International Relations and American Dominance

International Relations and American Dominance : A Diverse Discipline

By (author) 

Free delivery worldwide

Available. Dispatched from the UK in 2 business days
When will my order arrive?


This work seeks to explore the widely held assumption that the discipline of International Relations is dominated by American scholars, approaches and institutions. It proceeds by defining 'dominance' along Gramscian lines and then identifying different ways in which such dominance could be exerted: agenda-setting, theoretically, methodologically, institutionally, gate-keeping. Turton dedicates a chapter to each of these forms of dominance in which she sets out the arguments in the literature, discusses their theoretical implications, and tests for empirical support. The work argues that the self-image of IR as an American dominated discipline does not reflect the state of affairs once a detailed sociological analysis of the production of knowledge in the discipline is undertaken. Turton argues that the discipline is actually more plural than widely recognized, challenging widely held beliefs in International Relations and it taking a successful step towards unpacking the term 'dominance'. An insightful contribution to the field, this work will be of great interest to students and scholars alike.
show more

Product details

  • Hardback | 192 pages
  • 156 x 234 x 17.78mm | 408g
  • Taylor & Francis Ltd
  • London, United Kingdom
  • English
  • 35 black & white illustrations, 7 black & white tables, 35 black & white line drawings
  • 1138822671
  • 9781138822672

About Helen Turton

Helen Turton is a lecturer in International Relations at the University of Sheffield, UK.
show more

Table of contents

1. Introduction: Is International Relations an American dominated discipline? 2. American dominance as agenda setting? 3. American theoretical dominance? 4. American epistemological and methodological dominance? 5. American institutional dominance? 6. American dominance as gate-Keeping? 7. Conclusion: diversity and dominance in International Relations
show more