Arctic International Relations (5op)

Arviointiasteikko

H-5

Tavoitteet

After completion of the course the student is able to
- discuss the utility of a range of theories, concepts and approaches deriving from International Relations when applied to Arctic World Politics
- critically evaluate the limits of International Relations for understanding Arctic World politics
- explain the relevance of the differences between concepts of International and World for approaching the Arctic; in terms especially of the importance of worlding as a political practice.

Toteutustavat

Lecture and seminars (16 h). Independent work.

Suoritustavat

Participation in lectures and seminars (2 cr) and a written assignment (3 cr).

Sisältö

How is the Arctic approached and understood within the discipline of International Relations? What are the limits of those approaches and what is it about the Arctic and ’Arcticness’ which causes difficulties for IR? What does it mean to study Arctic World Politics in contrast with Arctic International Relations? In this course we will consider the reasons why the Arctic is seen to be distinct from other regions and cultures in IR and other sciences. In particular we will focus on the ontological conflicts between different theoretical approaches when it comes to comprehending the Arctic and the questions these conflicts pose for the future of IR itself.

Oppimateriaalit

TBC during the course.

Arviointikriteerit, tyydyttävä (1)

Fail: Performance is highly deficient or erroneous. The work may be based on serious misunderstandings.

Sufficient and satisfactory (1-2): Performance is lacking in scope, superficial, or corresponds poorly to the assignment. The author merely lists things out of context or addresses them one-sidedly. The work may contain errors or obscurities.

Arviointikriteerit, hyvä (3)

Good and very good (3-4): Performance corresponds to the assignment, manifesting comprehension and a skill to analyse and justify. The author has addressed the issue comprehensively. The work may contain some deficiencies.

Arviointikriteerit, kiitettävä (5)

Excellent (5): Performance delineates an extensive whole and the author can apply knowledge in a multifaceted way or place it in various contexts. The work manifests independency and insight, and it is a flawless entity that involves justified thinking or critical contemplation. The work is well written and implemented.