This theoretical chapter first proposes, within an open dynamic approach, a vocabulary to address the embodied person and their experience, and the material, social and symbolic environments in which they live, which are experienced physically, relationally and interpreted via semiotic processes. Then, it highlights the implications of a regional case study for the theorising of human development, notably, thanks to its attention to the interdependency between socio and microgenetic dynamics and ontogenesis. Further, it proposes a new series of concepts and dynamics to account for development in older age, where people are likely to find new ways to develop in a world whose forces may feel progressively more adverse. Hence, the model of reconfiguration of domains of conduct needs to be completed by an understanding of envelopes that supports centripetal dynamics, borrowed from psychoanalysis. Finally, the chapter examines the implication of this proposition for the theorising development in the lifecourse.

This introductory chapter contextualizes the inquiry and delimits the theoretical, historical, and practical concerns that motivate the study. After discussing key concepts informing the analysis, including the terms ‘religion’ and ‘recognition’, it summarizes the book’s main arguments and contributions and locates them in current International Relations (IR) scholarship as well as in the disciplines of religious studies and colonial history. It introduces the empirical case studies and illustrates how the quest for statehood, the contested question of minorities, political representation, and international border-making shaped and were shaped by the concepts, agents, and identities associated with ‘religion’ that broke through the threshold of political recognition to establish themselves as taken-for-granted political entities on the global stage. The chapter argues that religion is a space, concept, and realm of social and political life rather than separate from it. Consequently, struggles over authority, power, and political order shape the contours and meanings that ‘religion’ can take on. By the same token, analysing changes in such meanings and understandings help us understand the political structures and orders that characterize that particular place and time.

The Framers’ overarching theories for the control of faction included representation as a filter of popular passions, union, and an extended republic to limit the influence of factions by multiplying the number of distinct and competing interests, and divided sovereignty between the state and national governments. The theory of representation was familiar from their British heritage, but their theories of an extended republic and divided sovereignty between the national and state governments diverged from accepted political principles of the eighteenth century.

While most sustainability transitions researchers agree on the need for cross-disciplinary collaboration, such collaborations can be difficult in practice. Scholars often disagree on (a) how to understand the world (ontology) and (b) what constitutes important knowledge about transitions (epistemology). From this observation, this chapter explores ontological and epistemological debates in sustainability transitions research. It begins by outlining dominant frameworks, particularly the multi-level perspective (MLP), and their foundational assumptions drawn from evolutionary economics and science and technology studies (STS). The chapter identifies two main criticisms of the MLP: the need for an expanded epistemic focus and ontological critiques from proponents of ‘flat ontologies’ and critical realists. It then discusses new epistemological approaches that challenge the dominant narrative that transitions primarily emerge through innovation journeys. These criticisms focus on capitalism, coloniality, and justice, highlighting how mainstream transition studies tend to externalise such concerns. The chapter concludes by supporting radical theoretical pluralism as key to understanding sustainability transitions’ increasing complexities.

This chapter introduces readers to the subject, and gives a rationale for Strategic Studies as a distinct academic discipline deserving of its own intellectual tradition. From here, the chapter discusses the central role of strategic theory in the discipline, and introduces readers to the most important works in the field. These works include the classics, such as Sun Tzu and Clausewitz, but reference is also made to important modern works, including Gray and Wylie.

This chapter expands upon the key concepts of air power, illustrating its inter-war development and the challenges presented to the theory when exposed to the realities of the Second World War. It explains the importance of joint operations to Allied victory in 1945 and the importance of the use of the atom bomb as a counter to criticism that strategic bombing was perhaps not as important as had been suggested became moot. The chapter examines the ways in which the key air power concepts played out during the Cold War era (1945-circa 1990) and the employment of air power in the thirty years between the 1991 Gulf War and the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 brought about a new line of thinking about air power. The development and growing importance of space power is also considered in detail, leading into the final chapter in this section, which considers the way in which air and space power have become indispensable factors.

