The comparative descriptive analysis leads to four theoretical propositions that can be used to build hypotheses, for future evaluation according to the logic of confirmation.
📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale
🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Following the logic of discovery, I conduct a comparative descriptive analysis of the decision makers who negotiated the Treaty of Utrecht of 1713 and the Final Act of the Congress of Vienna of 1815.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The goal is to establish the facts of the two cases concerning indicators of war-weariness and fear of the radical potential of war as motivations for engaging in the negotiations, and of innovative thinking about international relations as reaction to those motivations.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:The comparative descriptive analysis leads to four theoretical propositions that can be used to build hypotheses, for future evaluation according to the logic of confirmation.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Managerial Coordination · War · Congress of Vienna
Abstract
Following the logic of discovery, I conduct a comparative descriptive analysis of the decision makers who negotiated the Treaty of Utrecht of 1713 and the Final Act of the Congress of Vienna of 1815. The goal is to establish the facts of the two cases concerning indicators of war-weariness and fear of the radical potential of war as motivations for engaging in the negotiations, and of innovative thinking about international relations as reaction to those motivations. These facts are associated with the presence of the practice of managerial coordination among the major powers after Vienna, and its absence after Utrecht. The comparative descriptive analysis leads to four theoretical propositions that can be used to build hypotheses, for future evaluation according to the logic of confirmation.
TRAVLOS, K. (2020). “By Consent and Management”: Aversion to war, innovative thinking and managerial coordination at Utrecht 1713 and Vienna 1815. Diplomasi Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 1, 56–74. https://ajindex.com/articles/750331
On Waves, Clusters, and Diffusion: A Conceptual Framework. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 598(1), 33–51.
Geller, D.S. & Travlos, K. (2019). Integrating Realist and Neoliberal Theories of War. Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, 25(2), 1-29.
Goddard, S.E. (2009). Brokering change: networks and entrepreneurs in international politics. International Theory, 1(2), 249-281.
Guilhot, N. (2015). Portrait of the realist as a historian: On anti-whiggism in the history of international relations. European Journal of International Relations, 21(1), 3-26.
Jervis, R. (1992). A Political Science Perspective on the Balance of Power and the Concert. American Historical Review, 97(3), 716– 24. Kacowicz, A.M. (1995) Explaining Zones of Peace: Democracies as Satisfied Powers? Journal of Peace Research, 32(3), 265–276.
Kagan, K. (1997/8). The Myth of the European Concert: The Realist-Institutionalist Debate and Great Power Behavior in the Eastern Question,1821– 41. Security Studies,7 (2), 1– 57. Keck, M. & Sikkink, K. (2014). Activists beyond borders: Advocacy networks in international politics. Cornell University Press.
Kraehe, E.E. (2002). Section III: Introduction. In P. Kruger & P. Schroeder (Eds)The Transformation of European Politics, 1763– 1848: Episode or Model in Modern History?, Palgrave, p. 161– 64. Lascurettes, K.M. (2020). Orders of Exclusion: Great Powers and the Strategic Sources of Foundational Rules In International Relations. Oxford University Press.
Levy, J.S. (1983). War in the Modern Great Power System: 1495--1975.
University Press of Kentucky. Levy, J.S. (1982). The Contagion of Great Power War Behavior, 1495-1975. American Journal of Political Science, 26(3), 562-584.
Levy, J.S. & Morgan, T.C. (1986). The war-weariness hypothesis: An empirical test. American Journal of Political Science, 30(1), 26-49.
Miller, B. (1995). When Opponents Cooperate: Great Power Conflict and Collaboration in World Politics. University of Michigan Press.
Mitzen, J. (2013). Power in concert: The nineteenth-century origins of global governance. University of Chicago Press.
Most, B.A. & Starr, H. (1990). Theoretical and Logical Issues in the Study of International Diffusion. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 2(4), 391–412.
Randle, R.F. (1987). Issues in the history of international relations: the role of issues in the evolution of the state system. Praeger. Richardson, L.F. (1960). Arms and Insec