78135 - POLITICA INTERNAZIONALE (LM)

Conoscenze e abilità da conseguire

Obiettivo del corso è fornire una conoscenza avanzata delle principali teorie delle relazioni internazionali contemporanee (costruttivismo, liberalismo, realismo). Al termine del corso, lo studente conosce i principali dibattiti interni alla disciplina e le principali questioni di politica internazionale, avendo inoltre sviluppato la capacità di utilizzo degli strumenti analitici necessari per interpretare il funzionamento del sistema internazionale contemporaneo.

Contenuti

Analisi introduttiva delle principali teorie di relazioni internazionali, quali il realismo, liberalismo, costruttivismo.

Il corso discute i concetti chiave delle relazioni internazionali quali: equilibrio di potenza, egemonia, anarchia, cooperazione, pace democratica, differenza tra sistema ed ordine internazionale.

Inoltre, il corso esplora il ruolo delle identità degli Stati e delle narrazioni da essi elaborate, così come delle norme, ma anche delle percezioni e altre variabili ideazionali che influiscono sulla politica internazionale.

Infine, il corso introduce alle teorie critiche delle relazioni internazionali (race, postcolonial and gender IR).

Testi/Bibliografia

Manuali consigliati:

Reus-Smit, C., & Snidal, D. (Eds.). (2008). The Oxford handbook of international relations. Oxford University Press.

Sørensen, G., Møller, J., & Jackson, R. H. (2022). Introduction to international relations: theories and approaches. Oxford university press.

(entrambi disponibili presso il sistema bibliotecario di Ateneo)

Letture obbligatorie (suddivise per lezione): Tutte le letture obbligatorie saranno disponibili su "Virtuale".

1. Introduzione

Che cosa sono le relazioni internazionali. Che cosa è la teoria delle relazioni internazionali. Evoluzione storica, principali obiettivi, e teorici.

2. Lo studio della teoria delle relazioni internazionali

Walt, S. M. (1998). International Relations: one world, many theories. Foreign policy, 29-46.

Snyder, Jack 2004, “One World, Rival Theories,” Foreign Policy, Nov., 52-62

3. Il realismo classico ed il neorealismo

Sørensen, G., Møller, J., & Jackson, R. H. (2022). Introduction to international relations: theories and approaches. Oxford university press, capitolo 3, "Realism" [eccetto paragrafo: Schelling and Strategic Realism]

Jervis, R. (1994). Hans Morgenthau, Realism, and The Scientific Study of International Politics. Social Research, 853-876.

Waltz, Kenneth. 1996. International Politics Is Not Foreign Policy. Security Studies, 6(1), 54-57.

Consigliate:

Zambernardi, Lorenzo. 2011. The impotence of power: Morgenthau’scritique of American intervention in Vietnam. Review of International Studies, 37(3), 1335–1356.

Helen Milner. 1991. “The Assumption of Anarchy in International Relations Theory: a Critique.” Review of International Studies 17 (1): 67–85.

Zachary Selden. 2013. “Balancing Against or Balancing With? The Spectrum of Alignment and the Endurance of American Hegemony.” Security Studies 22 (2): 330–364.

Guzzini, Stefano 1993. Structural Power: the limits of neorealist power analysis. International Organization, 47(3), 443-478.

4. La competizione tra grandi potenze

Allison, Graham. 2015. “The Thucydides Trap: Are the US and China Headed for War?” The Atlantic, September 24, 2015.

Mearsheimer, John. 2006. “China’s Unpeaceful Rise.” Current History 105 (690): 160–62

Consigliate:

Friedberg, Aaron L. (2005). The Future of U.S.-China Relations: Is Conflict Inevitable? International Security. 30(2): 7-45.

Legro, Jeffrey W., and Andrew Moravcsik. “Is anybody still a realist?” International Security, Vol. 24, No. 2 (Fall, 1999): 5-55

Rose, Gideon. “Neoclassical realism and theories of foreign policy.” World Politics 51.1 (1998): 144-172.

5.La Pace Democratica

Oneal, John R., and Bruce Russett (1999). The Kantian Peace: The Pacific Benefits of Democracy, Interdependence, and International Organizations, 1885-1992. World Politics. 52(1): 1- 37

Doyle, Michael W. 1986. “Liberalism and World Politics.” American Political Science Review 80 (4): 1151 69.

Consigliate:

Joseph M. Grieco. 1988. “Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism.” International Organization 42 (3): 485–507

Moravcsik, A (1997) “Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics” International Organization 51(4): 513-553.

6. Il Neoliberalismo

Fukuyama, Francis. 1992. The End of History and the Last Man. Simon and Schuster: 15-27

Ikenberry, G. John. 2009. “Liberal Internationalism 3.0: America and the dilemmas of liberal world order.” Perspectives on Politics7.1: 71-87.

Consigliate:

Jervis, Robert. 1999. “Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the Debate.” International Security 24 (1): 42–63.

