外交规范的意义建构:东南亚多边主义实践中的能力

IF 2.7 1区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Stéphanie Martel, Aarie Glas
{"title":"外交规范的意义建构:东南亚多边主义实践中的能力","authors":"Stéphanie Martel, Aarie Glas","doi":"10.1177/13540661221133194","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The supposedly fixed set of norms within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), commonly referred to as the “ASEAN way,” is both celebrated and maligned as a key element of Southeast Asian diplomacy. In this article, we contest this orthodoxy through a practitioner-near account of ASEAN diplomatic norms in practice. We find that the “ASEAN way” is best understood as a rhetorical commonplace, a well-established topological resource that social agents use to advance and contest claims of competent diplomatic practice in the ASEAN community of practice. We build on and bridge insights from norm contestation, practice theory, and discourse literatures to develop an original framework for the study of contestation in communities of practice. Drawing from documentary evidence and 61 interviews with practitioners of ASEAN diplomacy, we illustrate our argument by examining contestation in practice in the context of the organization’s response to the Rohingya crisis and the South China Sea disputes.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"29 1","pages":"227 - 252"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The contested meaning-making of diplomatic norms: competence in practice in Southeast Asian multilateralism\",\"authors\":\"Stéphanie Martel, Aarie Glas\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/13540661221133194\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The supposedly fixed set of norms within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), commonly referred to as the “ASEAN way,” is both celebrated and maligned as a key element of Southeast Asian diplomacy. In this article, we contest this orthodoxy through a practitioner-near account of ASEAN diplomatic norms in practice. We find that the “ASEAN way” is best understood as a rhetorical commonplace, a well-established topological resource that social agents use to advance and contest claims of competent diplomatic practice in the ASEAN community of practice. We build on and bridge insights from norm contestation, practice theory, and discourse literatures to develop an original framework for the study of contestation in communities of practice. Drawing from documentary evidence and 61 interviews with practitioners of ASEAN diplomacy, we illustrate our argument by examining contestation in practice in the context of the organization’s response to the Rohingya crisis and the South China Sea disputes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48069,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of International Relations\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"227 - 252\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of International Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661221133194\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of International Relations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661221133194","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

东南亚国家联盟(ASEAN)内部所谓的一套固定的准则,通常被称为“东盟方式”,作为东南亚外交的一个关键因素,既受到赞扬,也受到诋毁。在本文中,我们通过对实践中的东盟外交规范的实践者接近的描述来质疑这种正统观念。我们发现,“东盟方式”最好被理解为一种修辞上的老生常谈,一种完善的拓扑资源,社会代理人利用它来推进和质疑东盟实践共同体中称职外交实践的主张。我们在规范争论、实践理论和话语文献的基础上建立和衔接见解,为实践社区的争论研究开发一个原创框架。根据文献证据和61位东盟外交从业者的访谈,我们通过在该组织对罗兴亚危机和南中国海争端的回应背景下研究实践中的争议来说明我们的论点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The contested meaning-making of diplomatic norms: competence in practice in Southeast Asian multilateralism
The supposedly fixed set of norms within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), commonly referred to as the “ASEAN way,” is both celebrated and maligned as a key element of Southeast Asian diplomacy. In this article, we contest this orthodoxy through a practitioner-near account of ASEAN diplomatic norms in practice. We find that the “ASEAN way” is best understood as a rhetorical commonplace, a well-established topological resource that social agents use to advance and contest claims of competent diplomatic practice in the ASEAN community of practice. We build on and bridge insights from norm contestation, practice theory, and discourse literatures to develop an original framework for the study of contestation in communities of practice. Drawing from documentary evidence and 61 interviews with practitioners of ASEAN diplomacy, we illustrate our argument by examining contestation in practice in the context of the organization’s response to the Rohingya crisis and the South China Sea disputes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
8.80%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: The European Journal of International Relations publishes peer-reviewed scholarly contributions across the full breadth of the field of International Relations, from cutting edge theoretical debates to topics of contemporary and historical interest to scholars and practitioners in the IR community. The journal eschews adherence to any particular school or approach, nor is it either predisposed or restricted to any particular methodology. Theoretically aware empirical analysis and conceptual innovation forms the core of the journal’s dissemination of International Relations scholarship throughout the global academic community. In keeping with its European roots, this includes a commitment to underlying philosophical and normative issues relevant to the field, as well as interaction with related disciplines in the social sciences and humanities. This theoretical and methodological openness aims to produce a European journal with global impact, fostering broad awareness and innovation in a dynamic discipline. Adherence to this broad mandate has underpinned the journal’s emergence as a major and independent worldwide voice across the sub-fields of International Relations scholarship. The Editors embrace and are committed to further developing this inheritance. Above all the journal aims to achieve a representative balance across the diversity of the field and to promote deeper understanding of the rapidly-changing world around us. This includes an active and on-going commitment to facilitating dialogue with the study of global politics in the social sciences and beyond, among others international history, international law, international and development economics, and political/economic geography. The EJIR warmly embraces genuinely interdisciplinary scholarship that actively engages with the broad debates taking place across the contemporary field of international relations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信