Epistemic hierarchies and asymmetrical dialogues in global IR: increasing the epistemic gravity of the periphery through thematic density

Bibliography

• Acharya, A. 2011. “Dialogue and Discovery: In Search of International Relations Theories beyond the West.” Millennium: Journal of International Studies 39 (3): 619–637. doi:10.1177/0305829811406574
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Acharya, A. 2016. “Advancing Global IR: Challenges, Contentions, and Contributions.” International Studies Review 18 (1): 4–15. doi:10.1093/isr/viv016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Acharya, A., and B. Buzan. 2017. “Why Is There No Non-Western International Relations Theory? Ten Years on.” International Relations of the Asia-Pacific 17 (3): 341–370. doi:10.1093/irap/lcx006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aydın, M., and C. Dizdaroğlu. 2019. “Türkiye’de Uluslararası İlişkiler: TRIP 2018 Sonuçları Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme [International Relations in Turkey: An Evaluation on the Findings of TRIP 2018].” Uluslararası İlişkiler Dergisi 16 (64): 3–28. doi:10.33458/uidergisi.652877
   Google Scholar
• Aydinli, E. 2020. “Methodology as a Lingua Franca in International Relations: Peripheral Self-Reflections on Dialogue with the Core.” The Chinese Journal of International Politics 13 (2): 287–312. doi:10.1093/cjip/poaa003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aydınlı, E., and G. Biltekin. 2017. “Time to Quantify Turkey’s Foreign Affairs: Setting Quality Standards for a Maturing International Relations Discipline.” International Studies Perspectives 18 (3): 267–287. doi:10.1093/isp/ekv009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aydınlı, E., and G. Biltekin. 2018a. “Introduction: Widening the World of IR.” In Widening the World of International Relations: Homegrown Theorizing, edited by E. Aydınlı and G. Biltekin, 1–12. Oxon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Aydınlı, E., and G. Biltekin. 2018b. “Conclusion: Toward a Global Discipline.” In Widening the World of International Relations: Homegrown Theorizing, edited by E. Aydınlı and G. Biltekin, 226–233. Oxon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Aydınlı, E., and J. Mathews. 2000. “Are the Core and Periphery Irreconcilable? The Curious World of Publishing in Contemporary International Relations.” International Studies Perspectives 1 (3): 289–303. doi:10.1111/1528-3577.00028
   Google Scholar
• Aydınlı, E., and J. Mathews. 2008. “Periphery Theorising for a Truly Internationalized Discipline: Spinning IR Theory out of Anatolia.” Review of International Studies 34 (4): 693–712. doi:10.1017/S0260210508008231
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bakir, A., and E. Ersoy. 2022. “The Rise and Fall of Homegrown Concepts in Global IR: The Anatomy of ‘Strategic Depth’ in Turkish IR.” All Azimuth 11 (2): 257–273. doi:10.20991/allazimuth.1150360
   Google Scholar
• Balci, A., F. Cicioğlu, and D. Kalkan. 2019. “Türkiye’deki Uluslararası İlişkiler Akademisyenleri ve Bölümlerinin Akademik Etkilerinin Google Scholar Verilerinden Hareketle İncelenmesi [a Study for Scholarly Impacts of International Relations Academics and Departments in Turkey through Google Scholar Data].” Uluslararası İlişkiler Dergisi 16 (64): 57–75. doi:10.33458/uidergisi.652913
   Google Scholar
• Bode, I., and H. Huelss. 2018. “Autonomous Weapons Systems and Changing Norms in International Relations.” Review of International Studies 44 (3): 393–413. doi:10.1017/S0260210517000614
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carrozza, I., and L. Benabdallah. 2022. “South-South Knowledge Production and Hegemony: Searching for Africa in Chinese Theories of IR.” International Studies Review 24 (1): 1–21. doi:10.1093/isr/viab063
