MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1968194429 · doi:10.1177/002070201106600302

Diplomats as Permanent Representatives

2011· article· en· W1968194429 sur OpenAlex
Vincent Pouliot

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational Journal Canada s Journal of Global Policy Analysis · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueInternational Relations and Foreign Policy
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDiplomacyPoliticsInternational relationsPolitical scienceDominance (genetics)Political economySociologyLaw

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

It is not very well known that term order, which foreign policy practitioners often use to talk about international playing field, was actually coined by Norwegian zoologist Thorleif Schjelderup-Ebbe in 1922 to describe dominance hierarchy of hens.1 Clearly expression, as little flattering for diplomats as its origins may sound, captures a fundamental sociopolitical dynamic in world politics: practice of diplomacy takes place within a highly - though often unreflectively - structured social space in which hierarchy and stratification are rule, not exception. Formally, as well as informally, each player has a specific rank and role, attached to distinct ways of doing things, duties, and privileges. Often tacit but ever present in background of world politics, international pecking order forms, at from a practical point of view, backbone of diplomacy.This article looks for diplomatic pecking order where one might not expect to find it - inside multilateral international organizations. After all, given often deep-rooted relationships involved in international organizations like NATO or European Union, tightly knit multilateral dubs constitute what methodologists typically call least likely cases for exploration of international pecking order. In following pages, I delve into everyday life of permanent representatives (i.e., diplomats heading national missions to multilateral international organizations) to capture practical specificities of this form of diplomacy. Perm reps, as insiders call them, enjoy a rather unique diplomatic experience, which is well worth a specific inquiry - all more so, in fact, in that their sphere of competence is fast expanding in early 21st century due to ongoing multilateralization of world politics. Empirically, my main focus is on key skills and practical logics upon which practice of permanent representation is premised. To this purpose, I begin with diplomacy as a category of practice.2 I then examine it under light of selected socialtheoretical concepts derived from political sociology.I argue that being a permanent representative typically requires specific skills which, although not entirely exclusive to these diplomats, are solicited with a particular intensity in a multilateral setting. I first identify two specific features of multilateral diplomacy, groupness and nearness, which foster pecking order dynamics and turn community of practice into a world unto itself. Its many rules of game are in evidence in socialization dynamics and social sanctions that characterize work of permanent representation in international organization. In second section, 1 zoom in on main task of multilateral diplomacy - negotiation - and delineate some of its practical logics, including need to make things work, practices of joining consensus, reaching out, etc. Arguing that practices instantiate a working (pecking) order by clarifying various permanent representatives' rank and role around table, I identify basic skill of permanent representative as something Goffman calls of one's place. Finally, third section provides a short illustration based on case of Canada in United Nations pecking order. I conclude with a comment on possible professionalization of diplomat qua permanent representative in 21st century.THE SMALL WORLD OF PERMANENT REPRESENTATIONIt is by now pretty well established that diplomacy relies on a set of skills and dispositions generally learned in and through practice. Nicolson contends that common sense is essence of diplomacy; Satow equates practice with the application of intelligence and tact to conduct of official relations between governments of independent states; Kissinger asserts that diplomacy is an art, not a science; and Acheson contends that it involves a mysterious wisdom, too arcane for layman. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: Théorique ou conceptuel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,700
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,023
Tête enseignante GPT0,374
Écart entre enseignants0,351 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle