نگرشی نوین به مطالعۀ همگرایی منطقه‌ای: کردارگرایی و کاربست آن در مطالعات همگرایی اروپا

نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری، مطالعات منطقه‌ای، دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی

2 استاد، روابط بین‌الملل. دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی

چکیده

همگرایی منطقه‌ای از مهم‌ترین پدیده‌های بین‌المللی در جهان محسوب می‌شود که همواره در روابط بین‌الملل و مطالعات منطقه‌ای از مجموعه ادبیات نظری خاص برخوردار بوده است. نظریاتی چون فدرالیسم،کارکردگرایی، نوکارکردگرایی، نظریۀ ارتباطات و ... از جمله مهم‌ترین نظریه‌هایی هستند که به‌صورت خاص در پی تشریح چگونگی همگرایی منطقه‌ای در یک منطقۀ خاص هستند.«چرخش کرداری» و یا «کردارگرایی» یکی از آخرین دستاوردهای نظری در روابط بین‌الملل محسوب می‌شود که بسیاری از محققان اقدام به کاربست آن در مطالعات همگرایی منطقه‌ای کرده‌اند. مطابق مبانی اصلی این رویکرد نظری، پدیده‌های بین‌المللی برحسب «کردارهای» روزمرۀ بین‌المللی تحلیل می‌شوند. هستی‌شناسی،معرفت‌شناسی و روش‌شناسی خاص و تکثرگرای این رویکرد نظری موجب شده است تابسیاری از محققان مطالعات اروپا از آن جهت تحلیل و بررسی چگونگی همگرایی در اروپا بهره جویند. به‌همین‌منظور، در مقالۀ حاضر برآنیم تا با تشریح این رویکرد نظری به کاربست آن در مطالعات همگرایی اروپا و توسعۀ آن بپردازیم. براین اساس، پرسش اصلی مقالۀ حاضر این است که کردارگرایی چگونه بر توسعۀ مطالعات همگرایی در اروپا تأثیر گذاشته است؟یافته‌های نوشتار حاضر نشان می‌دهد که مطالعات مبتنی بر کردارگرایی درک سنتی‌تر و ادبیات نظری پیشینی از پویایی همگرایی اروپا را به‌ چالش کشیده است. درحقیقت، کردارگرایی نسل جدید محققان مطالعات اروپا را وادار کرده است تا در رابطه با مفروضات اصلی اتحادیۀ اروپا تجدیدنظر کرده و فراتر از هستی‌شناسی و روش‌های وابسته به نظریه‌های موجود در روابط بین‌الملل به‌صورت عملی و با مطالعۀ میدانی از کردارها، عملکردها و فعالیت‌های اجتماعی روزمره در نهادهای وابسته به اتحادیۀ اروپا به مطالعه و تحقیق همگرایی در اروپا بپردازند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

A New Approach to the Study of Regional Integration: Practice Theory and its Application in European Integration Studies

نویسندگان [English]

  • Milad Lotfi 1
  • Seyed Jalal Dehghani Firoozabadi 2
1 PhD Student, Regional Studies. Law & Political Faculty, Allameh Tabatabai University.
2 Professor, International Relationship, Law & Political Faculty, Allameh Tabatabai University.
چکیده [English]

Regional integration is considered one of the most important international phenomena in the world, which has always had special theoretical literature in international relations and regional studies. Theories such as federalism, functionalism, neo-functionalism, communication theory, etc. are among the most important theories that specifically seek to explain how regional integration occurs in a specific region. "Practice turn" or "practice theory" is considered one of the latest theoretical achievements in international relations, which many researchers have tried to apply in regional integration studies. According to the main principles of this theoretical approach, international phenomena are analyzed in terms of international "actions". The specific and pluralistic ontology, epistemology, and methodology of this theoretical approach have made many researchers of European studies use it to analyze and investigate the integration in Europe. For this purpose, in the present article, we intend to describe this theoretical approach and apply it to European integration studies and its development. Therefore, the main question of this article is, how has practice theory influenced the development of integration studies in Europe? The findings of this paper show that studies based on practice theory have challenged the more traditional understanding and previous theoretical literature on the dynamics of European integration. In fact, practice theory has forced the new generation of European studies researchers to reconsider the main assumptions of the European Union and go beyond the ontology and methods related to the existing theories in international relations.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Regional integration
  • Practice theory
  • Europe
  • Everyday activities

