Palavras-chave
Como Citar
Resumo
Nos últimos 40 anos, pesquisas mostraram que a disciplina de relações internacionais reproduz a influência norte-americana nos âmbitos da epistemologia, do método, dos paradigmas e dinâmicas institucionais. Este artigo visa a explorar o caso latino-americano, a partir da análise dos dados publicados pelo Teaching, Research and International Politics Project (TRIP) de 2014 do Instituto para a Teoria e Prática de Relações Internacionais do College William e Mary, Virginia (EUA), que pesquisa comunidades de relações internacionais em 32 países do mundo. O artigo tem por objetivo responder a duas questões principais: (i) se a influência norte-americana segue sendo dominante, em seus aspectos epistemológicos, paradigmáticos e de representações institucionais na região, tal como pesquisas no passado demonstraram; (ii) se existe contestação a tal influência na região. Em princípio, o artigo evidencia uma resposta positiva à primeira pergunta. Entretanto, e mais importante, a análise dos dados permite revelar a ascensão de questionamentos à influência norteamericana, sobretudo no que se refere aos aspectos epistêmicos e paradigmáticos. Os dados reforçam a tendência à miscigenação epistemológica e paradigmática e evidenciam não haver consenso quanto ao escopo de dominação norte-americana na comunidade latino-americana, especialmente por parte da comunidade epistêmica brasileira de relações internacionais, a mais numerosa e estruturada da região.Referências
ALKER, H.; BIERSTEKERR, T. “The dialectics of world order: notes for a future archeologist of international savoir faire”. International Studies Quarterly, 28(2), p. 121-142, Jun. 1984.
AYDINLI, E; MATTHEWS, J. “Are the core and the periphery irreconcilable? The curious world of publishing in contemporary International Relations”. International Studies Perspectives, 1, p. 289- 303, 2000.
AYDINLI, E.; MATTHEWS, J. “Turkey: towards homegrown theorizing and building a disciplinary community”. In: TICKNER, A.; WAEVER, O. (eds.). International Relations scholarship around the world. London & New York: Routledge. 2009.
AYOOB, M. Subaltern realism: International Relations theory meets the third world. In: NEUMAN, S. (ed.). International relations theory and the third world. New York: St. Martin´s Press, p. 31-54, 1998.
BIERSTEKER, T. “Eroding boundaries, contested terrain”. International Studies Review, 1(1), Spring, p. 3-9, 1999.
BARASUOL, F.; SILVA, A. “International Relations theory in Brazil: trends and challenges in teaching and research”. Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional, 59(2), e005, p. 1-20, 2016.
BREUNING, M. “Foreign policy analysis: an empirical assessment of the state of the art”. Paper prepared for presentation at “Foreign Policy Agendas and Actors: Views from the North and the South”. Institute of International Relations/Instituto de Relações Internacionais (IRI), Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), Brazil, Sep. 8-9, 2010.
BREUNING, M.; BREDEHOFT, J.; WALTON, E. “Promise and performance: an evaluation of journals in International Relations”. International Studies Perspectives, 6(4), p. 447-461, Nov. 2005.
BROWN, C. “The poverty of grand theory”. European Journal of International Relations, 19(3), p. 483- 497, 2013.
CARDOSO, F.; FALETO, E. Dependência e desenvolvimento na América Latina. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Zahar, 1979.
CARPICU, C. “¿Hacia una hegemonía del ‘modelo mainstream norteamericano’? Enfoques de la ciencia política en América Latina (2000-2012)”. Revista Latino-Americana de Investigación Crítica, 1 (1), p. 133-60, 2014.
DUNNE, T.; HANSEN, L.; WIGHT, C. “The end of International Relations theory?”. European Journal of International Relations, 19(3), p. 405-425, 2013.
ESCUDÉ, C. An introduction to peripherical realism and its implications for the interstate system: Argentina and the Condor II Missile Project. In: NEUMAN, S. (ed.). International Relations theory and the third world. New York: St. Martin’s Press, p. 55-75, 1998.
ESPACH, R. “International institutions: two approaches”. International Studies Quarterly, 32(4), p. 379-396, 1988.
ESPACH, R. (ed.). Latin America in the new international system. Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 2001.
GOLDSTEIN, J.; KEOHANE, R. (eds.). Ideas & foreign policy. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press. 1993.
HERZ, M. “The study of international relations in Latin America”. Symposium: “El Estado de la Disciplina de las Relaciones Internacionales en América”. Rio de Janeiro, 2010.