Ikenberry, G John. 2018. “The End of Liberal International Order?” International Affairs 94 (1): 7–23.

7. Il Costruttivismo

Wendt, Alexander. 1992. “Anarchy Is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics.” International Organization 46 (2): 391–425.

Hopf, Ted. 1998. "The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory". International security, 23(1): 171-200.

Guzzini, S. 2000. "A Reconstruction of Constructivism in International Relations". European Journal of International Relations, 6(2): 147-182.

Consigliate:

Guzzini, Stefano. 2005. “The concept of Power: a constructivist analysis.” Millennium 33.3: 495-521.

Checkel, Jeffrey T. “The constructive turn in international relations theory.” World politics 50.2 (1998): 324-348.

  

8. La Società Internazionale

Bull, Hedley.1977. The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. New York: Columbia University Press. Part 1- Chapters 1-2; 4

Barry Buzan. 1993. “From International System to International Society: Structural Realism and Regime Theory Meet the English School.” International Organization 47 (3): 327–352.

Consigliate:

Reus-Smit, Christian. 2007. “International Crises of Legitimacy.” International Politics 44 (2–3): 157–74.

Reus-Smit, Christian .2002. “Imagining Society: Constructivism and the English School.” The British Journal of Politics and International Relations 4 (3): 487–509.

Buzan, Barry. 2001. “The English School: An Underexploited Resource in IR.” Review of International Studies 27 (3): 471–88.

9. L’ordine globale, pt. I: "pluralism vs solidarism"

Weinert, Matthew S. 2011 “Reframing the Pluralist—Solidarist Debate.” Millennium 40.1 : 21-41

Acharya, Amitav. 2017. “After Liberal Hegemony: The advent of a multiplex world order.” Ethics & International Affairs 31.3: 271-285.

Consigliate:

Reus-Smit, Christian. 2001. “Human Rights and the Social Construction of Sovereignty.” Review of International Studies 27 (4): 519–38.

Acharya, Amitav. 2016. “Advancing global IR: Challenges, contentions, and contributions.” International Studies Review 18.1 (2016): 4-15

10. Istituzioni, Organizzazioni e Norme Internazionali

Finnemore, Martha, and Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change.” International Organization 52 (4): 887–917.

Deitelhoff, Nicole, and Lisbeth Zimmermann. 2020. “Things we lost in the fire: how different types of contestation affect the robustness of international norms.” International Studies Review 22.1 2020: 51-76

Consigliate:

Katzenstein, Peter J., Robert O. Keohane, and Stephen D. Krasner. “International Organization and the Study of World Politics.” International Organization 52.4 (1998): 645-685.

Welsh, Jennifer M. “Norm contestation and the responsibility to protect” Global Responsibility to Protect 5.4 (2013): 365-396.

11. Socializzazione e soft power

Alderson, K. 2001. Making sense of state socialization. Review of international studies, 27(3), 415-433.

Nye, Joseph. 2021. Soft Power: the evolution of a concept. Journal of Political Power, 14(1), 196-208.

Consigliate:

Callahan, William. 2015. “Identity and Security in China: The Negative Soft Power of the China Dream.” Politics 35 (3–4): 216–29

Roselle, Laura, Alister Miskimmon, and Ben O’loughlin. 2014. “Strategic narrative: A new means to understand soft power.” Media, War & Conflict 7.1: 70-84

12. Test di Mid-term per studenti frequentanti (16 Novembre 2022) - programma lezioni 1-10

13. L’identità degli stati

Greenhill, Brian. 2008. “Recognition and collective identity formation in international politics.” European Journal of International Relations 14.2: 343-368.

Urrestarazu, Ursula Stark. 2015. “Identity in International Relations and Foreign Policy Theory.” In Theorizing Foreign Policy in a Globalized World, edited by Knud Erik Jørgensen and Gunther Hellmann, Springer, 126–49. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Consigliate:

Zehfuss, Maja. 2001. “Constructivism and identity: A dangerous liaison.” European Journal of International Relations 7.3: 315-348

Wendt, Alexander. 1994. “Collective identity formation and the international state.” American political science review 88.2: 384-396

Neumann, Iver. 1996. Self and Other in International Relations. European Journal of International Relations, 2(2), 139-174.

14. La svolta narrativa nella teoria delle RI

 Subotić, Jelena. 2015. “Narrative, Ontological Security, and Foreign Policy Change.” Foreign Policy Analysis 12 (4): 610–27.

Hopf, Ted. 2016. “‘Crimea is ours’: A discursive history.” International Relations 30.2: 227-255.

Consigliate:

Gries, Peter, and Yiming Jing. 2019. “Are the US and China Fated to Fight? How Narratives of ‘Power Transition’ Shape Great Power War or Peace.” Cambridge Review of International Affairs 32 (4): 456–82.

Subotić, Jelena. “Stories states tell: Identity, narrative, and human rights in the Balkans.” Slavic Review 72.2 (2013): 306-326.

