Reimagining Comparisons in International Relations through Reflexivity

Abstract

The article argues that International Relations, and especially those approaches that are informed by the epistemological and methodological premises of reflexivity, would benefit from a more diversified range of comparative methodologies other than those deriving from the work of J.S. Mill and more recent developments within the neopositivist canon. While discussions of methodology in International Relations have become open to a diversity of approaches in recent years, scholars have often been less prone to formulate explicit methodological guidance, especially in the form of practical guidance for alternative comparative research designs. Building on but further developing existing work on reflexivity and methodology, the article thus aims to open up methodological possibilities for reflexive IR by delineating three comparative strategies: defamiliarizing discursive comparison, contrapuntal comparison, and vernacular comparison. Each of the strategies is explained with reference to its theoretical and methodological background in existing scholarship, two key stages for its practical application, as well as examples. The article concludes by highlighting the importance and urgency of methodological innovation in IR––especially when it comes to approaches inspired by reflexivity.