HOFFMANN, S. “An American social science: International Relations”. Daedalus, 106 (3), p. 41-60, 1977.
HOLSTI, K. The dividing discipline: hegemony and diversity in international theory. London: Allen & Unwin, 1985.
KEOHANE, R. Between vision and reality: variables in Latin American foreign policy. In: TULCHIN, J.; Espach, R. (eds.). Latin America in the New International System. Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 2001.
KATZENSTEIN, P.; KEOHANE, R.; KRASNER, S. “International organization and the study of world politics”. International Organization, 52(4), Autumm, p. 645-685, 1998.
KRISTENSEN, P. “Dividing discipline: structures of communication in International Relations”. International Studies Review, 14(1), p. 32-50, 2012.
LAKE, D. A. “Theory is dead, long live theory: the end of the great debates and the rise of eclecticism in International Relations”. European Journal of International Relations, 19(3), p. 567-587, 2013.
LEHMAN, K.; LUCENA, C. IRI: “Pensando o futuro: objetivos e estratégias” (draft paper). Workshop: “Publicações e Impacto Acadêmico”. Universidade de São Paulo, 2013.
MALINIAK, D., et al. TRIP 2014 Faculty Survey. Williamsburg, VA: Institute for the Theory and Practice of International Relations, 2014. Available at: . Acesso em: 5 Apr. 2017.
MALINIAK, D. TRIP 2011 Faculty Survey. Williamsburg, VA: Institute for the Theory and Practice of International Relations. Available at: . Acesso em: 5 Apr. 2017.
MALINIAK, D. “International Relations in the US academy”. International Studies Quarterly, 55(2), p. 437-464, 2011.
NEUMAN, S. (ed.). International Relations theory and the third world. New York: St. Martin´s Press, 1998.
NEUMAN, S. International Relations: theory and the third world: an oxymoron?. In: NEUMAN, S. (ed.). International Relations theory and the third world. New York: St. Martin´s Press, p. 1-29, 1998.
OCHOA, L., et al. “La disciplina de las relaciones internacionales en México: enseñanza, enfoques y programas docentes”. Ciudad de México: Benemerita/Amei/Feyri, 2013.
PUCHALA, D. Third world thinking and contemporary International Relations. In: NEUMAN, S. (ed.). International Relations theory and the third world. New York: St. Martin´s Press, p. 133-157, 1998.
SCHOEMAN, M. South Africa: between history and a hard place. In: TICKNER, A.; WAEVER, O. (eds.). International Relations scholarship around the world. London & New York: Routledge, 2009.
SMITH, S. “The discipline of International Relations: still an American social science?”. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 2(3), p. 374-402, Oct. 2000.
SMITH, S. “The United States and the discipline of International Relations: hegemonic country, hegemonic discipline”. International Studies Review, 4(2), p. 67-85, 2002.
TICKNER, A. Los estudios internacionales en América Latina. CESO y Departamento de Ciencia Política de la Universidad de los Andes. Bogotá: Alfaomega Colombiana, 2002.
TICKNER, A. Latin America: still policy dependent after all these years?. In: TICKNER, A.; WAEVER, O. (eds.). International Relations scholarship around the world. London & New York: Routledge, p. 32- 52, 2009.
TICKNER, A.; CEPEDA, C.; BERNAL, J. Enseñanza, investigación y política internacional en América Latina. DDCP, 19. Documentos del Departamento de Ciencia Política, Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá, 2012.
TICKNER, A.; WAEVER, O. Introduction: geocultural epistemologies. In: TICKNER, A.; WEAVER, O. (eds.). International Relations scholarship around the world. London & New York: Routledge, p. 1-31, 2009.
VILLA, R.; SOUZA, M. “Communities of International Relations in emerging world: neither resistant to the positivism nor beyond debates”. Journal of International Relations and Foreign Policy, 2(3,4), p. 67-97, Dec. 2014.
WALT, S. “Is IR still an ‘American social science’?”. Foreign Policy, Jun. 2011.
WEAVER, O. “The sociology of a not so international discipline: American and European developments in International Relations”. International Organization, 52(4), Autumn, p. 687-727, 1998.
WENDT, A. Social theory of international politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
A Opinião Pública utiliza a licença do Creative Commons (CC), preservando assim, a integridade dos artigos em ambiente de acesso aberto.
Downloads
