Abstract
International Practice Theory (IPT) has established a new paradigm that puts practitioners’ quotidian doings front and centre of International Relations (IR) theorising. It is proving to be an influential development also for Area Studies (AS) that share much of IR’s scholarship and objects of study. This is certainly the case for European Studies (ES) as the works of IPT scholars have raised attention to situated, mundane and everyday practices of EU institutions. This chapter reviews the contribution of IPT scholars to ES to assess the added value of this research agenda and its potential to become a “trading zone” where IR and AS scholars can advance their understanding of how the local and the global connect. It also identifies two challenges that have not been adequately addressed in the extant literature: (1) finding ways to theorise and empirically observe the transition from situated to global practices (generalisation challenge); and (2) assessing the exact role of interaction in structuring and transforming both the global and the local (challenge of relationism). The chapter ends by calling for a Global Practice Theory (GPT) as a way to tackle these two challenges.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Confront, for example, the works cited in this chapter with the ones discussed by Bueger and Gadinger to take stock of the practice turn (Bueger & Gadinger, 2018).
- 2.
Rebecca Adler-Nissen, for example, has been a member of the board of the Danish European Community Studies Association (ECSA-DK) between 2013 and 2017.
- 3.
It can be argued that this applies more in general to the role of constructivism in AS, as per the discussion by Teti (2007).
Reference lists
Acharya, A. (2014). Global international relations (IR) and regional worlds: A new agenda for international studies. International Studies Quarterly, 58(4), 647–659.
Acharya, A. (2016). Advancing global IR: Challenges, contentions, and contributions. International Studies Review, 18(1), 4–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viv016
Adler, E. (2004). Communitarian international relations.
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. (2009). Europe as a civilizational community of practice. In P. J. Katzenstein (Ed.), Civilizations in world politics: Plural and pluralist perspectives (pp. 67–90). Routledge.
Adler, E., & Pouliot, V. (2011). International practices. International Theory, 3(1), 1–36.
Adler-Nissen, R. (2014a). Opting out of the European Union: Diplomacy. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107337916
Adler-Nissen, R. (2014b). Symbolic power in European diplomacy: The struggle between national foreign services and the EU’s external action service. Review of International Studies, 40(4), 657–681.
Adler-Nissen, R. (2016). Towards a practice turn in EU studies: The everyday of European integration special issue: Another theory is possible: Dissident voices in theorising Europe. Journal of Common Market Studies, 54(1), 87–103.
Adler-Nissen, R., & Drieschova, A. (2019). Track-change diplomacy: Technology, affordances, and the practice of international negotiations. International Studies Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqz030
Adler-Nissen, R., & Kropp, K. (2015). A Sociology of knowledge approach to European integration: Four analytical principles. Journal of European Integration, 37(2), 155–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2014.990133
Aris, S. (2021). International vs. area? The disciplinary-politics of knowledge-exchange between IR and Area Studies. International Theory, 13(3), 451–482. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1752971920000184
Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning (Second Printing edition). Duke University Press Books.
Bell, D. (2009). Writing the world: Disciplinary history and beyond. International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-), 85(1), 3–22.
Bellamy, A. J. (2016). The humanisation of security? Towards an international human protection regime. European Journal of International Security, 1(1), 112–133.
Bicchi, F. (2011). The EU as a community of practice: Foreign policy communications in the COREU network. Journal of European Public Policy, 18(8), 1115–1132. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2011.615200
Bicchi, F. (2016). Europe under occupation: The European diplomatic community of practice in the Jerusalem area. European Security, 25(4), 461–477.
Bicchi, F., & Bremberg, N. (2016). European diplomatic practices: Contemporary challenges and innovative approaches. European Security, 25(4), 391–406.
Bigo, D. (2000). When two become one: Internal and external securitisations in Europe. In M. Kelstrup & M. Williams (Eds.), International relations theory and the politics of European integration: Power, security and community (pp. 171–204). Taylor & Francis Group. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/sdub/detail.action?docID=166031
Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice. Stanford University Press.
Brandenburg, N. C. (2017). eu mediation as an assemblage of practices: Introducing a new approach to the study of EU conflict resolution. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 55(5), 993–1008. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12532
Bremberg, N. (2016). Making sense of the EU’s response to the Arab uprisings: Foreign policy practice at times of crisis. European Security, 25(4), 423–441. https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2016.1236019
Bueger, C. (2012). From epistemology to practice: A sociology of science for international relations. Journal of International Relations and Development, 15(1), 97–109.
