Abstract
How are international phenomena rendered knowable? By which means and practical devices is international knowledge generated? In this article, I draw on the case of contemporary maritime piracy to introduce a research framework that allows these questions to be addressed. Arguing that the practices of international knowledge generation are poorly understood, I show how concepts from science and technology studies provide the tools to study these practices empirically. Relying on the practice theory of Karin Knorr Cetina, I introduce the concepts of epistemic infrastructures, epistemic practice, and laboratories and demonstrate how they facilitate interesting insights on knowledge generation. I investigate three “archetypes” of epistemic practices in detail and show how these generate knowledge about piracy for the United Nations. The three archetypes are the quantification practices of the International Maritime Organization, the interpretation work of a monitoring group and the network of a special adviser. The article introduces an innovative agenda for studying knowledge generation in international relations by focusing on the practical epistemic infrastructures, which maintain knowledge about international phenomena.
Highlights
Constructivist international relations (IR) theorists have pointed to the importance of international organizations (IOs) in producing and disseminating knowledge, but they have rarely focused on how knowledge production unfolds in practice
I have argued that research on epistemic infrastructures and the epistemic practices and laboratory sites that enact them opens up a new productive perspective on knowledge generation in IR
The three epistemic practices of piracy I studied in detail revealed quite some variety in how knowledge of the international is generated
Summary
How are international phenomena rendered knowable? By which means and practical devices is international knowledge generated? In this article, I draw on the case of contemporary maritime piracy to introduce a research framework that allows these questions to be addressed. Research in STS offers an alternative understanding of knowledge production that is based on practice theory Such an understanding shifts the perspective from actors, their interaction and influence, toward the practical infrastructures by which knowledge is produced, validated, and maintained. Following Knorr Cetina’s understanding of practice leads us to the study of the permanent patterns and processes of the configuration of practical forms of order, as well as the instruments which enable and maintain these structures From such a perspective, our understanding of IOs changes quite fundamentally, away from the traditional view of an IO as an arena in which different actors— including states, IO administrations, and transnational communities—interact, deliberate, or generate knowledge (Hurd 2011; Johnstone 2011). What is required is an understanding of the specifics of epistemic practice, which goes beyond the more general discussion of theories of practice
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