15. La Scuola di Copenaghen

McDonald, Matt. 2008. “Securitization and the Construction of Security.” European Journal of International Relations 14.4: 563-587.

Hansen, Lene .2000. The Little Mermaid's Silent Security Dilemma and the Absence of Gender in the Copenhagen School. Millennium, 29(2), 285-306.

Consigliate:

Balzacq, Thierry, and Stefano Guzzini. “Introduction:‘What kind of theory–if any–is securitization?’.” International Relations29.1 (2015): 97-102.

 16. L’ordine globale, pt. II: "the struggle for recognition"

Wishnick, Elizabeth. 2016. “In Search of the ‘Other’ in Asia: Russia–China Relations Revisited.” The Pacific Review 30 (1): 114–32

Adler-Nissen, R., & Zarakol, A. 2021. Struggles for Recognition: The liberal international order and the merger of its discontents. International Organization, 75(2), 611-634.

Consigliate:

Adler-Nissen, Rebecca. 2014. “Stigma management in International Relations: Transgressive identities, norms, and order in international society.” International Organization 68.1 (2014): 143-176

Burai, Erna, and Stephanie C Hofmann. 2021. “Constructivism and Peaceful Change.” The Oxford Handbook of Peaceful Change in International Relations, 169–89.

17. Introduzione alle teorie critiche (race, postcolonial and gender IR)

Andrew S. Rosenberg. 2019. “Measuring Racial Bias in International Migration Flows.” International Studies Quarterly 63 (4): 837–845.

Seth, S. (2011). Postcolonial theory and the critique of international relations. Millennium, 40(1), 167-183.

J. Ann Tickner. 1997. “You Just Don’t Understand: Troubled Engagements Between Feminists and IR Theorists.” International Studies Quarterly 41 (4): 611–632.

Consigliate:

Tarak Barkawi and Mark Laffey. 1999. “The Imperial Peace: Democracy, Force and Globalization.” European Journal of International Relations 5 (4): 403–434.

J. Ann Tickner. 1988. “Hans Morgenthau’s Principles of Political Realism: A Feminist Reformulation.” Millennium 17 (3): 429–440.

Cynthia Weber. 1994. “Good Girls, Little Girls, and Bad Girls: Male Paranoia in Robert Keohane’s Critique of Feminist International Relations.” Millennium 23 (2): 337–349.

18. (Trans) Gendering IR

Weber, Cynthia. 2015. Why Is There No Queer International Theory? European Journal of International Relations, 21(1), 27-51.

Sjoberg, L. (2012). Toward Trans-Gendering International Relations?. International Political Sociology, 6(4), 337-354.

19. Conclusione

Zambernardi, Lorenzo. 2016. “Politics is too important to be left to political scientists,” European Journal of International Relations. 22(1), 3-23.

Dunne, T., Hansen, L., & Wight, C. 2013. The end of International Relations Theory?. European Journal of International Relations, 19(3), 405-425.

Consigliate:

Brown, C. 2016. “Review Article: International Political Theory Today” Millennium: Journal of International Studies. 45(2)

20. Test finale (per studenti frequentanti) – 14 dicembre 2022

Metodi didattici

20 Lezioni di due ore (due volte la settimana per 10 settimane dal 4 ottobre al 14 dicembre 2022).

“In considerazione della tipologia di attività e dei metodi didattici adottati, la frequenza di questa attività formativa richiede la preventiva partecipazione di tutti gli studenti ai Moduli 1 e 2 di formazione sulla sicurezza nei luoghi di studio, [https://elearning-sicurezza.unibo.it/] in modalità e-learning.

Modalità di verifica e valutazione dell'apprendimento

Per gli studenti frequentanti (che hanno frequentato almeno il 70% del corso):

Test Mid-term scritto (45%) composto da 4 domande a risposta multipla da 2,5 punti ciascuna, 2 risposte brevi (circa 100 parole) da 5 punti ciascuna, 1 saggio (min. 350 max 450 parole) da 10 punti. Tempo a disposizione: 75 minuti.

Esame finale scritto (45%) composto da 4 domande a risposta multipla da 2,5 punti ciascuna, 2 risposte brevi (circa 100 parole) da 5 punti ciascuna, 1 saggio (min. 350 max 450 parole) da 10 punti. Tempo a disposizione: 75 minuti.

Frequenza e partecipazione (10%)

Per gli studenti non-frequentanti:

Esame finale scritto (50%) composto da 4 domande a risposta multipla da 2,5 punti ciascuna, 2 risposte brevi (circa 100 parole) da 5 punti ciascuna, 1 saggio (min. 350 max 450 parole) da 10 punti. Tempo a disposizione: 75 minuti.

Esame orale (50%)

Strumenti a supporto della didattica

Power point, video clips

Orario di ricevimento

Consulta il sito web di Flavia Lucenti