Journals / Alternatif Politika / 2022 / Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 2

21st Century Area Studies: Three Approaches

21. Yüzyıl Bölge Çalışmaları: Üç Yaklaşım

Pages
359–382
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It will examine how that solve the classic tensions such as universal vs particular; theory vs empirical data; their knowledge production processes and their ontological approach to the “area”.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In 21st century, area studies are undergoing deep transformations.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This study will map out the area studies in this century and present its new approaches. 21st century area studies will be divided into three axes: mainstream area studies; comparative area studies and critical area studies.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It will examine how that solve the classic tensions such as universal vs particular; theory vs empirical data; their knowledge production processes and their ontological approach to the “area”.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Bölge Çalışmaları · Karşılaştırmalı Bölge Çalışmaları · Eleştirel Bölge Çalışmaları

Abstract

In 21st century, area studies are undergoing deep transformations. Part of these transformations are occurring in parallel to transformation in disciplines in social sciences, reflecting the discussions around themes of this period, such as uni/multi polarity; globalization and migration. On the other hand, new theoretical and methodological tendencies that are unique to area studies are also emerging. Behind this period of transformations, there lies a painful process of criticism and self-reflection. This study will map out the area studies in this century and present its new approaches. 21st century area studies will be divided into three axes: mainstream area studies; comparative area studies and critical area studies. It will present their solutions to the traditional problems of the field and their interplay with one another. It will examine how that solve the classic tensions such as universal vs particular; theory vs empirical data; their knowledge production processes and their ontological approach to the “area”.

Özet

Bölge çalışmaları 21. yüzyılda derin dönüşümler geçirmektedir. Bunların bir kısmı sosyal bilim disiplinlerindeki dönüşüme paralel gerçekleşmiş ve bu dönüşümlerde tek/çok kutupluluk, küreselleşme ve göç gibi dönemin başlıklarının etkisi görülmüştür. Bu dönüşümün arkasında alana yönelik sancılı bir eleştiri ve özeleştiri süreci vardır. Diğer yandan bölge çalışmaları alanına özgü yeni kuramsal ve yöntemsel eğilimler de ortaya çıkmıştır. Bu çalışmada bölge çalışmalarının küresel olarak geldiği yeni yer haritalandırılacak ayrıca yeni kuramsal ve yöntemsel eğilimler sunulacaktır. Bölge çalışmalarının 21. yüzyılda; ana akım bölge çalışmaları, karşılaştırmalı bölge çalışmaları ve eleştirel bölge çalışmaları olarak üç farklı eksende nasıl geliştiği, bu eksenlerin alanın geleneksel sorunlarına getirdiği çözümleri ve birbirleriyle ilişkilerini aktarılacaktır. Bu farklı eğilimlerin evrensel ve tikel; kuram ve ampirik veri gibi temel gerilimleri nasıl çözdüğüne, hangi bilgi kategorilerinde üretim yaptıklarına bakacak ve bölge çalışmalarının temel nesnesi olan “bölge”yi ontolojik açıdan nasıl kavramsallaştırdıklarını ele alacaktır.

🔖

Cite This Article

GÖÇER, D. (2022). 21st Century Area Studies: Three Approaches. Alternatif Politika, Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 2, 359–382. https://ajindex.com/articles/435242

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Ahram, Ariel I., Patrick Köllner ve Rudra Sil, (2018), Comparative Area Studies: Methodological Rationales and Cross-Regional Applications (Oxford: Oxford University Press). Altunışık, Meliha (2014), “Geographical Representation of Turkey’s Cuspness: Discourse and Practice”, Robins, Philips ve Mark Herzog (Der.) The Role, Position and Agency of Cusp States in International Relations (London: Routledge): 25-41.
  2. Appadurai, Arjun (2010), “How Histories Make Geographies: Circulation and Context in a Global Perspective”, The Journal of Transcultural Studies, 1 (1): 4-13.
  3. Aris, Stephen (2020), “International vs. area? The disciplinary-politics of knowledge-exchange between IR and Area Studies”, International Theory, 13 (3): 51-482.
  4. Basedau, Matthias ve Patrick Köllner (2007), “Area studies, comparative area studies, and the study of politics: Context, substance, and methodological challenges”, Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft, 1: 105-124.
  5. Bates, Robert H. (1997), ‘‘Area Studies and the Discipline: A Useful Controversy?’’, Political Science and Politics, 30 (2): 166-169.
  6. Berger, Mark T. (2007), “Keeping the World Safe for Primary Colors: Area Studies, Development Studies, International Studies, and the Vicissitudes of Nation-Building”, Globalizations, 4 (4): 429-444.
  7. Beyaz Saray (2021), https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/06/12/fact-sheet-president-biden-and-g7-leaders-launch-build-back-better-world-b3w-partnership/ (21.06.2021).
  8. Bernasconi, Robert (2015), Irk Kavramını Kim İcat Etti: Felsefi Düşüncede Irk ve Irkçılık (İstanbul: Metis Yayınları) (Çev. Zeynep Direk, İsmail Esiner, Nazlı Öktem ve Tendü Meriç). Braune, Ines ve Achim Rohde (2015), “Critical Area Studies”, Middle East - Topics & Arguments, 4: 5-11.
  9. Brenner, Neil ve Stuart Elden, (2009), ‘‘Henri Lefebvre on State, Space, Territory’’, International Political Sociology, 3: 353–377.
  10. Burawoy, Michael (2007), “Open the Social Sciences: To Whom and For What?”, Portuguese Journal of Social Science, 6 (3): 137-146.
  11. Cumings, Bruce (1997), “Boundary Displacement: Area Studies and International Studies during and after the Cold War”, Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars, 29 (1): 6-26.
  12. Donati, Pierpaolo (2011), Relational Sociology: A New Paradigm for the Social Sciences (London: Routledge). Dutton, Michael (2005), “The Trick of Words: Asian Studies, Translation, and the Problems of Knowledge”, Steinmetz, George (Der.), The Politics of Method in the Human Sciences: Po