Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:28:01.854Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Peace research: is a distinction between ‘insiders’ and ‘outsiders’ useful?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 October 2009

David J. Dunn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the October, 1982, issue of the Review, John Baylis presented a series of observations on recent issues in peace research and peace education. Such comments are most welcome, for they represent at least the beginning of a dialogue between peace researchers and ‘outsiders’. This dialogue is long overdue. It is not surprising that its start has been delayed for, as Baylis points out, the debates and conflicts within peace research itself may have retarded its wider acceptance. Yet it could be argued that, having been left to get itself together, peace research is now better placed to make itself known to a wide audience of outsiders. If this is the case, then the phase of establishing an identity, the period of confusion, doubt and debate, may be concluded, with positive results. Such a thesis informs the following remarks, which contrast with those of Baylis; though in some respects I am in agreement with him.

Type
Comment
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 9 , Issue 1 , January 1983 , pp. 71 - 77
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Baylis, John, ‘Peace Research and Peace Education: a review’, Review of International Studies, viii (1982), p. 276.Google Scholar

2. Rosenau, James, International Politics and Foreign Policy (Glencoe, Illinois, 1961), p. 1.Google Scholar

3. Chatfield, Charles, ‘International Peace Research: The field defined by dissemination’, Journal of Peace Research, XVI, 2 (1979), p. 173.Google Scholar

4. Booth, Ken, Strategy and Ethnocentrism (London, 1979), p. 139.Google Scholar

5. Singer, David, ‘An assessment of peace research’, International Security, I (1976), p. 124.Google Scholar

6. Singer, David, ‘Preface’ in Jurgen Dedring, Recent Advances in Peace and Conflict Research: a critical survey (Beverly Hills and London, 1976), p. 10.Google Scholar

7. Ibid., p. 8.

8. Galtung, Johan, Peace Problems: some case studies (Essays in Peace Research, Volume V (Copenhagen, 1980), p. 22.Google Scholar

9. Kelman, Herbert, A Time to speak (San Francisco, 1968), p. 156.Google Scholar

10. Kerman, Cynthia E., Creative Tension: the life and thought of Kenneth Boulding (Ann Arbor, 1974), p. 17.Google Scholar

11. Boulding, Kenneth, Beyond Economics: essays on society, religion and ethics (Ann Arbor, 1968), p. 273.Google Scholar

12. Kerman, op. cit., p. 58.

13. Baylis, op. cit., p. 280.