Global Studies: Contested Fields, One Domain?

Goodman, J

Global Studies: Contested Fields, One Domain?

Goodman, J

Permalink

Publisher:: Palgrave Macmillan
Publication Type:: Chapter
Citation:: Revisiting the Global Imaginary Theories, Ideologies, Subjectivities: Essays in Honor of Manfred Steger, 2019, pp. 49 - 64
Issue Date:: 2019-04-02

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	Global Studies - full chapter.pdf	Accepted Manuscript version	294.42 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Goodman, J https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3211-3416	en_US
dc.contributor.editor	Hudson, C	en_US
dc.contributor.editor	Wilson, E	en_US
dc.date.accessioned	2020-03-29T04:51:38Z
dc.date.available	2020-03-29T04:51:38Z
dc.date.issued	2019-04-02	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Revisiting the Global Imaginary Theories, Ideologies, Subjectivities: Essays in Honor of Manfred Steger, 2019, pp. 49 - 64	en_US
dc.identifier.isbn	3030149102	en_US
dc.identifier.isbn	9783030149109	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/139591
dc.description.abstract	Advocates of state-centric analysis have actively policed boundaries between the ‘domestic’ and the ‘international,’ asserting states as key actors in international contexts. Both claims were overwhelmed by the disciplinary transformations that came with the study of globalization from the 1980s. This chapter debates these drivers for global studies, outlining the struggle for primacy between state-centric and global approaches. It focuses on debates about the proper or primary units of analysis for the study of international phenomena, and the related ‘levels of analysis’ problem, showing how they were radically reconfigured by the ongoing globalization of social sciences and humanities. The chapter ends by echoing Manfred Steger’s work, elaborating with some reflections on the importance of interdisciplinarity for the development of global studies.	en_US
dc.publisher	Palgrave Macmillan	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Revisiting the Global Imaginary Theories, Ideologies, Subjectivities: Essays in Honor of Manfred Steger	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1007/978-3-030-14911-6_4	en_US
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.title	Global Studies: Contested Fields, One Domain?	en_US
dc.type	Chapter
utslib.location	Cham	en_US
utslib.for	1606 Political Science	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/e-Press
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences/Social and Political Sciences Program
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access	*
pubs.consider-herdc	true	en_US
pubs.place-of-publication	Cham	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US

Abstract:

Advocates of state-centric analysis have actively policed boundaries between the ‘domestic’ and the ‘international,’ asserting states as key actors in international contexts. Both claims were overwhelmed by the disciplinary transformations that came with the study of globalization from the 1980s. This chapter debates these drivers for global studies, outlining the struggle for primacy between state-centric and global approaches. It focuses on debates about the proper or primary units of analysis for the study of international phenomena, and the related ‘levels of analysis’ problem, showing how they were radically reconfigured by the ongoing globalization of social sciences and humanities. The chapter ends by echoing Manfred Steger’s work, elaborating with some reflections on the importance of interdisciplinarity for the development of global studies.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/139591