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, C. 2011. “The Absence of Non-Western IR Theory in Asia Reconsidered.” International Relations of the Asia-Pacific 11 (1): 1–23. doi:10.1093/irap/lcq014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, C. 2019. Time and Power: Visions of History in German Politics, from the Thirty Years’ War to the Third Reich. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cooke, S., ed. 2022. Non-Western Global Theories of International Relations. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Cotton, J. 2009. “Realism, Rationalism, Race: On the Early International Relations Discipline in Australia.” International Studies Quarterly 53 (3): 627–647. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2478.2009.00549.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elman, C., and M. F. Elman. 2003. Progress in International Relations Theory: Appraising the Field. London: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ersoy, E. 2018. “Conceptual Cultivation and Homegrown Theorizing: The Case of/for the Concept of Influence.” In Widening the World of International Relations: Homegrown Theorizing, edited by E. Aydınlı and G. Biltekin, 204–225. Oxon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Eun, Y.-S., and K. Pieczara. 2013. “Getting Asia Right and Advancing the Field of IR.” Political Studies Review 11 (3): 369–377. doi:10.1111/j.1478-9302.2012.00290.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garcia, D. 2018. “Lethal Artificial Intelligence and Change: The Future of International Peace and Security.” International Studies Review 20 (2): 334–341. doi:10.1093/isr/viy029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoijtink, M., and M. Leese, eds. 2019. Technology and Agency in International Relations. Oxon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hurrell, A. 2016. “Beyond Critique: How to Study Global IR?” International Studies Review 18 (1): 149–151. doi:10.1093/isr/viv022
   Google Scholar
• Hutchings, K. 2011. “Dialogue between Whom? The Role of the West/Non-West Distinction in Promoting Global Dialogue in IR.” Millennium: Journal of International Studies 39 (3): 639–647. doi:10.1177/0305829811401941
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kilina, Y. 2021. “It’s Not Science, If It’s Not European.” Ukrant. https://www.ukrant.nl/magazine/its-not-science-if-its-not-european/?lang=en
   Google Scholar
• Kristensen, P. M. 2015a. “International Relations in China and Europe: The Case for Interregional Dialogue in a Hegemonic Discipline.” The Pacific Review 28 (2): 161–187. doi:10.1080/09512748.2014.948568
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kristensen, P. M. 2015b. “Revisiting the ‘American Social Science’ – Mapping the Geography of International Relations.” International Studies Perspectives 16 (3): 246–269. doi:10.1111/insp.12061
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kristensen, P. M. 2015c. “How Can Emerging Powers Speak: On Theorists, Native Informants and Quasi-Officials in International Relations Discourse.” Third World Quarterly 36 (4): 637–653. doi:10.1080/01436597.2015.1023288
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kristensen, P. M. 2019. “Southern Sensibilities: Advancing Third Wave Sociology of International Relations in the Case of Brazil.” Journal of International Relations and Development 22 (2): 468–494. doi:10.1057/s41268-017-0107-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kostem, S., and O. F. Sen. 2020. “International Political Economy in Turkey: The Evolution and Current State of a Maturing Subfield.” Uluslararası İlişkiler 17 (66): 77–91. doi:10.33458/uidergisi.720626
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lohaus, M., W. Wemheuer-Vogelaar, and O. Ding. 2021. “Bifurcated Core, Diverse Scholarship: IR Research in Seventeen Journals around the World.” Global Studies Quarterly 1 (4): 1–16. doi:10.1093/isagsq/ksab033
   Google Scholar
• Loke, B., and C. Owen. 2022. “Mapping Practices and Spatiality in IR Knowledge Production: From Detachment to Emancipation.” European Journal of International Relations 28 (1): 30–57. doi:10.1177/13540661211062798
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maliniak, D., S. Peterson, R. Powers, and M. J. Tierney. 2018. “Is International Relations a Global Discipline? Hegemony, Insularity, and Diversity in the Field.” Security Studies 27 (3): 448–484. doi:10.1080/09636412.2017.1416824
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moshirzadeh, H. 2018. “Iranian Scholars and Theorizing International Relations: Achievements and Challenges.” In Widening the World of International Relations: Homegrown Theorizing, edited by E. Aydınlı and G. Biltekin, 83–103. Oxon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Niang, A. 2016. “The Imperative of African Perspectives on International Relations (IR).” Politics 36 (4): 453–466. doi:10.1177/0263395716637092
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Odoom, I., and N. Andrews. 2017. “What/Who Is Still Missing in International Relationship Scholarship? Situating Africa as an Agent in IR Theorising.” Third World Quarterly 38 (1): 42–60. doi:10.1080/01436597.2016.1153416
