The Play of International Practice

Abstract

The core claims of the practice turn in International Relations (IR) remain ambiguous. What promises does international practice theory hold for the field? How does the kind of theorizing it produces differ from existing perspectives? What kind of research agenda does it produce? This article addresses these questions. Drawing on the work of Andreas Reckwitz, we show that practice approaches entail a distinctive view on the drivers of social relations. Practice theories argue against individualistic‐interest and norm‐based actor models. They situate knowledge in practice rather than “mental frames” or “discourse.” Practice approaches focus on how groups perform their practical activities in world politics to renew and reproduce social order. They therefore overcome familiar dualisms—agents and structures, subjects and objects, and ideational and material—that plague IR theory. Practice theories are a heterogeneous family, but, as we argue, share a range of core commitments. Realizing the promise of the practice turn requires considering the full spectrum of its approaches. However, the field primarily draws on trajectories in international practice theory that emphasize reproduction and hierarchies. It should pay greater attention to practice approaches rooted in pragmatism and that emphasize contingency and change. We conclude with an outline of core challenges that the future agenda of international practice theory must tackle.

Spaces of Global Security: Beyond Methodological Nationalism

“…Such a theorization could be fruitfully married to already-existing approaches in human security, environmental security, and feminist approaches (e.g., Spike Peterson 1992;True 1995;Paris 2001;Sjoberg 2013;Enloe 2014), and also to approaches that focus on collective mobilization, networks, practices, and relationalism (Jackson and Nexon 1999;Neumann 2002;Sageman 2004;Slaughter 2004;Montgomery 2005;Pouliot 2008;Goddard 2009;Hafner-Burton, Kahler, and Montgomey 2009;Nexon 2009;Adler and Pouliot 2011;Bigo 2011;Shapiro 2013;Bueger and Gadinger 2015;MacDonald 2014). Realist and state-centric approaches, however, would also benefit from paying greater attention to the changing spatial practices of states (such as drone warfare, cybersurveillance, and diaspora engagement policies), as well as how spatial transformations in the exercise of state power affect states' relationships with each other, and with other actors in the global security environment.…”

Rethinking agency in International Relations: performativity, performances and actor-networks

“…Jackson and Nexon (1999) stressed that relational reasoning can be employed by both rationalists and constructivists. IR has since also witnessed the emergence of practice theory (Neumann 2002;Adler and Pouliot 2011;Bueger and Gadinger 2015), a family of approaches that explicitly understand themselves as relational (Nexon and Pouliot 2013). These approaches study 'socially recognized forms of activity, done on the basis of what members learn from others, and capable of being done well or badly, correctly or incorrectly' (Barnes 2001: 19;see Neumann 2013: 87).…”

“…While some have taken Foucault's (1969Foucault's ( /2002) lead and study discourses as 'discursive practices' (Lopez Lucia 2016), others have drawn a stronger line between the two concepts, acknowledging that discourse constitutes the precondition for action, but insisting that practices are key to understanding how politics unfolds dynamically (Neumann 2002; see also Adler and Pouliot 2011;Bueger and Gadinger 2015;Schindler and Wille 2015). Adler and Pouliot, for example, understand practices as 'competent performances', by which they mean that 'practices are socially meaningful patterns of action, which, in being performed more or less competently, simultaneously embody, act out, and possibly reify background knowledge and discourse in and on the material world' (Adler and Pouliot 2011: 4).…”

Representation and agency in diplomacy: How Kosovo came to agree to the Rambouillet accords

“…While the Kosovars with the support of their legal advisors swiftly began preparing written comments on the drafts that were presented to them, the Serbian delegation was stalling. During the day, they were seen lounging in the public areas of the castle, while at night they would get drunk and sing, so that -as Weller (2009, p. 126) ironically notes -at one point 'an informal protest was made against the singing of Serbian 30 A concern with practical knowledge and competence is a thread that runs through the whole recent debate on international practices; see Adler and Pouliot (2011), Bueger and Gadinger (2015), and Neumann (2002). 31 Press briefing by the Contact Group negotiators, 18 February, 1999, printed in Weller (1999a.…”