Theoretically thinking and rethinking the intertnational order: the new emerging international institutions through neo-institutionalist lenses

Q4 Social Sciences Janus.net Pub Date : 2018-10-01 DOI:10.26619//1647-7251.9.2.2
Marion Guerrero
{"title":"Theoretically thinking and rethinking the intertnational order: the new emerging international institutions through neo-institutionalist lenses","authors":"Marion Guerrero","doi":"10.26619//1647-7251.9.2.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since the beginning of the 21st century, the emergence of various institutionalization processes of new informal institutional spaces (such as BRICS, IBSA, BASIC or P5+1) has been observed internationally, but little has been studied in depth. Accordingly, this paper seeks to rethink, through a theoretical approach standing between Political Science and International Relations, the theoretical concepts of neo-institutionalism in order to make a new critical theoretical-analytical contribution that accounts for the particular characteristics of such phenomena. We believe that it is of interest for the study of international institutions to expand the current field of analysis in order to explain how the emergence of these new institutions occurred and how they interact with already established formal institutions. This article examines two traditional forms of neo-institutionalism (rational choice neo-institutionalism and historical neo-institutionalism), making explicit what the starting points of each are and what elements each can contribute to the study. At the end of the work, a dialogue is held between the perspectives that allow us to establish a theoretical analytical criterion to study these new phenomena.","PeriodicalId":38150,"journal":{"name":"Janus.net","volume":"2 1","pages":"16-31"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Janus.net","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26619//1647-7251.9.2.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Since the beginning of the 21st century, the emergence of various institutionalization processes of new informal institutional spaces (such as BRICS, IBSA, BASIC or P5+1) has been observed internationally, but little has been studied in depth. Accordingly, this paper seeks to rethink, through a theoretical approach standing between Political Science and International Relations, the theoretical concepts of neo-institutionalism in order to make a new critical theoretical-analytical contribution that accounts for the particular characteristics of such phenomena. We believe that it is of interest for the study of international institutions to expand the current field of analysis in order to explain how the emergence of these new institutions occurred and how they interact with already established formal institutions. This article examines two traditional forms of neo-institutionalism (rational choice neo-institutionalism and historical neo-institutionalism), making explicit what the starting points of each are and what elements each can contribute to the study. At the end of the work, a dialogue is held between the perspectives that allow us to establish a theoretical analytical criterion to study these new phenomena.
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
国家间秩序的理论思考与反思:新制度主义视野下的新兴国际制度
自21世纪初以来,国际上已经观察到新的非正式制度空间(如金砖国家、IBSA、BASIC或P5+1)的各种制度化进程的出现,但很少有人深入研究。因此,本文试图通过一种介于政治学和国际关系之间的理论方法,重新思考新制度主义的理论概念,以便对这些现象的特殊特征做出新的批判性理论分析贡献。我们认为,对国际机构的研究有兴趣扩大目前的分析领域,以解释这些新机构是如何出现的,以及它们如何与已经建立的正式机构相互作用。本文考察了新制度主义的两种传统形式(理性选择新制度主义和历史新制度主义),明确了每种形式的出发点是什么,以及每种形式可以为研究做出哪些贡献。在工作的最后,在不同的视角之间进行了对话,使我们能够建立一个理论分析标准来研究这些新现象。
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
Janus.net
Janus.net Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊最新文献
China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results? EU-China relations: Exploring the possibility of cognitive dissonance It’s Not Venus, but Minerva: The European Quest for Relevance vis-à-vis the China Challenge Ukraine Geopolitical European Flashpoints vis-à-vis India and China: From Ambivalence to Strategic Engagement. Perspectives on The Suspension of the Eu-China Comprehensive Agreement on Investment.
×
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