CALL FOR SECTION CHAIRS IS CLOSED

The 19th Pan-European Conference on International Relations invites participants to submit section proposals.

Even better than the real thing?  Questioning knowledge production, positionality, and authenticity in IR 

As scholars whose job is to produce texts and teach about them, we often serve as arbiters of what counts as knowledge in International Relations. Our field, long shaped by Western and state-centric assumptions of objectivity, neutrality, and universality, faces questions about the authenticity and legitimacy of its epistemological claims. Over the last few decades, IR has become receptive to a more nuanced and complex understanding of world politics, as well as a wider diversity of ontological, epistemological, theoretical and methodological approaches. Claims of value-free knowledge and universality have also been challenged. The acceptance of the importance of the gaze, of positionality and of reflexivity came with their own challenges: what is knowledge, who is in a position of producing it, and how should it circulate? 

At a time when global politics is marked by disinformation, epistemic inequality, and the erosion of shared truths, the foundations of how we know the world – and who is authorized to speak about it – are under ever-growing scrutiny. IR, as all other fields of knowledge, has more recently been confronted with the challenge of the impact of genAI in knowledge production. Both scholars and the general public have come to question what is real (?) knowledge produced by humans and or whether it is the appropriated output produced by stochastic parrots. Even though many argue that genAI can be useful, there are significant ethical and epistemological concerns and questions that remain. What have peers produced, and with how much genAI, and what have students produced, and with how much genAI? To put it bluntly, if the subaltern have to free their minds from the gaze of the colonizer or the former colonizer, what can one say about the gaze of genAI?  

This conference invites reflections on how knowledge in IR is produced, circulated, and contested. It encourages participants to interrogate the politics of authenticity: Whose experiences and epistemologies are deemed valid, and whose are dismissed or rendered invisible? What role do institutions, technologies, and disciplinary norms play in shaping what we take to be true, knowable, or worth knowing?  

We welcome contributions on the impact of world and regional events on knowledge production. In this sense, the debate on knowledge production and its authenticity in a world in which truth claims are constantly questioned from all sides and in which artificial intelligence is certain to play an increasingly central role is an important one in the current academic context. How are scholars dealing with evidence, with data and how is that impacting their research? We also welcome contributions about what is authentic knowledge, who authorizes it, who is entitled to produce it and how it is produced. What is the role of academia in the new ventures of knowledge production, and how can it -or should it- collaborate with other sectors in producing knowledge? How is knowledge transferred, how are the future generations of knowledge producers prepared and made ready to deal with these challenges and those future challenges that we do not yet know about?  

SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

Proposals for sections should include:

• • Name, institutional affiliation, EISA membership number and email address of the proposed section chair(s) — maximum two chairs per section; 
  • Proposed section title and summary of its theme(s) and rationale(s) (no more than 250 words). Please state here if your proposed section is to contain 5 or 10 panels; 
  • Tentative list of possible panels. A full list of panels is not required but section chair(s) should demonstrate the range of topics they hope will be covered by the section at the conference. A 5-panel proposal should include at least 3 suggested themes; and a 10-panel proposal should outline a minimum of 6 suggested themes. If they wish, section chairs may also complement these themes with a list of possible papers or roundtable participants.  

Section chair(s) are responsible for:

• • proposing a section theme and a preliminary list of possible panels at the proposal stage;  
  • adhering to EISA’s inclusivity agenda by ensuring that the section does not feature any all-male panels and maintaining a balance between established, emerging, and postgraduate scholars; 
  • composing the rest of the section’s programme by selecting papers that were proposed in response to the general call for papers; 
  • identifying panel chairs and discussants; 
  • taking overall responsibility for the execution of their section’s contribution to the conference programme. 

Section chairs must be EISA members. 

If you wish your proposal to be considered as a new Standing Section (3-year term), please read and follow the specific guidelines, and tick the box “Standing Section” in the submission form. 

SUBMISSION DEADLINE

The closing date for section proposals is 17 November 2025 (Midnight, CET). 

METHOD OF SUBMISSION

Submit your section proposal HERE.  

CONTACT

Programme related issues:
proposals.pec26@eisa-net.org 

General information about the conference:
info@eisa-net.org