Bueger, C. (2016). Doing Europe: Agency and the European Union in the field of counter-piracy practice. European Security, 25(4), 407–422. https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2016.1236020
Bueger, C. (2018). Territory, authority, expertise: Global governance and the counter-piracy assemblage. European Journal of International Relations, 24(3), 614–637. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066117725155
Bueger, C., & Gadinger, F. (2007). Reassembling and Dissecting: International relations practice from a science studies perspective. International Studies Perspectives, 8(1), 90–110.
Bueger, C., & Gadinger, F. (2015). The play of international practice. International Studies Quarterly, 59(3), 449–460.
Bueger, C., & Gadinger, F. (2018). International practice theory. Palgrave Macmillan.
Chamlian, L. (2019). European Union Studies as power/knowledge dispositif: Towards a reflexive turn. Culture, Practice & Europeanization, 4(2), 59–77.
Chan, S., Mandaville, P. G., & Bleiker, R. (2001). The Zen of international relations: IR theory from East to West. Palgrave. http://site.ebrary.com/id/10487878
Cornut, J. (2017). Practice turn in international relations theory. In The International Studies Encyclopedia. Wiley-Blackwell. http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780191842665.001.0001/acref-9780191842665-e-0456
D’Amato, S., Dian, M., & Russo, A. (2022). Reaching for allies? The dialectics and overlaps between International Relations and Area Studies in the study of politics, security and conflicts. Italian Political Science Review, Early view.
De Franco, C. (forthcoming). The logic of narrativity: Recasting the role of language in international practices.
De Franco, C. (2022). Turning towards practices: On the common ground of international relations and European studies. Italian Political Science Review / Rivista Italiana Di Scienza Politica, 52(2), 172–186. https://doi.org/10.1017/ipo.2022.11
De Franco, C., & Gelot, L. (forthcoming). Recasting norm contestation as a transnational field’s struggle: The case of Human Rights contestation in the EU-AU strategic partnership.
Deneckere, M. (2019). The uncharted path towards a European peace facility (Discussion Paper No. 248). ECDPM. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2014_2019/plmrep/COMMITTEES/SEDE/DV/2020/02-17/1101_uncharted-path-towards-a-European-Peace-Facility-ECDPM_EN.pdf
Diez, T. (2005). Constructing the self and changing others: Reconsidering `normative power Europe’. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 33(3), 613–636. https://doi.org/10.1177/03058298050330031701
Ekengren, M. (2018). Explaining the European Union’s foreign policy: A practice theory of translocal action. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108381451
Epstein, C. (2013a). Theorizing agency in hobbes’s wake: The rational actor, the self, or the speaking subject? International Organization, 67(2), 287–316.
Epstein, C. (2013b). Constructivism or the eternal return of universals in International Relations: Why returning to language is vital to prolonging the owl’s flight. European Journal of International Relations, 19(3), 499–519.
Epstein, C., & Wæver, O. (forthcoming). The turn to turns in international relations.
Fawcett, L., Hall, T. H., Hurrell, A., & de Estrada, K. S. (2020). Contributor introduction: Does international relations need area studies? St Antony’s International Review (STAIR), 16(1), 175–176.
Fierke, K. M., & Jabri, V. (2019). Global conversations: Relationality, embodiment and power in the move towards a Global IR. Global Constitutionalism, 8(3), 506–535. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045381719000121
Foucault, M. (2007). In M. Senellart, F. Ewald, & A. Fontana (Eds.), Security, territory, population. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230245075
Frost, M., & Lechner, S. (2016). Two conceptions of international practice: Aristotelian praxis or Wittgensteinian language-games? Review of International Studies, 42(02), 334–350.
Gahrn-Andersen, R. (2019). But language too is material! Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 18(1), 169–183.
Galison, P. L. (1999). Reflections on image and logic: A material culture of microphysics. Perspectives on Science, 7(2), 255–284.
Godefroy, B., & Chinitz, D. (2019, August 29). More good than harm: Why the EU must learn from others’ mistakes to ensure better protection of civilians through European peace facility (EPF) activities. Center for Civilians in Conflict (CIVIC). https://civiliansinconflict.org/blog/epf-ensure-civilian-protection/
Græger, N. (2016). European security as practice: EU–NATO communities of practice in the making? European Security, 25(4), 478–501. https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2016.1236021
Hill, C. (1993). The capability-expectations gap, or conceptualizing europe’s international role. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 31(3), 305–328. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.1993.tb00466.x
Hofius, M. (2016). Community at the border or the boundaries of community? The case of EU field diplomats. Review of International Studies, 42(5), 939–967. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210516000085
Huelss, H. (2017). After decision-making: The operationalization of norms in International Relations. International Theory, 9(3), 381–409.
Hui, A. (2017). Variations and the intersection of practices. In A. Hui, T. R. Schatzki, & E. Shove (Eds.), The nexus of practices: Connections, constellations and practitioners (pp. 52–67). Routledge.
