Triumphant Geopolitics? Making Space of and for Arctic Geopolitics in the Arctic Ocean

Dodds, Klaus; Woon, Chih Yuan

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-05523-3_10

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, different schools and traditions could more engage with each other to form a cumulative body of knowledge and avoid a piecemeal approach to empirical analysis. Several scholars very recently made a start and turned in new directions to see through the simultaneous practices of cooperation, integration, fragmentation, dissent and rivalry in the Arctic region by making recourse to concepts and theories from social movement research (Wilson Rowe, 2020), cultural studies (Hansen-Magnusson, 2019), political geography (Dodds, 2019;Dodds & Woon, 2019;Väätänen, 2019), Foucauldian governmentality (Albert & Vasilache, 2018) or the philosophy of language (Medby, 2019). These works indicate that the field of AGR is maturing and moving beyond simple description.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Arctic governance research in crisis? A pathological diagnosis

Knecht

Laubenstein

2020

Polar Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The governance of the Arctic as a frontier for international environmental and climate cooperation, resource politics and security governance holds the promise to provide important insights into some of the 21st century’s most enduring and pressing global challenges. This article reviews the state of the art of Arctic governance research (AGR) to assess the potential and limitations of a regional studies community for making sense of Northern politics and contributing to the broader discipline of international relations (IR) research. A bibliometric analysis of 398 articles published in 10 outlets between 2008 and 2019 reveals that AGR faces at least four limitations that undermine understanding and explaining the processes and outcomes of regional politics and inhibit generalisable observations applicable to questions of global governance: academic immaturity, methodological monoculturalism, state-centrism and analytical parochialism. The lack particularly of theoretically driven and comparative research is indicative of a deeper crisis in AGR which, if unaddressed, could further solidify the community’s unjustified reputation as quixotic in orientation and negligible in its contributions to IR research.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Arctic governance research in crisis? A pathological diagnosis

Knecht

Laubenstein

2020

Polar Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It can be predicted that the Arctic will have a wide and far-reaching impact on the future international political and economic order. Arctic countries and Arctic stakeholders will compete fiercely for territory, natural resources, and air routes, and the Arctic is likely to become a new hot spot for competition (Østhagen 2019;Dodds and Woon 2019).…”

Section: Visual Rights and The Information Societymentioning

confidence: 99%

New Developments in Geopolitics: A Reassessment of Theories after 2023

Topalidis,

Kartalis,

Velentzas

et al. 2024

Social Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The scope of this article is to make a synthesis of the theory of geopolitics with new trends and characteristics of the new global environment. Traditional geopolitical theories are established on the basis of sovereign states. The starting point of many theories is for sovereign states to compete for world hegemony, or to gain an advantage in competition with their opponents. Geopolitical research also mostly starts from the interests of the country. However, as global environmental changes, transnational crimes, terrorism, information security, and other non-traditional security threats have become common threats to human society, their impact also crosses borders and has global characteristics, which also means solving geopolitical issues. Thinking needs to change from a national perspective to a global perspective. On the other hand, as the international community pays more and more attention to human rights, the challenge of human rights to sovereignty has become an unavoidable reality in current international politics. With the progress of the times, the protection and respect of civil rights has become the basic consensus of the international community. Nowadays, the issue of virtual rights such as carbon emission rights have also been included in the geopolitics theory, creating a strong shift of paradigm towards a renewed theory.

show abstract

“…It is noteworthy that one of the more significant moments in the evolution of the Arctic region as a space of possible institution‐building and geopolitical contestation occurred with former Soviet president, Mikhail Gorbachev's, speech in 1987 calling for the demilitarisation of the Arctic as a space for peace (Young, 2009). While this may have acted as a spur to the ultimate creation of the Council, critics argue that it simply enshrined the self‐designated power of what would become the Arctic 8 states, whose claim to authority was based primarily on their geographical location (Dodds & Woon, 2019).…”

Section: The Over Achieving Arctic Council?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Multilateralism still Matter? ASEAN and the Arctic Council in Comparative Perspective

Beeson

Hewitt

2022

Global Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At a time when the world faces a number of complex problems that transcend national borders and which individual states appear unable to address on their own, multilateralism ought to matter more than ever. All too often, however, attempts to encourage collaborative and effective responses to transnational problems are unable to overcome national interests, or lack the capacity to address novel challenges that defy easy resolution. Despite the urgent need for international cooperation, it is often conspicuous by its absence and it is not unreasonable to ask, does multilateralism really matter anymore? We argue that it does, if only because, there is no alternative. To illustrate multilateralism's weaknesses and potential strengths we provide a novel comparison of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the Arctic Council, which reveals the importance of history, diplomatic styles, the significance of issue areas, and the motivations of members. The two bodies literally and metaphorically illustrate developments in the North and South, and provide a novel and revealing benchmark for measuring the success of multilateral bodies at different moments in history.

show abstract

Triumphant Geopolitics? Making Space of and for Arctic Geopolitics in the Arctic Ocean

Cited by 8 publications

References 26 publications

Is Arctic governance research in crisis? A pathological diagnosis

Is Arctic governance research in crisis? A pathological diagnosis

New Developments in Geopolitics: A Reassessment of Theories after 2023

Does Multilateralism still Matter? ASEAN and the Arctic Council in Comparative Perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About