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ongur, H. Ö., and S. E. Gürbüz. 2019. “Türkiye’de Uluslararası İlişkiler Eğitimi ve Oryantalizm: Disipline Eleştirel Pedagojik Bir Bakış [The Education of International Relations in Turkey and Orientalism: A Critical Pedagogical Approach to the Discipline].” Uluslararası İlişkiler Dergisi 16 (61): 23–38. doi:10.33458/uidergisi.541517
   Google Scholar
• Opello, W. C., and S. J. Rostow. 1999. The Nation-State and Global Order: A Historical Introduction to Contemporary Politics. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
   Google Scholar
• Özcan, G. 2020. “Siyasiyat’tan ‘Milletlerararası Münasebetler’e: Türkiye’de Uluslararası İlişkiler Disiplininin Kavramsal Tarihi [From Politics to International Relations: A Conceptual History of the International Relations Discipline in Turkey].” Uluslararası İlişkiler 17 (66): 3–21. doi:10.33458/uidergisi.720619
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters, I., and W. Wemheuer-Vogelaar, eds. 2016. Globalizing International Relations: Scholarship Amidst Divides and Diversity. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Risse, T., W. Wemheuer-Vogelaar, and F. Havemann. 2022. “IR Theory and the Core-Periphery Structure of Global IR: Lessons from Citation Analysis.” International Studies Review 24 (3): 1–38. doi:10.1093/isr/viac029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rupert, M. 2009. “Antonio Gramsci.” In Critical Theorists and International Relations, edited by J. Edkins and N. Vaughan-Williams, 176–186. Oxon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Sajed, A. 2020. “From the Third World to the Global South.” E-International Relations. https://www.e-ir.info/2020/07/27/from-the-third-world-to-the-global-south/
   Google Scholar
• Shahi, D. 2019. Advaita as a Global International Relations Theory. Oxon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, L. 2012. “Decolonizing International Relations: Perspectives from Latin America.” International Studies Review 14 (3): 386–400. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2486.2012.01125.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tickner, A. B. 2013. “Core, Periphery and (Neo)Imperialist International Relations.” European Journal of International Relations 19 (3): 627–646. doi:10.1177/1354066113494323
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turan, İ. 2018. “Progress in Turkish International Relations.” All Azimuth 7 (1): 137–142. doi:10.20991/allazimuth.328455
   Google Scholar
• Turton, H. L. 2016. International Relations and American Dominance: A Diverse Discipline. Oxon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Turton, H. L., and L. G. Freire. 2016. “Peripheral Possibilities: Revealing Originality and Encouraging Dialogue through a Reconsideration of ‘Marginal’ IR Scholarship.” Journal of International Relations and Development 19 (4): 534–557. doi:10.1057/jird.2014.24
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valbjørn, M. 2017. “Dialoguing about Dialogues: On the Purpose, Procedure and Product of Dialogues in Inter-National Relations Theory.” International Studies Review 19 (2): 279–309. doi:10.1093/isr/vix009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viramontes, E. 2022. “Questioning the Quest for Pluralism: How Decolonial Is Non-Western IR?” Alternatives: Global, Local, Political 47 (1): 45–63. doi:10.1177/03043754211064545
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wemheuer-Vogelaar, W. 2022. “The Global Division of Labor in a Not So Global Discipline.” All Azimuth 11 (1): 3–27. doi:10.20991/allazimuth.1034358
   Google Scholar
• Xuetong, Y. 2019. Leadership and the Rise of Great Powers. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Yong-Soo, E. 2019. “Global IR through Dialogue.” The Pacific Review 32 (2): 131–149. doi:10.1080/09512748.2018.1461680
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, F. 2012. “The Tsinghua Approach and the Inception of Chinese Theories of International Relations.” The Chinese Journal of International Politics 5 (1): 73–102. doi:10.1093/cjip/por015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, Y. 2020. “The Chinese School, Global Production of Knowledge, and Contentious Politics in the Disciplinary IR.” All Azimuth 9 (2): 283–298. doi:10.20991/allazimuth.725252
   Google Scholar