Search results

"Since the 1970s, a 'critical' movement has been developing in the humanities and social sciences denouncing the existence of a 'Western dominance' over the worldwide production and circulation of knowledge. However, thirty years after the emergence of this promising agenda in International Relations (IR), this discipline has not experienced a major shift. This volume offers a counter-intuitive and original contribution to the understanding of the global circulation of knowledge. In constrast with the literature, it argues that the internationalisation of social sciences in the designated 'Global South' is not conditioned by the existence of a presumably 'Western dominance'. Indeed, though discriminative practices such as Eurocentrism and gate-keeping practices exist, their existence does not lead to a unipolar structuration of IR internationalisation around 'the West'. Based on these empirical results, this book reflexively questions the role of critique in the (re)production of the social and political order. Paradoxically, the anti-Eurocentric critical discourses reproduce the very Eurocentrism they criticise. This book offers methodological support to address this paradox by demonstrating how one can use discourse analysis and reflexivity to produce innovative results and decenter oneself from the vision of the world one has been socialised into. This work offers an insightful contribution to International Relations, Political Theory, Sociology and Qualitative Methodology. It will be useful to all students and scholars interested in critical theories, international political sociology, social sciences in Brazil and India, knowledge and discourse, Eurocentrism, as well as the future of reflexivity"--

How to implement reflexivity in practice? Can the knowledge we produce be emancipatory when our discourses recursively originate in the world we aim to challenge? Critical International Relations (IR) scholars have successfully put reflexivity on the agenda based on the theoretical premise that discourse and knowledge play a socio-political role. However, academics often find themselves at a loss when it comes to implementing reflexivity due to the lack of adapted methodological and pedagogical material. This article shifts reflexivity from meta-reflections on the situatedness of research into a distinctive practice of research and writing that can be learned and taught alongside other research practices. To do so, I develop a methodology based on discourse: reflexive discourse analysis (RDA). Based on the discourse analysis of our own discourse and self-resocialisation, RDA aims to reflexively assess and transform our socio-discursive engagement with the world, so as to render it consistent with our intentional socio-political objectives. RDA builds upon a theoretical framework integrating discourse theory to Bourdieu's conceptual apparatus for reflexivity and practices illustrated in the works of Comte and La Boétie. To illustrate this methodology, I used this very article as a recursive performance. I show how RDA enabled me to identify implicit discriminative mechanisms within my discourse and transform them into an alternative based on love, to produce an article more in line with my socio-political objectives. Overall, this article turns reflexivity into a critical methodology for social change and demonstrates how to integrate criticality methodologically into research and writing.

How to implement reflexivity in practice? Can the knowledge we produce be emancipatory when our discourses recursively originate in the world we aim to challenge? Critical International Relations (IR) scholars have successfully put reflexivity on the agenda based on the theoretical premise that discourse and knowledge play a socio-political role. However, academics often find themselves at a loss when it comes to implementing reflexivity due to the lack of adapted methodological and pedagogical material. This article shifts reflexivity from meta-reflections on the situatedness of research into a distinctive practice of research and writing that can be learned and taught alongside other research practices. To do so, I develop a methodology based on discourse: reflexive discourse analysis (RDA). Based on the discourse analysis of our own discourse and self-resocialisation, RDA aims to reflexively assess and transform our socio-discursive engagement with the world, so as to render it consistent with our intentional socio-political objectives. RDA builds upon a theoretical framework integrating discourse theory to Bourdieu's conceptual apparatus for reflexivity and practices illustrated in the works of Comte and La Boétie. To illustrate this methodology, I used this very article as a recursive performance. I show how RDA enabled me to identify implicit discriminative mechanisms within my discourse and transform them into an alternative based on love, to produce an article more in line with my socio-political objectives. Overall, this article turns reflexivity into a critical methodology for social change and demonstrates how to integrate criticality methodologically into research and writing.

