The state of concept: A new analytical tool for political research
| DOI | 10.1177/00471178211021477 |
| Date | 01 December 2021 |
| Published date | 01 December 2021 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/00471178211021477
International Relations
2021, Vol. 35(4) 593 –612
© The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/00471178211021477
journals.sagepub.com/home/ire
The state of concept:
A new analytical tool
for political research
Roee Kibrik
Mitvim – The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies
Abstract
This paper proposes a typology of four possible states of concepts: unquestioned, contested,
essentially contested, and destabilized. The typology serves as a frame of reference and as an
analytical tool for IR researchers who wish to study concepts and conceptualizing processes as a
way of understanding politics. It argues that, within a context, every concept is in one out of four
possible states. The typology rests on the relationship between experiences, perceptions, and
concepts, aiming to rectify the lacuna of minimal attention to the experiences of many IR works
which mainly focus on the inter-subjective sphere and actor-structure tensions. Thus, using the
example of sovereignty in Jerusalem during the Israeli-Palestinians negotiations (1993–2001), a
new state of concept, the destabilized state, is introduced.
Keywords
destabilized concept, essentially contested concepts, Jerusalem, phenomenology, sovereignty
Introduction
Political behavior is founded on concepts and breathes life into concepts. Identities and
interests of political actors are shaped by concepts and concepts define political bounda-
ries and content. At the same time, the way that political actors use concepts breathes
meaning into them. It is no wonder, then, that political researchers and practitioners pay
attention to concepts in an effort to understand and to act within the political arena.
International relations (IR) scholars frequently stress the political dimension of attrib-
uting meaning to concepts. They suggest that each understanding of a concept presents a
different set of plausible political activities. Many scholars are constructivists or critical
scholars, as they share similar premises about the importance of ideas, the central role of
the inter-subjective sphere and the impact of actor-structure tensions in shaping the
Corresponding author:
Roee Kibrik, Mitvim – The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies, Israel.
Email: Roee.Kibrik@mail.huji.ac.il
1021477IRE0010.1177/00471178211021477International RelationsKibrik
research-article2021
Article
594 International Relations 35(4)
political world and political behavior.1 Most of the (constructivist/critical) IR literature
on concepts and conceptualization processes focuses on the inter-subjective sphere and
actor-structure tensions, leaving aside experiences and material aspects.2 Indeed, some
researchers have critiqued how constructivists and IR researchers generally relate to the
social context, focusing first and foremost on the role of norms, rules, inter-subjectivity
and identity.3 They argue that we should pay greater attention to more social structural
forces. I agree with their basic criticism and propose that the experiences4 and percep-
tions of reality as factors in the process of conceptualization should supplement the
intentional critical reflective action of attributing meaning in social-political discourses
and attributing meaning through the discursive maneuvers of the elite.
The present paper aims to rectify the lacuna existing in the minor attention paid to the
experiences and perceptions aspects of the conceptualization process. Thus, it has two
aims: first to contribute theoretically to the research on the relationship between experi-
ences, perceptions, and concepts by introducing the idea of a destabilized concept. The
second aim is to continue and develop the research on concepts by humbly accepting the
challenge of proposing an analytical framework that integrates many of the former ideas
into a comprehensive picture and leads the epistemological discussion into the political
field. It therefore proposes a typology, a frame of reference, and an analytical tool for IR
researchers who wish to study concepts and conceptualizing processes as a way of under-
standing politics.
First, the philosophical foundations must be established. Though it may seem too far
to leap from a philosophical debate to political research, this is a necessary step. One
cannot investigate the political role of concepts without first exploring what a ‘concept’
is, and this is the essence and aim of the philosophical work. Much of the IR debate
regarding the political role of concepts, starts at the societal level and lacks the funda-
mental and necessary condition for coherent discussion – an agreed upon concept of
‘concept.’ So, many times we end up with a dialogue de sourds. Thus, we must start with
an explanation of my definition of concept and conceptualization which will set a com-
mon ground for deliberation. Embracing the phenomenological perspective and present-
ing the consequential road from conceptualization to politics, I highlight the important,
but too often neglected, role of experience and cognitive perception dynamics in the
political process.
In the second section, based on the philosophical foundations, I introduce the notion
of states of concepts, which takes us to political research. The state of concepts idea
stems from the specific understanding of concept and conceptualization presented in the
first section and can serve as an analytical tool for exploring concepts and politics. This
idea proposes that, in the social-political field, concepts are in different states that repre-
sent different kinds of political-epistemological-ontological constellations, setting the
boundaries for plausible political activity. A typology of four concept states is proposed:
unquestioned, contested, essentially contested, and destabilized, in which each state
arises from different constellations and relations between knowledge, public discourse,
the elite’s political maneuvers, and experiences. I weave the existing literature about
concepts into the analytical framework, while also introducing the idea of a destabilized
state, which can only be identified after acknowledging the role of experience and per-
ception in the conceptualization process. In the last section I elaborate on the importance
To continue reading
Request your trial