全球政治中的基础设施理论化

IF 2.4 1区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS International Studies Quarterly Pub Date : 2023-11-29 DOI:10.1093/isq/sqad101
Christian Bueger, Tobias Liebetrau, Jan Stockbruegger
{"title":"全球政治中的基础设施理论化","authors":"Christian Bueger, Tobias Liebetrau, Jan Stockbruegger","doi":"10.1093/isq/sqad101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A growing wave of studies in international relations is interested in “infrastructure.” Pipelines, ports, financial transaction arrangements, and other large technical systems increasingly occupy the minds of international theorists. This theory note provides direction to the debate by offering an important clarification of the concept of infrastructure and how it is theorized. Scholars have very different understandings of what infrastructures are, why they matter, and how to theorize and study them empirically. By outlining three distinct “styles of theorizing infrastructure,” we provide new directions for future research and how it can contribute to broader debates in international theory. The three styles allow to capture the disagreement over whether infrastructure is a theoretical concept at all, or if it solely refers to empirical phenomena. For some scholars, infrastructures are an object of politics, while others see them as developing political force or even agency on their own. Others see broader potential and note that “infrastructuralism” could provide a major new theoretical vocabulary. Each style provides major new avenues for international theory.","PeriodicalId":48313,"journal":{"name":"International Studies Quarterly","volume":"115 29","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Theorizing Infrastructures in Global Politics\",\"authors\":\"Christian Bueger, Tobias Liebetrau, Jan Stockbruegger\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/isq/sqad101\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A growing wave of studies in international relations is interested in “infrastructure.” Pipelines, ports, financial transaction arrangements, and other large technical systems increasingly occupy the minds of international theorists. This theory note provides direction to the debate by offering an important clarification of the concept of infrastructure and how it is theorized. Scholars have very different understandings of what infrastructures are, why they matter, and how to theorize and study them empirically. By outlining three distinct “styles of theorizing infrastructure,” we provide new directions for future research and how it can contribute to broader debates in international theory. The three styles allow to capture the disagreement over whether infrastructure is a theoretical concept at all, or if it solely refers to empirical phenomena. For some scholars, infrastructures are an object of politics, while others see them as developing political force or even agency on their own. Others see broader potential and note that “infrastructuralism” could provide a major new theoretical vocabulary. Each style provides major new avenues for international theory.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48313,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Studies Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"115 29\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Studies Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqad101\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Studies Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqad101","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

越来越多的国际关系研究对“基础设施”感兴趣。管道、港口、金融交易安排和其他大型技术系统越来越多地占据了国际理论家的思想。本理论说明通过对基础设施概念及其如何理论化的重要澄清,为辩论提供了方向。学者们对于基础设施是什么,为什么重要,以及如何理论化和实证研究基础设施有着非常不同的理解。通过概述三种不同的“基础设施理论化风格”,我们为未来的研究提供了新的方向,以及它如何有助于在国际理论中进行更广泛的辩论。这三种风格可以捕捉到关于基础设施究竟是一个理论概念,还是仅仅是指经验现象的分歧。在一些学者看来,基础设施是政治的客体,而在另一些学者看来,基础设施本身就是一种发展中的政治力量,甚至是一种代理。其他人看到了更广泛的潜力,并指出“基础设施主义”可以提供一个重要的新理论词汇。每种风格都为国际理论提供了重要的新途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Theorizing Infrastructures in Global Politics
A growing wave of studies in international relations is interested in “infrastructure.” Pipelines, ports, financial transaction arrangements, and other large technical systems increasingly occupy the minds of international theorists. This theory note provides direction to the debate by offering an important clarification of the concept of infrastructure and how it is theorized. Scholars have very different understandings of what infrastructures are, why they matter, and how to theorize and study them empirically. By outlining three distinct “styles of theorizing infrastructure,” we provide new directions for future research and how it can contribute to broader debates in international theory. The three styles allow to capture the disagreement over whether infrastructure is a theoretical concept at all, or if it solely refers to empirical phenomena. For some scholars, infrastructures are an object of politics, while others see them as developing political force or even agency on their own. Others see broader potential and note that “infrastructuralism” could provide a major new theoretical vocabulary. Each style provides major new avenues for international theory.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
7.70%
发文量
71
期刊介绍: International Studies Quarterly, the official journal of the International Studies Association, seeks to acquaint a broad audience of readers with the best work being done in the variety of intellectual traditions included under the rubric of international studies. Therefore, the editors welcome all submissions addressing this community"s theoretical, empirical, and normative concerns. First preference will continue to be given to articles that address and contribute to important disciplinary and interdisciplinary questions and controversies.
期刊最新文献
Inference with Extremes: Accounting for Extreme Values in Count Regression Models Contesting the Securitization of Migration: NGOs, IGOs, and the Security Backlash Dealing with Clashes of International Law: A Microlevel Study of Climate and Trade Nationalism, Internationalism, and Interventionism: How Overseas Military Service Influences Foreign Policy Attitudes Preferential Trade Agreements and Leaders’ Business Experience
×
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