« Normes » : différence entre les versions
| Ligne 13 : | Ligne 13 : | ||
==De la normalité à l'ordre international== | ==De la normalité à l'ordre international== | ||
=Références= | =Références= | ||
*Adler, E. (1997). Seizing the Middle Ground: Constructivism in World Politics.European Journal of International Relations, 3(3), 319–363. | |||
*Guzzini, S. (2000). A reconstruction of constructivism in international relations.European Journal of International Relations, 6(2), 147–182. | |||
Adler, E. (1997). Seizing the Middle Ground: Constructivism in World Politics.European Journal of International Relations, 3(3), 319–363. | *Kratochwil, F. (2000). Constructing a new orthodoxy? Wendt's "Social Theory ofInternational Politics" and the constructivist challenge. Millennium: Journal ofInternational Studies, 29(1), 73–101.! | ||
Guzzini, S. (2000). A reconstruction of constructivism in international relations.European Journal of International Relations, 6(2), 147–182. | *Hobson, J. M. (2000). The State and International Relations. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.! | ||
Kratochwil, F. (2000). Constructing a new orthodoxy? Wendt's "Social Theory ofInternational Politics" and the constructivist challenge. Millennium: Journal ofInternational Studies, 29(1), 73–101.! | *Risse, T. (2000). « ’Let’s Argue!’: Communicative Action in World Politics »,International Organization, 54(1): 1-39.! | ||
Hobson, J. M. (2000). The State and International Relations. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.! | *Wendt, A. (1999). Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press. | ||
Risse, T. (2000). « ’Let’s Argue!’: Communicative Action in World Politics »,International Organization, 54(1): 1-39.! | *Adamson, F. B. (2005). Global Liberalism Versus Political Islam: Competing IdeologicalFrameworks in International Politics. Mershon International Studies Review, 7(4), 547–569.! | ||
Wendt, A. (1999). Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press. | *Fassin, D. (2010). La raison humanitaire. Une histoire morale du temps présent. Paris:Gallimard/Seuil.! | ||
*Foucault, M. (2004). Sécurité, territoire, population. Cours au Collège de France, 1977-1978.Paris: Gallimard/Seuil.! | |||
Adamson, F. B. (2005). Global Liberalism Versus Political Islam: Competing IdeologicalFrameworks in International Politics. Mershon International Studies Review, 7(4), 547–569.! | *Finnemore, M. (1996) National Interests in International Society. Ithaca: Cornell UniversityPress.! | ||
Fassin, D. (2010). La raison humanitaire. Une histoire morale du temps présent. Paris:Gallimard/Seuil.! | *Finnemore, M. and Sikkink, K. (1998). International norm dynamics and political change.International Organization, 52(4), 887–917.! | ||
Foucault, M. (2004). Sécurité, territoire, population. Cours au Collège de France, 1977-1978.Paris: Gallimard/Seuil.! | *Gusterson, H. (1999). “Nuclear Weapons and the Other in the Western Imagination.”Cultural Anthropology 14 (1): 111–143.! | ||
Finnemore, M. (1996) National Interests in International Society. Ithaca: Cornell UniversityPress.! | *Hobson, John M. (2000). The State and International Relations. Cambridge University Press. | ||
Finnemore, M. and Sikkink, K. (1998). International norm dynamics and political change.International Organization, 52(4), 887–917.! | |||
Gusterson, H. (1999). “Nuclear Weapons and the Other in the Western Imagination.”Cultural Anthropology 14 (1): 111–143.! | |||
Hobson, John M. (2000). The State and International Relations. Cambridge University Press. | |||
=Notes= | =Notes= | ||
Version du 1 mars 2014 à 10:41
Enjeux et concepts clefs
Pourquoi étudier les normes ?
Qu'est-ce qu'une norme ?
La tradition constructiviste en RelationsInternationales
La constitution du sens et de la réalité́ sociale
Les enjeux conceptuels clef
Regards critiques=
Rappel
La « cycle de vie » des normes
La norme de non-prolifération des armes nucléaires
Le biais libéral et l'absence du politique
De la norme à la normalité
De la normalité à l'ordre international
Références
- Adler, E. (1997). Seizing the Middle Ground: Constructivism in World Politics.European Journal of International Relations, 3(3), 319–363.
- Guzzini, S. (2000). A reconstruction of constructivism in international relations.European Journal of International Relations, 6(2), 147–182.
- Kratochwil, F. (2000). Constructing a new orthodoxy? Wendt's "Social Theory ofInternational Politics" and the constructivist challenge. Millennium: Journal ofInternational Studies, 29(1), 73–101.!
- Hobson, J. M. (2000). The State and International Relations. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.!
- Risse, T. (2000). « ’Let’s Argue!’: Communicative Action in World Politics »,International Organization, 54(1): 1-39.!
- Wendt, A. (1999). Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
- Adamson, F. B. (2005). Global Liberalism Versus Political Islam: Competing IdeologicalFrameworks in International Politics. Mershon International Studies Review, 7(4), 547–569.!
- Fassin, D. (2010). La raison humanitaire. Une histoire morale du temps présent. Paris:Gallimard/Seuil.!
- Foucault, M. (2004). Sécurité, territoire, population. Cours au Collège de France, 1977-1978.Paris: Gallimard/Seuil.!
- Finnemore, M. (1996) National Interests in International Society. Ithaca: Cornell UniversityPress.!
- Finnemore, M. and Sikkink, K. (1998). International norm dynamics and political change.International Organization, 52(4), 887–917.!
- Gusterson, H. (1999). “Nuclear Weapons and the Other in the Western Imagination.”Cultural Anthropology 14 (1): 111–143.!
- Hobson, John M. (2000). The State and International Relations. Cambridge University Press.
Notes
<vote type=1 />