PLEASE NOTE this is a 2013 reading list—the precise content may change in future years.
Term 1, Week 1
The first two weeks of this module are intended to provide students with a general introduction to
the key ideas and themes that will be addressed in the course. This is the time to get used to reading
in advance of seminars and also being prepared to talk and discuss issues in class.
What Is IR Theory Anyway and Why Should We Care?
Key Questions
What is IR theory, who is it for, and what purpose does it serve?
How has the discipline of IR developed?
What simplifying devices are used to study international politics?
Core Reading
Smith, S. and Baylis, J. (2007) ‘Introduction’ in Baylis, J. Smith, S. and Owens, P., The
Globalisation of World Politics.
Burchill, S. (2009) ‘Introduction’ in Burchill, al. Theories of International Relations.
Pin-Fat, V. (2008) ‘How do we begin to think about the world?’ in Edkins, J. and Zehfuss,
M. Global Politics: A New Introduction.
Recommended Reading
Smith, S. ‘Diversity and Disciplinarity in International Relations Theory’, in Dunne, Smith, and
Kurki (Eds),International Relations theories, Discipline and Diversity.
Kurki, M. and C. Wight, International Relations and Social Science, in Dunne, Smith, and Kurki
(Eds), International Relations theories, Discipline and Diversity.
Supplementary Reading
Brown, C. (2001) Understanding International Relations (Basingstoke: Palgrave) ch.2.
Booth, K. (1995) ‘Dare not to know: International Relations theory versus the future’ in Booth &
Smith (Eds) International relations theory today (Cambridge: Polity).
Hollis, M. and Smith, S. (1991) Explaining and Understanding international Relations, (Oxford:
Clarendon), ch.3.
Jackson, R. (1996) ‘Is there a classical international theory?’ in Smith, Booth and Zalewski
(Eds) International theory: positivism and beyond (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Kahler, M. (1997) ‘Inventing International Relations: International Relations Theory After 1945’, in M.
Doyle & G. John Ikenberry (Eds.), New Thinking in International Relations Theory, (Boulder, Colorado:
Westview Press).
Neufeld, M. (1995) The restructuring of International Relations theory (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press), chapters two and three
Nicholson, M. (2000) ‘What's the use of International Relations?” Review of International
Studies 26(2), pp. 183-198.
Smith, S. (1987) ‘The Development of International Relations as a Social Science’, Millennium, 16(2),
pp. 189-206.
Smith, S. (1995) ‘The self-image of a discipline: a genealogy of International Relations theory’ in
Steve Smith and Ken Booth (Eds) International Political Theory Today (Cambridge: Polity).
Smith, S. (2000) ‘The discipline of International Relations: still an American social science?’, British
Journal of Politics and International Relations, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 374-402.
Wallace, W. (1996) ‘Truth and Power, Monks and Technocrats: Theory and Practice in International
Relations’, Review of International Studies, 22(3), pp.301-21.
See replies by K. Booth ‘Discussion: A Reply to Wallace’, Review of International Studies, 23(3) (1997),
and S. Smith, ‘Power and Truth: A Reply to William Wallace’, Review of International Studies, 23(4)
Walt, S. (1998) ‘International relations: one world, many theories’, Foreign Policy, Issue 100, pp.2947
Woods, N. (1996) ‘The uses of theory in the study of International Relations’ in Ngaire Woods
(ed.) Explaining International Relations since 1945 (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

Term 1, Week 1