of maritime governance using novel theoretical tools.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
顾客永远是对的?方便旗与海事集结
方便旗 "的概念在有关海事治理的文献中无处不在。它最早由国际运输工人联合会 (ITF) 推广,一直是海事政策讨论中的试金石概念,也是国家和企业行为者在海事事务和更广泛的全球化经济中互动的隐喻。然而,本文认为,作为现有海事治理文献基础的公私本体分离概念掩盖了近几十年来方便旗实践中的显著变化。更具体地说(借鉴组合理论),本文认为,虽然方便旗一直被视为允许航运利益集团逃避监管的实体,但某些开放登记册已被重新构建为知识和物质中心,以各种方式便利和加速商业流通。文章最后提请人们注意船旗国政治和实践的不稳定性;此外,文章还强调了使用新的理论工具对海事治理进行研究可为国际关系带来的启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International Relations
International Relations INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
6.20%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: International Relations is explicitly pluralist in outlook. Editorial policy favours variety in both subject-matter and method, at a time when so many academic journals are increasingly specialised in scope, and sectarian in approach. We welcome articles or proposals from all perspectives and on all subjects pertaining to international relations: law, economics, ethics, strategy, philosophy, culture, environment, and so on, in addition to more mainstream conceptual work and policy analysis. We believe that such pluralism is in great demand by the academic and policy communities and the interested public.
期刊最新文献
A neoclassical realist model of overconfidence and the Japan–Soviet Neutrality Pact in 1941 Brazil’s pragmatic equidistance: hedging and the Second World War Mediated public diplomacy and securitisation theory: the US campaign against Chinese 5G in Brazil and Chile Domestic terrorism, incumbency, and legislative vote shares The customer is always right? Flags of convenience and the assembling of maritime affairs
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1