Search results

We revisit and empirically evaluate crucial yet under-examined arguments articulated in "God Gave Physics the Easy Problems" (2000), the authors of which emphasized that, in International Relations (IR) predictions, predominant nomothetic approaches should be supplemented with concrete scenario thinking. We test whether the IR predictive toolkit is in fact dominated by nomothetic generalizations and, more broadly, map the methodological profile of this subfield. We build on the TRIP database, supplementing it with extensive original coding to operationalize the nuances of predictive research. In particular, we differentiate between nomoscopic predictions (predictive generalizations) and idioscopic predictions (predictions for concrete situations), showing that this distinction is not reducible to other methodological cleavages. We find that even though in contemporary IR an increasing number of articles seek to provide predictions, they consistently avoid predictions about concrete situations. The proportion of idioscopic predictions is stably small, with an even smaller proportion of predictions that develop concrete narratives or specify any determinate time period. Furthermore, those idioscopic studies are mostly limited to a niche with specialized themes and aims. Thus, our research shows that the critical claims from 20 years ago are still relevant for contemporary IR, as the "difficult problem" of developing predictive scenarios is still consistently overlooked in favor of other objectives. Ultimately, the types of predictions that IR scholars develop depend on their specific aims and constraints, but the discipline-wide result is a situation in which international studies' ambition to provide predictions grows, but they tend to reproduce the same limitations as they did in 2000.

"China has been holding its annual China International Import Expo (CIIE), starting from 2018 in Shanghai. This is a significant move for China to actively open the Chinese market to the rest of the world as this supports trade liberalization and economic globalization This book systematically expounds the background and content of CIIE, and studies the opportunities that China's expansion of imports brings to its economy, enterprises, consumers and to that of other countries. It elaborates on how the CIIE facilitates countries and regions from different parts of the world to strengthen their economic cooperation and trade, and promote global trade and world economic growth. The book helps readers understand China's reform and opening-up, as well as the the latest trends and policies of the country's expansion of import"--Publisher's website

The Institute of International Studies of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences, which is the oldest professional academic organization as 'Think-Tank', that exclusively carries out basic research on international studies and international relations in Mongolia, was established 55 years ago amid hard external and internal conditions of the country, and had gone through several stages.
The main purpose of this report is to summarize the main research results of the Institute of International Studies of MAS for latest 55 years, and to briefly present to you my brief conclusions and suggestions about the current state and future prospects of international studies research. The paper has consisted following parts, a. Historical background of the institution, b. A historical approach to institute research, c. Current status and future prospects of the Institute's research, d. conclusion and some proposals etc.
Монгол Улс дахь олон улс судлалын түүхэн хандлага, өнөөгийн байдал, цаашдын төлөв (ШУА-ийн Олон улс судлалын хүрээлэнгийн жишээн дээр)
Монгол Улс дахь олон улс судлал, олон улсын харилцааны суурь судалгааг дагнан хэрэгжүүлэгч мэргэжлийн ууган байгууллага болох ШУА-ийн Олон улс судлалын хүрээлэн нь өдгөөгөөс 55 жилийн тэртээ улс орны гадаад, дотоод амаргүй нөхцөл байдлын дунд үүсэн байгуулагдаж, энэ түүхэн хугацаанд хөгжил, төлөвшлийн хэд хэдэн үе шатыг туулж иржээ.
Энэхүү илтгэлийн үндсэн зорилго нь ШУА-ийн Олон улс судлалын хүрээлэнгийн 55 жилийн хугацаан дахь судалгааны гол үр дүнг нэгтгэн тоймлож, хүрээлэн дэх олон улс судлалын судалгааны өнөөгийн байдал, цаашдын төлөвийн талаар дүгнэлт, саналаа Та бүхэндээ товчлон танилцуулахад чиглэгдсэн болно.

Throughout the second half of the Twentieth Century, Australia was a fierce advocate and defender of the multilateral rules-based economic order. Since the early 2000s however, the Australian government has privileged the pursuit of preferential trade and investment agreements, and now sees the pursuit of preferential deals as central to the advancement of its broader foreign policy goals. In this chapter, I assess Australia's contribution to the rules-based international order in trade and finance from the end of WWII to the present. I also examine the relationship between Australia's trade and investment policy approach and its broader foreign policy objectives by asking: are the economic rules Australia is promoting likely to advance or undermine its stated foreign policy goals? My aim is to advance debate about the most desirable future direction of Australia's foreign economic policy agenda.

Every system that manages or assesses biodiversity rests on a simplification of its complexity. The simplification of biodiversity is debatable and difficult; even, for example, regarding the elements on which the assessment and management should focus. Nevertheless, within law, there are assessment and management schemes that are based on a simplified understanding of the meaning of [the construct of] 'biodiversity'. For example, the Ecosystem Approach, European Union (EU) Habitats Directive, and the EU Water Framework Directive try to assess the status of different biodiversity elements based on their different 'biodiversity' simplifications. As the conservation of biodiversity is a vital global question, it is important to include the right elements within the 'biodiversity' construct to achieve no net loss. Based on international and EU law, I conceptualize a consistent legal simplification of 'biodiversity'.

Every system that manages or assesses biodiversity rests on a simplification of its complexity. The simplification of biodiversity is debatable and difficult ; even, for example, regarding the elements on which the assessment and management should focus. Nevertheless, within law, there are assessment and management schemes that are based on a simplified understanding of the meaning of [the construct of] 'biodiversity'. For example, the Ecosystem Approach, European Union (EU) Habitats Directive, and the EU Water Framework Directive try to assess the status of different biodiversity elements based on their different 'biodiversity' simplifications. As the conservation of biodiversity is a vital global question, it is important to include the right elements within the 'biodiversity' construct to achieve no net loss. Based on international and EU law, I conceptualize a consistent legal simplification of 'biodiversity'.