مراجع

  •  

     

    منابع

    • بیوگر، ک.، و گادنیجر، ف. (1400)، نظریه کردارگرایی بین‏‌الملل: چشم‏‌اندازهای نوین. (س. ج. دهقانی فیروزآبادی، مترجم) تهران: ابرار معاصر.
    • دهقانی‌ فیروزآبادی، س.، و رادفر، ف. (1401)، مبانی فرانظری کردارگرایی در روابط بین الملل. مطالعات راهبردی، 3(97)، ۱۹۵ - ۲۲۶.
    • Adler, E. (2008), The Spread of Security Communities: Communities of Practice, Self-Restraint, and NATO’s Post–Cold War Transformation. European Journal of International Relations, 14(2), 195–230.
    • Adler, E., & Pouliot, V. (2011), International Practices. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    • Adler-Nissen, R. (2012), Bourdieu in International Relations: Rethinking Key Concepts in IR. Routledge.
    • Adler-Nissen, R. (2014), Opting Out of the European Union: Diplomacy, Sovereignty and European Integration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    • Adler-Nissen, R. (2015), Towards a Practice Turn in EU Studies: The Everyday of European Integration. Journal of Common Market Studies. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12329
    • Ban, C. (2013), Management and Culture in an Enlarged European Commission: From Diversity to Unity? Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
    • Bellier, I. (2002), In and out, fieldwork in a political space: the case of the European Commission. Österreichische Zeitschrift fûr Politikwissenchaft, 31(2), 205-216.
    • Börzel, T., & Risse, (2003), Conceptualizing the domestic impact of Europe. The Politics of Europeanization , 57–82.
    • Bourdieu, P. (1977), Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    • Bucher, B. (2018), Moving beyond the substantialist foundations of the agency-structure dichotomy: figurational thinking in international relations. Journal of International Relations and Development, 11(1), 408–433.
    • Bueger, C., & Gadinger, F. (2015), International Practice Theory: New Perspectives. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
    • Checkel, J. T. (2005), International Institutions and Socialization in Europe: Introduction and Framework. International Organization, 59(4), 801-826.
    • Cini, M. (2013), EU Decision-Making on Inter-Institutional Agreements: Defining (Common) Rules of Conduct for European Lobbyists and Public Servants. West European Politics, 36(6), 1143-1158.
    • Crawford, G., Jaspersen, L., Kruckenberg, L., & Lou, N. (2017), Understanding Global Development Research: Fieldwork Issues, Experiences and Reflections. SAGE.
    • Deutsch, K. W. (1957), Political Community and the North Atlantic Area. International Organization in the Light of His. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
    • Diez, T. (2004), Europe's others and the return of geopolitics. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 17(2), 319-335.
    • Favell, A. (2008), Eurostars and Eurocities: Free Movement and Mobility in an Integrating Europe. Oxford: WileyBlackwell.
    • Feldman, M., & Orlikowsk, W. (2011), Theorizing practice and practicing theory. Organization Science,, 5(22), 1240-1253.
    • Giddens, A. (1984), The Constitution Of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.
    • Hayes-Renshaw, F., Van Aken , W., & Wallace, H. (2006), When and why the EU Council of Ministers votes explicitly. Journal of Common Market Studies., 44(1), 161-194.
    • Hix, S. (1998), The study of the European Union II: the 'new governance' agenda and its rival. Journal of European Public Policy, 5(1), 38-65.
    • Hobson, J., & Seabrooke, L. (2009), Everyday international political economy In Blyth. Routledge Handbook of International Political Economy: IPE as a Global Conversation: Milton Park: Routledge.
    • Ingelgom, V. V. (2017), Integrating Indifference: A Comparative, Qualitative and Quantitative Approach to the. West European Politics, 38(6), 1363-1365.
    • Joseph, J., & Kurki, M. (2017), The limits of practice: why realism can complement IR’s practice turn. International Theory, 10(1), 71-97.
    • Kauppi, N. (2003), Bourdieu's Political Sociology and the Politics of European integration. Theory and Society, 32(5), 775-789.
