• DOI:10.4135/9781412959636.n295
• Corpus ID: 146684756

International Relations as a Field of Study

@inproceedings{Hellmann2011InternationalRA,
  title={International Relations as a Field of Study},
  author={Gunther Hellmann},
  year={2011}
}

• G. Hellmann
• Published 2011
• Political Science

The field “International Relations” (commonly abbreviated IR) focuses on a variety of subject matters. The many connotations which are usually associated with the term “relations” (one of the most underspecified terms in the field itself) and the aesthetic quality which accompanies relating the name of the field (IR) to a broad set of subject matters subsumed under the same term in minor letters, “international relations”, help explain why both IR and “international relations” are still widely accepted. Of course, this is not to say that there is consensus. As a matter of fact, and unsurprisingly so, both the name of the field as well as any succinct description of its subject matter(s) have always been contested. Different observers have argued that the “international” ought to be replaced by “inter-state”, “trans-national”, or “global” – just to name a few. Others would like to see “relations” replaced by “studies” or “politics”. A brief look at some of these alternative combinations – eg. “inter-state relations”, “trans-national politics”, or “global studies” – would give any reader a quick idea as far as different emphases is concerned even if he or she would not be familiar with the normative and theoretical underpinnings which inform these alternative descriptions of the field of study and its subject matter(s). For this very reason conceptual contestation is unsurprising: it is already an expression of the inevitable and recurring ascertainment of the borders of a field of study by the community of scholars belonging to it and claiming it as their own.