In a new article that has just been accepted by Global Studies Quarterly, Maren Hofius, Scott Edwards and I address a major question of recent ‘community of practice’ theories. Community of practice is one of the major strands of international practice theory. Yet, it has often been of limited use, since it narrowly investigates isolated community. Pushing the debate forward we ask: If the world is populated by communities of practice, how do these interact?
We propose a new analytical framework through which we can study this interaction. To illustrate its value we discuss instances of ocean governance. We show how ocean summits, special representatives and maritime domain awareness are spaces and actors that facilitate interaction.
In a new book chapter that came out today, Tobias Liebetrau and I show how one can use assemblage theory to understand complex polycentric governance processes. The chapter provides an easily accessible introduction to assemblage thinking and shows it can be used as an analytical framework. We discuss empirical examples from maritime security and cyber security that show how we can better understood governance tools, such as best practices and public-private partnerships.
In my lecture I addressed the role of the European Union as a global maritime security provider. I reviewed the evolution of the EU’s maritime security thinking starting out from early counter-piracy operations in the 2010s and the expansion of capacity building programs on a global level.
I also discussed the ongoing update of the EU’s Maritime Security Strategy and the new priorities it sets out, including in the fields of capability development, maritime domain awareness and critical maritime infrastructure protection.
On the 10th of May we are discussing the state and future of international practice theorizing at an event in Copenhagen.
Practice theorizing has become one of the most important approaches in political science and international relations. This roundtable reflects on the state of the debate in the light of the recently published book “Conceptualizing International Practices” (Cambridge University Press, 2022).
The book edited by Alena Drieschova, Christian Bueger and Ted Hopf, engages in conversations around key concepts, like power, change, normativity, or knowledge. It shows the value of theorizing politics and the international through practice.
Over the last couple of days, I had the pleasure to attend the International Maritime Security Conference (IMSC) organized by the Singapore navy.
The conference is a bi-annual heads of navy meeting accompanied by a defense exhibition (Imdex), a fleet show, as well as side events organized by the maritime security program by RSIS. The conference might not have an iconic name, but is the most important gathering of navies and maritime security experts in the region. It was my second time attending.
From the 3rd to the 5th of May, I will have the pleasure to attend the International Maritime Conference, organized by RSIS and the Singapore navy.
I am also scheduled to attend a series of side events focused on different aspects of maritime security in Southeast Asia and the Indo-Pacific. The conference provides an ideal opportunity to gauge where the maritime security debate in the region is heading.
The Leadership in International Security Course is the flagship executive training by the Geneva Centre for Security Policy (GCSP). I am delighted to teach a session on maritime security in the course on May, 2nd.
Maritime security is a vital component of contemporary security politics, and it is great that the GCSP includes it in the course. In the session, I will summarize the key insights from our forthcoming book Understanding Maritime Security (with Tim Edmunds).
What’s the state of the practice debate in international relations, and how does it fit into the broader landscape of the discipline? This is one of the key question that will be discussed at a workshop in Erfurt on 25.-28.3.).
At the workshop, I am presenting a short essay titled “Making a difference with praxiography”. I am arguing that we need to leave the comfort zone of traditional theory+methods+empirics research and investigate how we can add to, interfere with, or intervene in practices. I propose a way of thinking about this centered on praxiography, the study of problematic situations, the deliberate making of useful epistemic objects, as well as three modes of engaging with practice. Contact me if you want to read the essay (by email or social media).
This week I am attending the annual conference of the International Studies Association, which is the largest association bringing together scholars working in International Relations (IR) research. Joining thousands of participants from around the globe, I will be presenting our most recent work.
Together with a range of colleagues we have curated a set of interlinked panels titled “OceanicIR”. Across several panels we are investigating how IR can provide important answers to global ocean politics. In one of these panels, I am presenting a paper together with Tobias Liebetrau on the different ways that the subsea cable is considered as a political problem. I am also participating in two roundtables, discussing the relation of IR and the sea, as well as the question of Arctic sovereignties.
I am also attending a workshop on infrastructures, which precedes the conference. The workshop reflects on how infrastructures impact on global politics. Here I am presenting the overall work of the Copenhagen Ocean Infrastructure Research Group that I am leading since last year.