Since the 1980s, International Relations (IR) scholars have emphasised the 'geoepistemological' dynamics underpinning the global structuration of discipline diversity. By focusing mainly on the study of 'American' and 'non-Western' IR, this debate has given little attention to the voices, perspectives, and practices of those scholars who study IR in Europe. This article aims reflexively to question the identity dynamics of the marginalisation of European cases in the debate about diversity and hegemony in International Relations. Using anthropological and sociological tools, such as the idea of 'misery of position' developed by Pierre Bourdieu, it explores the postcolonial and eurocentric narratives that can explain this situation, while also putting forward why assuming a balanced ethnocentric stance would provide a more appropriate relational model to promote pluralism.

Despite the imperative to pay attention to the words we use as a routine dimension of research, the methodological and pedagogical tools illustrating how to work on our own use of language are largely missing within and beyond international relations (IR). To address this gap, we develop a method—the "Reflexive Review"—which adds a linguistic and reflexive dimension to the common practice of a literature review. This method is accessible for researchers who are neither linguistic specialists nor working on language and can be integrated within a standalone research project. First, we review the existing traditions used in IR to investigate language—quantitative text analysis, conceptual analysis, discourse analysis, deconstruction, and problematization—and assess their interest and limits regarding linguistic reflexivity. Second, we introduce four methodological steps for conducting the Reflexive Review, by reviewing literature to: (1) build a list of "priority words" that may need reflexive attention; (2) look for metalinguistic statements to synthesize how the literature has explicitly discussed these words; (3) identify patterns of word use, as collectively shared meanings that coexist and that we should become aware of; and (4) compare the identified uses of language with our own. Third, we demonstrate the Reflexive Review in practice based on a word commonly used in IR: "local." We identify four patterns of the word use of "local" in IR literature as: a class of actors, a level of analysis, community, and experiences of the everyday. In sum, we demonstrate how a Reflexive Review enables us to implement reflexivity in practice and make more conscious linguistic choices, to support more nuanced, ethical, and rigorous analysis and empirical work.

Despite the imperative to pay attention to the words we use as a routine dimension of research, the methodological and pedagogical tools illustrating how to work on our own use of language are largely missing within and beyond international relations (IR). To address this gap, we develop a method—the "Reflexive Review"—which adds a linguistic and reflexive dimension to the common practice of a literature review. This method is accessible for researchers who are neither linguistic specialists nor working on language and can be integrated within a standalone research project. First, we review the existing traditions used in IR to investigate language—quantitative text analysis, conceptual analysis, discourse analysis, deconstruction, and problematization—and assess their interest and limits regarding linguistic reflexivity. Second, we introduce four methodological steps for conducting the Reflexive Review, by reviewing literature to: (1) build a list of "priority words" that may need reflexive attention; (2) look for metalinguistic statements to synthesize how the literature has explicitly discussed these words; (3) identify patterns of word use, as collectively shared meanings that coexist and that we should become aware of; and (4) compare the identified uses of language with our own. Third, we demonstrate the Reflexive Review in practice based on a word commonly used in IR: "local." We identify four patterns of the word use of "local" in IR literature as: a class of actors, a level of analysis, community, and experiences of the everyday. In sum, we demonstrate how a Reflexive Review enables us to implement reflexivity in practice and make more conscious linguistic choices, to support more nuanced, ethical, and rigorous analysis and empirical work.

ABSTRACT
This study explores the application of role-play simulations (RPS) in addressing complex challenges (e.g., the climate crisis) beyond traditional educational settings. Drawing from pilot simulations involving 12 scientific experts and 12 policy makers, the article identifies three key challenges in conducting RPS with elite participants and provides practical strategies for overcoming them. Namely, the article emphasizes the importance of adapting the scenarios to sociopolitical contexts, choosing an ethical recruiting method to ensure inclusivity, and managing group diversity while maintaining a balance between the playfulness and the seriousness of the simulation. Overall, our study underscores the potential of RPS to foster dialogue between scientific and political actors and provides practical guidance for their effective use.