联合国大会决议的目的是什么?议会外交的四种观点

IF 3.1 1区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS International Studies Review Pub Date : 2022-12-29 DOI:10.1093/isr/viac058
Rafael Mesquita, Antonio Pires
{"title":"联合国大会决议的目的是什么?议会外交的四种观点","authors":"Rafael Mesquita, Antonio Pires","doi":"10.1093/isr/viac058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) has passed over eighteen thousand resolutions since its foundation. It is a very heterogeneous collection, containing at once landmark documents, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and scores of less important and even controversial pieces. Hence, scholarship for the past 75 years has been divided on the actual relevance of UNGA resolutions and on member states’ motivations in engaging with their drafting. We propose a novel theoretical typology to organize prevailing views on the role of UNGA resolutions. Relying on the dimensions of effect and consensus, that is, whether or not resolutions are deemed to have a real-world impact and to what extent they represent world opinion, we sort the literature into four ideal types: resolutions can be regarded as the fruit of deliberation, dispute, diversion, or drama. We discuss the rationale of each view and indicate proposals within the UNGA that exemplify these perspectives. Our typology contributes to scholarship by both tidying previous debates and highlighting unnoticed commonalities between the UNGA and topics from the political representation literature.","PeriodicalId":54206,"journal":{"name":"International Studies Review","volume":"18 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What Are UN General Assembly Resolutions for? Four Views on Parliamentary Diplomacy\",\"authors\":\"Rafael Mesquita, Antonio Pires\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/isr/viac058\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) has passed over eighteen thousand resolutions since its foundation. It is a very heterogeneous collection, containing at once landmark documents, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and scores of less important and even controversial pieces. Hence, scholarship for the past 75 years has been divided on the actual relevance of UNGA resolutions and on member states’ motivations in engaging with their drafting. We propose a novel theoretical typology to organize prevailing views on the role of UNGA resolutions. Relying on the dimensions of effect and consensus, that is, whether or not resolutions are deemed to have a real-world impact and to what extent they represent world opinion, we sort the literature into four ideal types: resolutions can be regarded as the fruit of deliberation, dispute, diversion, or drama. We discuss the rationale of each view and indicate proposals within the UNGA that exemplify these perspectives. Our typology contributes to scholarship by both tidying previous debates and highlighting unnoticed commonalities between the UNGA and topics from the political representation literature.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54206,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Studies Review\",\"volume\":\"18 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Studies Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viac058\",\"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 Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viac058","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: 0

摘要

联合国大会(UNGA)自成立以来已经通过了18000多项决议。它是一个非常多样化的集合,既包含具有里程碑意义的文件,如《世界人权宣言》,也包含许多不太重要甚至有争议的文件。因此,在过去75年里,学术界对联合国大会决议的实际相关性和会员国参与起草决议的动机存在分歧。我们提出了一个新的理论类型学来组织关于联大决议作用的主流观点。根据效果和共识的维度,即决议是否被认为具有现实世界的影响,以及它们在多大程度上代表了世界舆论,我们将文献分为四种理想类型:决议可以被视为审议、争议、转移或戏剧的成果。我们讨论了每一种观点的基本原理,并在大会内提出了体现这些观点的建议。我们的类型学通过整理以前的辩论和突出联合国大会与政治代表性文献主题之间未被注意到的共性,为学术贡献了力量。
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
What Are UN General Assembly Resolutions for? Four Views on Parliamentary Diplomacy
The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) has passed over eighteen thousand resolutions since its foundation. It is a very heterogeneous collection, containing at once landmark documents, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and scores of less important and even controversial pieces. Hence, scholarship for the past 75 years has been divided on the actual relevance of UNGA resolutions and on member states’ motivations in engaging with their drafting. We propose a novel theoretical typology to organize prevailing views on the role of UNGA resolutions. Relying on the dimensions of effect and consensus, that is, whether or not resolutions are deemed to have a real-world impact and to what extent they represent world opinion, we sort the literature into four ideal types: resolutions can be regarded as the fruit of deliberation, dispute, diversion, or drama. We discuss the rationale of each view and indicate proposals within the UNGA that exemplify these perspectives. Our typology contributes to scholarship by both tidying previous debates and highlighting unnoticed commonalities between the UNGA and topics from the political representation literature.
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
6.70
自引率
9.10%
发文量
62
期刊介绍: The International Studies Review (ISR) provides a window on current trends and research in international studies worldwide. Published four times a year, ISR is intended to help: (a) scholars engage in the kind of dialogue and debate that will shape the field of international studies in the future, (b) graduate and undergraduate students understand major issues in international studies and identify promising opportunities for research, and (c) educators keep up with new ideas and research. To achieve these objectives, ISR includes analytical essays, reviews of new books, and a forum in each issue. Essays integrate scholarship, clarify debates, provide new perspectives on research, identify new directions for the field, and present insights into scholarship in various parts of the world.
期刊最新文献
Fifty Shades of Deprivation: Disaggregating Types of Economic Disadvantage in Studies of Terrorism Postcards from the Pandemic: Women, Intersectionality, and Gendered Risks in the Global COVID-19 Pandemic Reimagining Comparisons in International Relations through Reflexivity Infrastructures and International Relations: A Critical Reflection on Materials and Mobilities More Women, Fewer Nukes?
×
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