Relações Internacionais: o estado da disciplina

Auteurs-es

DOI :

https://doi.org/10.5752/P.1809-6182.2021v18n1p6-15

Mots-clés :

Relações Internacionais, Teoria das Relações Internacionais, Metodologia

Résumé

Ao longo de quase um século de desenvolvimento das Relações Internacionais, alunos e acadêmicos deparam-se com uma variedade de campos teóricos, métodos e temas de pesquisa. Este artigo resume a evolução histórica da disciplina, aponta os principais métodos utilizados e identifica debates contemporâneos, buscando auxiliar estudantes recém-ingressos no curso.

Téléchargements

Les données relatives au téléchargement ne sont pas encore disponibles.

Biographie de l'auteur-e

Felipe Leal Albuquerque, Instituto de Ciências Sociais da Universidade de Lisboa (ICS-UL)

Especialista (PUC-Rio, 2009) e mestre (UERJ, 2013) em Relações Internacionais e doutor em Ciência Política pelo Instituto de Ciências Sociais da Universidade de Lisboa (ICS-UL, 2020). Foi Marie Curie Fellow (2014-2017) do programa da Comissão Europeia "Power and Region in a Multipolar Order (PRIMO-ITN)" e professor colaborador do mestrado em Ciência Política da Universidade de Salamanca. Em 2016, foi Doctoral Researcher na Universidade de Stellenbosch, na África do Sul, e no German Institute of Global and Area Studies (GIGA), em Hamburgo. Foi professor substituto de Política Internacional do IFCS-UFRJ e assistente de pesquisa no Centro de Pesquisa e Documentação de História Contemporânea do Brasil da Fundação Getúlio Vargas (CPDOC-FGV), também tendo atuado na Agência da ONU para Refugiados (ACNUR). Seus principais interesses são análise de política externa e processo decisório, métodos qualitativos e regimes multilaterais (especialmente mudança do clima, segurança alimentar, paz e segurança internacionais e migrações).

Références

ACHARYA, Amitav. The End of American World Order. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2014.

ACHARYA, Amitav; BUZAN, Barry. Why There is no non-Western International Relations Theory? An Introduction. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, v. 7, n. 3, p. 287-331, 2007.

BEACH, Derek; PEDERSEN, Rasmus Brun. Process-tracing Methods: Foundations and Guidelines. Michigan: University of Michigan Press, 2013.

BILGIN, Pinar. Thinking past ‘Western’ IR. Third World Quarterly, v. 29, n. 1, pp. 5-23, 2008.

BREMMER, Ian. Every Nation for Itself: Winners and Losers in a G-Zero World. New York: Portfolio/Penguin, 2013

BROWN, Chris; AINLEY, Kirsten. Understanding International Relations. Nova York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.

BURCHILL, Scott; LINKLATER, Andrew. Introduction. In: BURCHILL, Scott; LINKLATER, Andrew; DEVETAK, Richard; DONNELLY, Jack; PATERSON, Matthew; REUS-SMIT, Christian; TRUE, Jacqui (eds.). Theories of International Relations. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005, p. 12-13.

CHOWDHRY, Geeta; NAIR, Sheila (eds.). Power, Postcolonialism and International Relations: Reading Race, Gender, and Class. London and New York: Routledge, 2004.

DERICHS, Claudia. Asiatische Zeitenwende? Von der bipolaren zur polyzentrischen Weltordnung (Asian sea change? From the bipolar to a polycentric world order). Politische Vierteljahresschrift, v. 48, p. 41-66, 2014.

FRIEDBERG, Aaron L. Ripe for Rivalry: Prospects for Peace in a Multipolar Asia. International Security, v. 18, n. 3, p. 5-33, 1994.

GOERTZ, Gary. Multimethod Research, Causal Mechanisms, and Case Studies: an Integrated Approach. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2017.

HAAS, Ernst B. The Uniting of Europe: Political, Social, and Economic Forces 1950-1957. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1958.

HAAS, Richard N. The Age of Nonpolarity. Foreign Affairs, v. 87, n. 3, p. 44-56, 2008.

HUNTINGTON, Samuel. The Lonely Superpower. Foreign Affairs, v. 78, n. 2, p. 35-49, 1999.

KANT, Immanuel. To Perpetual Peace: a Philosophical Sketch. Indiana: Hackett Publishing, 2003.

KEOHANE, Robert O.; NYE JR., Joseph. Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition. Boston: Little, Brown, 1977.

KEOHANE, Robert O.; MARTIN Lisa. Institutional Theory, Endogeneity, and Delegation. Working Paper 99-07. Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard University, Cambridge, p. 1-55, 1999.

ONUF, Nicholas. World of Our Making: Rules and Rule in Social Theory and International Relations. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1989.

RAGIN, Charles C. Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008.

SIKKINK, Kathryn. Latin American Countries as Norm Protagonists of the Idea of International Human Rights. Global Governance, v. 20, n. 3, p. 389-404, 2014.

STUENKEL, Oliver. Post-Western World: How Emerging Powers are Remaking Global Order. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2016.

TICKNER, Ann J, Gender in International Relations: Feminist Perspectives on Achieving Global Security. New York: Columbia University Press, 1992.

TICKNER, Arlene B.; WAEVER, Ole (eds.). International Relations Scholarship Around the World: Worlding Beyond the West. New York: Routledge, 2009.

ZAKARIA, Fareed. The Post-American World. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2008.

ZARAKOL, Ayse. After Defeat: How the East Learned to Live with the West. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011.

WAEVER, Ole. Rise and Fall of the Inter-paradigm Debate. In SMITH, Steve; BOOTH, Ken; ZALEWSKI, Marysia (eds.). International Theory: Positivism and Beyond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996, p. 149-185.

WALTZ, Kenneth N. Theory of International Politics. Illinois: Waveland Press, 2010.

WATSON, Adam. The Evolution of International Society. London: Routledge, 1992.

WENDT, Alexander E. The Agent-structure Problem in International Relations Theory. International Organization, v. 41, n. 3, p. 335-370, 1987.

WOMACK, Brantly. Asymmetry and International Relationships. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016.

Publié-e

2021-12-10

Comment citer

Albuquerque, F. L. (2021). Relações Internacionais: o estado da disciplina. Conjuntura Internacional, 18(1), 6–15. https://doi.org/10.5752/P.1809-6182.2021v18n1p6-15