Suchergebnisse

.

"In this timely book, Benjamin J. Cohen identifies and analyses a range of critical pathologies currently afflicting the field of international political economy (IPE) and offers remedies to restore the field's vitality. The book addresses the purpose of IPE as a field of study, highlighting the key questions posed by scholars since the modern field's inception, and explores how research seeks to engage with politics in practice. Tackling contemporary factionalism in the field, chapters consider IPE's remarkable diversity and fragmentation of research traditions across the globe and draw attention to the lack of clear methods and behavioural assumptions established as 'best practice' internationally. To rejuvenate the field, Cohen argues, reforms are needed that would both encourage more policy engagement by IPE scholars and maximize opportunities to enjoy the benefits of the field's diversity. The book offers a cutting-edge research agenda, emphasising the need for collaboration across scholarly divides and the obligations of leading professional associations and societies to countervail the forces that keep these groups separated. A powerful critique and a rousing call-to-arms, this book is crucial reading for scholars of IPE in search of innovative ways to develop new research and revitalise the field as a whole. It also offers key insights for students who need to understand the challenges facing IPE and its potential research trajectories."

ABSTRACTGiven the growth of international studies (IS) programs and the reciprocal relationship between political science and IS, this article explores perceptions of IS among political science department chairs. We found that the relationship between political science departments and IS programs is largely positive—that is, a majority of chairs supports the existence of IS at their institution, believes the job prospects for political science and IS majors are about equal, and perceives a low level of financial competition between programs. However, we discovered two points of contention: (1) the perception of lower academic rigor of IS programs, and (2) a high level of competition for majors and the "best students." Perceptions of IS programs are related to a host of factors, including whether a program is housed within the political science department. Finally, we provide suggestions for improving the relationship between political science and IS.

With entries from leading international scholars from around the world, this title provides a definitive, comprehensive picture o all aspects of political life, recognizing its theoretical foundations and including empirical findings from across the globe

An article & two responses that discuss the establishment of an interdisciplinary perspective that combines legal theory & political science perspectives are presented. Rather than assert that such an interdisciplinary approach is feasible, Karen J. Alter contends that legal theory & political science perspectives can collaborate but are ultimately incompatible. Specifically, it is claimed that legal theory & political science are concerned with distinct enterprises, eg, whereas legal analysis is largely a normative endeavor, political science is primarily a positivist venture. Additional attention is directed toward discussing the different methodologies & styles of writing used in legal & political science scholarship. A rationale for encouraging collaboration between the two disciplinary approaches is also offered. In response, Renaud Dehousse questions the validity of Alter's contention that legal theory & political science are incompatible. It is subsequently asserted that the European integration movement necessitates scholars from both disciplines to incorporate methods from the other discipline since the European Union combines politics & law. In response, Georg Vanberg emphasizes the importance of Alter's argument yet suggests that legal theorists must dedicate additional attention to questions of empirical testing in comparative studies. Moreover, both legal theorists & political scientists are urged to examine the circumstances that provide authority to principled legal arguments. 28 References. J. W. Parker