Abstract
The notion of ‘reflexivity’ has been so intimately tied to the critique of positivism and empiricism in International Relations (IR) that the emergence of post-positivism has naturally produced the anticipation of a ‘reflexive turn’ in IR theory. Three decades after the launch of the post-positivist critique, however, reflexive IR has failed to impose itself as either a clear or serious contender to mainstream scholarship. Reasons for this failure include: the proliferation of different understandings of ‘reflexivity’ in IR theory that entail significantly different projects and concerns for IR scholarship; the equation of ‘reflexive theory’ with ‘critical’ and ‘emancipatory theory’ and the consequent confusion of ethical/normative issues with strictly epistemic/theoretical ones; and the refusal to consider reflexive IR as a ‘research programme’ concerned with empirical knowledge, not just meta-explanation. The development of reflexivity in IR theory as a sustainable cognitive and praxeological effort is nonetheless possible — and still needed. This article suggests what taking the ‘reflexive turn’ would really entail for IR.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 669-694 |
| Journal | European Journal of International Relations |
| Volume | 19 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| Early online date | 30 May 2013 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Dec 2013 |
Keywords
- constructivism
- critical theory
- epistemology
- interdisciplinarity
- reflexivism
- reflexitivity
- vales