    • Kohler-Koch, B., & Rittberger, B. (2006), Review Article: The 'Governance Turn' in EU Studies. Journal of Common Market Studies, 44(1), 27-49.
    • Lechner , S., & Frost , M. (2018), Practice Theory and International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    • Lefebvre, H. (2002), Critique of Everyday Life (Vol. 2). London: Verso.
    • Lewis, J. (2005), The Janus Face of Brussels: Socialization and Everyday Decision Making in the European Union. International Organization, 59(4), 937-971.
    • MacKay, J., & Levin, J. (2015), Hanging Out in International Politics: Two Kinds of Explanatory Political Ethnography for IR. International Studies Review, 17(2), 163-188.
    • McDonnald, M. (2000), McDonald, M. (2000) 'Accountability, Anthropology, and the European Commission In Strathern, M. (ed) Audit Cultures: Anthropological Studies in Accountability, Ethics, and the Academy . New York: Routledge.
    • McNamara, K. (2015), The Politics of Everyday Europe: Constructing Authority in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    • Mitchell, J. P. (2000), Ambivalent Europeans: Ritual, Memory and the Public Sphere in Malta. London: Routledge.
    • Montsion, J. M. (2018), Ethnography and international relations: situating recent trends, debates and limitations from an interdisciplinary perspective. The Journal of Chinese Sociology, 5(9).
    • Moravcsik, A. (1997), Taking preferences seriously: A liberal theory of international politics. International Organization, 51(4), 513-553.
    • Naurin, D., & Rasmussen, A. (2011), respond when inter-institutional rules change New external rules, new internal games: how the EU institutions. West European Politics, 34(1), 1-17.
    • Neumann, I. (2002), Returning Practice to Linguistic Turn: The Case of Diplomacy. Millennium – Journal of International Studies, 31(3), 627–51.
    • Neumann, I. B. (2012), At Home with the Diplomats: Inside a European Foreign Ministry. Expertise: Cultures and Technologies of Knowledge, 232. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7591/j.ctt7zjmn
    • Peltonen, H., & Traisbach, K. (2021), In the midst of theory and practice: a foreword. International Theory, 13(3), 508–512.
    • Sassatelli, M. (2000), The Arts, the State, and the EU: cultural policy in the making of Europe. Social Analysis, 21(1), 28-41.
    • Saurugger, S. (2010), The social construction of the participatory turn: The emergence of a norm in the European Union. European Journal of Political Research, 49(4), 471-495.
    • Schatzki, T. (2002), The Site of the Social: A Philosophical Account of the Constitution of Social Life and Change. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.
    • Schatzki, T. (2012), A Primer on Practices'. In J. Higgs et al (eds) Practice-Based Education (Rotterdam:SensePublishers), pp. 13-26.
    • Schimmelfennig, F. (2006), The community trap: Liberal norms, rhetorical action, and the eastern enlargement of the European Union. International Organization, 55(1), 47-80.
    • Shore, C. (2011), European Governance’ or Governmentality? The European Commission and the Future of Democratic Government. European Law Journal, 17(3), 287-303.
    • Stappert, N. (2020), The Art of Aiming at a Moving Target: A Critique of Lechner and Frost’s Practice Theory and International Relations. Global Constitutionalism, 9(1).
    • Walters, W. (2002), The power of inscription: beyond social construction and deconstruction in European integration studies. Millennium-Journal of International Studies, 31(1), 83-108.
    • Wenger, E. (1998), Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
    • Wiener, A. (1993), European'Citizenship Practice: Building Institutions of a Non-State. Boulder: Westview Press.
    • Wolfe, J. (2011), Who rules the EU? Pragmatism and power in European integration theory. Journal of Political Power,, 4(1), 127-144.
    • Zabusky, S. (2011), Launching Europe: An Ethnography of European Cooperation in Space Science. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار