https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4207-1651
![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
This article adopts the theoretical lens of the English School of International Relations (IR) to outline a new Arctic research agenda. In contrast to the more mechanistic approaches used in North American IR, the English School draws from a wider range of scholarship including historical, legal, philosophical, and sociological thinking about international relations, especially around the concepts of ‘international system,’ ‘international society,’ and ‘world society.’ The article introduces the key concepts and debates within the English School, contemplates how insights from the Arctic could advance the development of the English School theory, and demonstrates how a rigorous application of the English School concepts could contribute to a better understanding of international relations in the Arctic.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 E.g., Albert and Knecht, “The Arctic as a Complex Object of Responsibility’; Albert and Vasilache, “Governmentality of the Arctic as an International Region”; Hansen-Magnusson, “The Web of Responsibility in and for the Arctic”; Kauppila and Kopra, “Responsible International Citizenship and China”s Participation in Arctic Regionalisation”; Wilson Rowe, Arctic Governance: Power in Cross-border Cooperation.
2 Buzan, Introduction to the English School, 170.
3 Dunne, “The English School.”
4 Buzan, Introduction to the English School, 5.
5 Cf. Buzan, “The English School: an Underexploited Resource in IR.”
6 Zhang, “The Global Diffusion of the English School.”
7 Blaxekær, Lanteigne and Shi, “The Polar Silk Road and the West Nordic Region”; Exner-Pirot and Murray, “Regional Order in the Arctic”; Kopra, “China and a New Order in the Arctic”; Kopra, “China, Great Power Responsibility and Arctic Security”; Weinert, “Sovereignty as an Institution of International Society.”
8 Cf. Friedner Parrat, Spandler and Yao, “The English School as a Theory and a Scholarly Community.”
9 Navari, English School Methods.
10 Reus-Smit, “Constructivism and the English School”; Buzan, An Introduction to the English School, 32–36.
11 Buzan, From International to World Society, 12.
12 Bull, Anarchical Society, 9.
13 E.g., Murray, “Arctic Politics in the Emerging Multipolar System.”
14 Bull, Anarchical Society, 13.
15 E.g., Bertelsen and Gallucci, “The Return of China, Post-Cold War Russia, and the Arctic”; Lanteigne, “Considering the Arctic as a Security Region.”
16 I am grateful for an anonymous reviewer for pointing out this perspective. See also Finnemore, “Exporting the English School,” 513.
17 E.g., Holsti, Taming the Sovereigns; Navari, English School Methods.
18 Söderbaum, Rethinking Regionalism.
19 Bull, Anarchical Society, 13.
20 E.g., Jackson, Global Covenant.
21 Cf. Karmazin, Costa-Buranelli, Zhang and Merke, Regions in International Society.
22 E.g., Czaputowicz, “The English School of International Relations and Its Approach to European Integration”; Diez and Whitman, “Analysing European Integration”; Stivachtis and Webber, “Regional International Society in a Post-Enlargement Europe”; Sakwa, “Russia and Europe: Whose Society.”
23 Friedner Parrat, Spandler and Yao, “The English School as a Theory and a Scholarly Community,” 2.
24 Kayaoglu, “Westphalian Eurocentrism in International Relations Theory”; Ruacan, “Classical English School Theory and the Ottoman/Turk.”
25 Keal, European Conquest and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
26 Buzan and Gonzalez-Pelaez, International Society and the Middle East.
27 Buzan and Zhang, International Society and the Contest over “East Asia; Zhang, Suzuki and Quirk, International Orders in the Early Modern World; Zhang, “Towards a Regional International Society.”
28. Spandler, Regional Organizations in International Society.
29 Schouenborg, The Scandinavian International Society.
30 E.g., Exner-Pirot, “What is the Arctic a Case of?”; Keskitalo, Negotiating the Arctic; Young, Creating Regimes.
31 Weinert, “Sovereignty as an Institution of International Society.”
32 Kopra, “China and a New Order in the Arctic”; Kauppila and Kopra, “Responsible International Citizenship and China's Participation in Arctic Regionalisation.”
33 Bull, Anarchical Society, 13.
34 Ibid., 15.
35 E.g., Nuttall and Callaghan, The Arctic: Environment, People, Policy.
36 Cf. Exner-Pirot and Murray, “Regional Order in the Arctic.”
37. Gorbachev, “Speech in Murmansk.”
38 Arctic Council, “Declaration on the Establishment of the Arctic Council.”
39 E.g., Smieszek, “Reforming the Arctic Council.”
40 Bull, Anarchical Society, 15.
41 I am grateful for Duncan Depledge for pointing out this perspective.
42 Bull, Anarchical Society, 15.
43 Cf. Knecht and Laubenstein, “Is Arctic Governance Research in Crisis?.”
44 Heininen and Southcott, Globalisation and the Circumpolar North; Finger and Heininen, The Global Arctic Handbook; Shibata et al., Emerging Legal Orders in the Arctic.
45 Cf. Buzan, “How Regions Were Made.”
46 Buzan, From International to World Society.
47 Buzan, Introduction to the English School, 13.
48 Wendt and Duvall, “Institutions and International Order.”
49 Buzan, From International to World Society, 181.
50 Cf. Reus-Smit, The Moral Purpose of the State; Holsti, Taming the Sovereigns.
51 Schouenborg, “The English School and Institutions,” 80–81.
52 Wilson, “English School Meets the Chicago School,” 568.
53 E.g., Buzan, From International to World Society; Buzan, Introduction to the English School; Holsti, Taming the Sovereigns; Schouenborg, The Scandinavian International Society; Schouenborg, “The English School and Institutions”; Wight, Power Politics; Wilson, “English School Meets the Chicago School.”
54 Cf. Buzan, Introduction to the English School, 97–98; Schouenborg, “The English School and Institutions,” 80–81.
55 Friedner Parrat, “International Organization in International Society,” 10.
56 Cf. Buzan, “China”s Rise in English School Perspective”, 2; Holsti, Taming the Sovereigns, 18–19.
57 Indigenous rights could constitute such a distinctive Arctic-specific primary institution.
58 E.g., Buzan, Introduction to the English School; Buzan and Schouenborg, Global International Society.
59 Buzan, Introduction to the English School, 182–183.
60 Knudsen, “Fundamental Institutions and International Organizations,” 33.
61 Cf. Weinert, “Sovereignty as an Institution of International Society.”
62 Kopra, “China and a New Order in the Arctic.”
63 Steinveg, “The Role of Conferences within Arctic Governance.”
64 Young, “Governing the Arctic.”
65 Depledge and Dodds, “Bazaar Governance.”
66 Cf. Palmujoki, “Fragmentation and Diversification of Climate Change Governance.”
67 Watson, Diplomacy: The Dialogue Between States, 201.
68 Hought, International Politics of the Arctic, 59.
69 Cf. Falkner and Buzan, Great Powers, Climate Change, and Global Environmental Responsibilities.
70 Kopra, “China, Great Power Responsibility and Arctic Security.”
71 The Ilulissat Declaration.
72 Cf. Bull, Anarchical Society, 194.
73 Kopra, “China and a New Order in the Arctic.”
74 Buzan, Introduction to the English School, 138.
75 E.g., Southcott et al. Resources and Sustainable Development in the Arctic; Heininen and Southcott, Globalisation and the Circumpolar North.
76 Kopra, “China and a New Order in the Arctic.”
77 E.g., Falkner, “Global Environmentalism and the Greening of International Society.”
78 E.g., Falkner, Environmentalism and Global International Society; Falkner and Buzan, “The Emergence of Environmental Stewardship as a Primary Institution.”
79 E.g., Exner-Pirot, “What is the Arctic a Case of?.”
80 Cf. Buzan, Introduction to the English School, 106–107, 153–156.
81 Southcott et al. Resources and Sustainable Development in the Arctic, 5.
82 E.g., Doods and Nuttall, The Arctic, 122–159.
83 E.g., Minde, “Assimilation of the Sami.”
84 Cambou and Koivurova, “The Participation of Arctic Indigenous Peoples' Organisations in the Arctic Council and Beyond.”
85 Knudsen, “Master Institutions of International Society,” 18; see also Knudsen, “Solidarism, Pluralism and Fundamental Institutional Change”; Knudsen, “Fundamental Institutions and International Organizations.”
86 E.g., Knudsen and Navari, International Organization in the Anarchical Society.
87 Spandler, “The Political International Society,” 13 (emphasis in original).
88 Ibid. (emphasis in original).
89 Friedner Parrat, “International Organization in International Society,” 10.
90 Kopra, “China and the UN Climate Regime.”
91. E.g., Axworthy, Koivurova and Hasanat, The Arctic Council; Durfee and Johnstone, Arctic Governance; Keil and Knecht, Governing Arctic Change; Young, “Is It Time for a Reset in Arctic Governance?.”
92 Cf. Hansen-Magnusson, “The Web of Responsibility in and for the Arctic.”
93 Cf. Navari and Knudsen, International Organization in the Anarchical Society, 8.
94 Giumelli and Costa Buranelli, “The UN Ombudsperson as a “Contact Point” Between International and World Society,” 47.
95 E.g., Bain, “The Pluralist-solidarist Debate in the English School”; Buzan, Introduction to the English School; Knudsen, “Solidarism, Pluralism and Fundamental Institutional Change”; Weinert, “Reframing the Pluralist–solidarist Debate.”
96 Buzan, Introduction to the English School, 90.
97 Cf. Hansen-Magnusson, “The Web of Responsibility in and for the Arctic.”
98 E.g., Wheeler, Saving Strangers.
99 Kopra, “Responsibility for Climate Justice.”
100 Buzan, Introduction to the English School, 113.
101 Ibid., 116.
102 Gong, The Standard of “Civilization” in International Society; Buzan, “The “Standard of Civilisation” as an English School Concept.”
103 Liu, “英国学派人权思想研究”; Suzuki, Civilisation and Empire; Qin, “International Society as a Process”; Zhang, “China in the Conception of International Society.”
104 Kayaoglu, “Westphalian Eurocentrism in International Relations Theory”; Ruacan, “Classical English School Theory and the Ottoman/Turk.”
105 Cf. Costa Buranelli and Taeuber, “The English School and Global IR.”
106 Friedner Parrat, Spandler and Yao, “The English School as a Theory and a Scholarly Community,” 1–2.
107 Blanchard, “Why is There No Gender in the English School?”
108 Hoogensen Gjørv, “Finding Gender in the Arctic.”
109 Falkner, “International Climate Politics between Pluralism and Solidarism,” 27; Falkner, The Anarchical Society and Climate Change.
110 E.g., Falkner, “Global Environmentalism and the Greening of International Society”; Falkner, Environmentalism and Global International Society; Falkner and Buzan, “The Emergence of Environmental Stewardship as a Primary Institution”; Falkner and Buzan, Great Powers, Climate Change, and Global Environmental Responsibilities; Kopra, “China and the UN Climate Regime”; Kopra, China and Great Power Responsibility for Climate Change; Palmujoki, “Fragmentation and Diversification of Climate Change Governance.”
111 Cf. Kopra, “Responsibility for Climate Justice.”
112 Cf. Burke et al., “Planet Politics.”
113 Cf. Acharya, “Global International Relations (IR) and Regional Worlds”; Knecht and Laubenstein, “Is Arctic Governance Research in Crisis?”