Katzenstein, P. J. (2002). Area studies, regional studies, and international relations. Journal of East Asian Studies, 2(1), 127–137. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1598240800000709
Kauppi, N. (2003). Bourdieu’s political sociology and the politics of European integration. Theory and Society, 32(5–6), 775–789.
Kauppi, N. (2018). Constructing transnational fields. In N. Kauppi (Ed.), Toward a reflexive political sociology of the European Union: Fields, intellectuals and politicians (pp. 69–88). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71002-0_4
Kauppi, N., & Madsen, M. R. (2014). Fields of global governance: how transnational power elites can make global governance intelligible. International Political Sociology, 8(3), 324–330. https://doi.org/10.1111/ips.12060
Köllner, P., Sil, R., & Ahram, A. I. (2018). Comparative area studies. What it is, what it can do. In A. I. Ahram, P. Köllner, & R. Sil (Eds.), Comparative area studies: Editors methodological rationales and cross-regional applications (pp. 3–26). Oxford University Press.
Kurki, M. (2011). Governmentality and EU democracy promotion: The European instrument for democracy and human rights and the construction of democratic civil societies1. International Political Sociology, 5(4), 349–366. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-5687.2011.00139.x
Kuus, M. (2014). Geopolitics and expertise: Knowledge and authority in European diplomacy. John Wiley & Sons.
Kuus, M. (2015). Symbolic power in diplomatic practice: Matters of style in Brussels. Cooperation and Conflict, 50(3), 368–384.
Larsen, H. (2020). Normative power Europe or capability–expectations gap? The performativity of concepts in the study of European foreign policy. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 58(4), 962–977. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12998
Latour, B. (1996). On interobjectivity. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 3(4), 228–245.
Leander, A. (2008). Thinking tools. In A. Klotz & D. Prakash (Eds.), Qualitative methods in international relations: A pluralist guide (pp. 11–27). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230584129_2
Lequesne, C. (2015). EU foreign policy through the lens of practice theory: A different approach to the European External Action Service. Cooperation and Conflict, 50(3), 351–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836715578742
Manners, I. (2002). Normative power Europe: A contradiction in terms? JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 40(2), 235–258. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5965.00353
Manners, I. (2006). Normative power Europe reconsidered: Beyond the crossroads. Journal of European Public Policy, 13(2), 182–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760500451600
Mérand, F. (2006). Social representations in the European Security and defence policy. Cooperation and Conflict, 41(2), 131–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836706063659
Mérand, F. (2010). Pierre Bourdieu and the birth of European defense. Security Studies, 19(2), 342–374. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636411003795780
Mérand, F., & Rayroux, A. (2016). The practice of burden sharing in European crisis management operations. European Security, 25(4), 442–460. https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2016.1236022
Ralph, J., & Gifkins, J. (2017). The purpose of United Nations Security Council practice: Contesting competence claims in the normative context created by the responsibility to protect. European Journal of International Relations, 23(3), 630–653. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066116669652
Reckwitz, A. (2002). Toward a theory of social practices: A development in culturalist theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, 5(2), 243–263.
Ringmar, E. (2016). How the world stage makes its subjects: An embodied critique of constructivist IR theory. Journal of International Relations and Development, 19(1), 101–125.
Rosamond, B. (2007). European integration and the social science of EU studies: The disciplinary politics of a subfield. International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-), 83(2), 231–252.
Schatzki, T. R. (1997). Practices and actions: A Wittgensteinian critique of Bourdieu and Giddens. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 27(3), 283–308.
Swidler, A. (2001). What anchors cultural practices. In K. Knorr Cetina, T. R. Schatzki, & E. von Savigny (Eds.), The practice turn in contemporary theory (pp. 83–101). Taylor & Francis Group. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/sdub/detail.action?docID=235322
Teti, A. (2007). Bridging the gap: IR, middle east studies and the disciplinary politics of the area studies controversy. European Journal of International Relations, 13(1), 117–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066107074291
Tiilikainen, T. (2019). Theory of European integration as a challenge to IR theories. Global Affairs, 5(4–5), 477–484. https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2020.1722957
Turner, J. H., & Boyns, D. E. (2001). The return of grand theory. In J. H. Turner (Ed.), Handbook of sociological theory (pp. 353–378). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-36274-6_18
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press.
Wiener, A. (2018). Contestation and constitution of norms in global international relations (1st ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
De Franco, C. (2023). Connecting the Local and the Global: International Practice Theory as a Trading Zone for International Relations and Area Studies Scholars. In: D'Amato, S., Dian, M., Russo, A. (eds) International Relations and Area Studies. Contributions to International Relations. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-39655-7_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-39655-7_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-39654-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-39655-7
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)