This chapter examines the role and nature of theory in big picture analysis. It argues that while Buzan-style big picture analysis necessarily engages a specific perspective, it does not tell us anything about the nature of the theory used. That is, what concepts does it consist of? How are they organized? And what kind of inner mechanisms make it tick? This chapter demonstrates that Buzan-style big picture analysis is enabled by a theory quite distinct from other standard types of theorizing in International Relations. Uniquely, Buzan understands theory as a network of concepts, hierarchically organized, that allows a mapping of issues and thus corresponding to the mindmapping© technique. As such, theory does not have a lasting form, but shifts in accordance with empirics. In Buzan’s case, most of the key concepts come from the English School (within International Relations), mixed up with standard terminology from macro-history and historical sociology. Beyond that, I argue, that Buzan – like many in IR – has evolved through an engagement with Waltzian neorealism. I examine to what extent traces of Waltz remain in Buzan’s approach and go on to suggest that there is space within Buzan’s framework for developing theories in the Waltzian sense as pictures mentally formed, sporting a constant form holding across space and time.

This introductory chapter provides the rationale for this topic and framing of the book. The strength and tools of linguistics can contribute greatly to teacher effectiveness in the second language classroom, yet the two professional realms have developed largely independently of one another. This chapter introduces the argument for strengthening the role of linguistics in second language study as well as establishing the place of second language data in linguistics inquiry and education, bringing together the two disciplines around the actual realities of language itself. It introduces the chapter content and flow of the book, the breadth represented in topics and authors, intended audience, special features of the chapters, and perspectives from second language acquisition to help bridge the gap between disciplines.

This chapter lays out the overall rationale for the book, elucidates some of its key aspects and situates the book in relation to a scholarly field of feminist jurisprudence in India. It introduces the established convention of diversity in the field of Indian feminist jurisprudence, which this book joins with and expands. The chapter offers an illustration of the field by introducing the body of literature that the book is drawing from and contributing to and foregrounds that there are different voices in the field each of which speaks from a different locus both within and outside Indian legal academia. Simultaneously, the chapter explains the relevance of caste and how it hierarchically organises the field of intellectual labour in India.

This chapter examines how international relations (IR) scholarship has approached two central questions concerning international law and legalisation: why do states create international law, and what makes a particular norm ‘legal’ in nature? It then outlines the concept of legalisation as described in Abbott et al.’s well-known article of the same name. Under the classic legalisation framework, legalisation has three components: obligation, precision and delegation. The chapter argues that the classic OPD framework cannot fully capture the expanding role of non-state actors or conceptualise law as a process. It therefore proposes an adapted model for the transnational legal system that incorporates a crucial omitted dimension – implementation. Implementation refers to the concrete actions taken by agents to translate legal or law-like principles into practical, workable instructions for courts, governments, companies, and other non-state actors.

The transition from research question to theory is a crucial part of producing a good empirical research paper. A good theory explains patterns in data with a well-articulated “because” clause that specifies a causal mechanism linking the independent variable to the dependent variable. A good theory also identifies the scope conditions and assumptions under which it operates. Developing your theory, articulating definitions of its concepts, and fully explicating its causal mechanism are key components of this process; these are critical for later stages. This is part of why the theory is such an important part of empirical research: without a carefully-thought-out theory, empirical research doesn’t make much sense.

Chapter 7 discusses the process of “theoretical drift.” Science operates on a gift economy wherein researchers share knowledge freely, but this means losing control over how ideas are used, which can result in outsiders using them in new ways that harm the reputation of their creators. The chapter describes five sociological processes that led to theoretical drift, including rampant faddishness, the abstraction and elaboration of individual concepts from the main theory, the relativity of the creative frontier, the sheer volume of new research on the topic, and conceptual travel and stretching. The chapter concludes by detailing RA members’ efforts to regain control of their theoretical narrative through public performances and by publishing articles and books to re-establish their original theoretical vision.