Skip to main content

Doing Praxiography: Research Strategies, Methods and Techniques

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
International Practice Theory

Abstract

In this chapter, we discuss the methodology and methods of IPT. We outline methodological guidelines that spring from practice theory, and the fact that social science is also a practice. We introduce the notion of praxiography to speak about the methodology and methods of practice-theory-driven research, and discuss the status of ‘theory’ and its relation to empirics. Praxiography can be anchored in different starting points, and the seven core approaches imply distinct strategies as to where to begin inquiry. Turning to methods, our argument is that praxiography implies carefully considering how practice can be observed directly. We show how different forms of field work, including participant observation, event observation and shadowing can be used to study practice Some situations require alternative techniques, and we point to interviews and different forms of text analysis as options. Finally, we address the drafting of a praxiography. Writing about practice implies controlling for the unruliness of practices, and ordering them into a more-or-less coherent narrative. How can a narrative about practice be written in a way that makes sense to a distinct audience? We argue that praxiography requires experimentation and creativity, and introduce ideas from ethnography and filmmaking as inspirations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See, in particular, the contributions in Jonas et al. (2017), and, in the context of German sociology, Kalthoff et al. (2008), and Schäfer et al. (2015).

  2. 2.

    See, in particular, Karin Knorr Cetina’s work (e.g. 1981, 2001), but also the thriving discussion on the “social life of methods” in social science, summarised in Greiffenhagen et al. (2015).

  3. 3.

    See, for example, contributions in Jonas et al. (2017).

  4. 4.

    Compare the special issue of the European Journal of International Relations on this matter (Wight et al. 2013).

  5. 5.

    See, for instance, Kratochwil (2011) for whom theory and practice are opposite poles and hence the notion of ‘practice theory’ doesn’t make much sense. As Stern (2003: 201–203) argues, much of the debate on the status of theory is related to different interpretations of Wittgenstein . As he concludes, “perhaps it is the protean character of practice theory, the way in which it holds out the promise of accommodating both the aim of rigorous theory of society, and the desire for a close description of particulars, that has made it both so attractive and so hard to pin down.” (Stern 2003: 203).

  6. 6.

    For related discussions on techniques of generalisation, see the discussion on the methodology of case studies, in particular Flyvbjerg (2006), Ruddin (2006) and Thomas (2010).

  7. 7.

    Other scholars prefer the term praxeology to speak about the methodology of practice theory. Given that “-ology” refers to a subject of study or a branch of knowledge, rather than an epistemic activity, we prefer the suffix of “-graphy”.

  8. 8.

    Trowler (2014) provides a useful short discussion of the relation between praxiography and ethnography . For the broader discussion on the twists and turns of recent ethnography and its reception in international relations and political science, see the discussions in Kapisezewski et al. (2015), Eckl (2008), Vrasti (2008), Sande Lie (2013), Wedeen (2010), Kuus (2013), De Volo, and Schatz (2004), Stepputat and Larsen (2015), Bueger and Mireanu (2014), and the contributions in Schatz (2009).

  9. 9.

    Summarised, for instance, in Bueger and Mireanu (2014) and Schatz (2009).

  10. 10.

    For the more general (not practice-focussed) debate on auto-ethnography in international relations, see Brigg and Bleiker (2010), Dauphinee (2010), Löwenheim (2010), Doty (2010), Neumann (2010) and Hamati-Ataya (2014).

  11. 11.

    For a discussion of the book’s style and underlying methodology see Czarniawska (2008) and Austrin and Farnsworth (2005).

Literature

  • ———. 2008. The Spread of Security Communities: Communities of Practice, Self-Restraint, and NATO’s Post-Cold War Transformation. European Journal of International Relations 14 (2): 195–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knorr-Cetina, Karin D. 1981. The Manufacture of Knowledge: An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, Rune S., and Frank Möller. 2013. Engaging the Limits of Visibility: Photography, Security, and Surveillance. Security Dialogue 44 (3): 203–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aradau, Claudia, and Andrew Hill. 2013. The Politics of Drawing: Children, Evidence, and the Darfur Conflict. International Political Sociology 7 (4): 368–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Austrin, Terry, and John Farnsworth. 2005. Hybrid Genres: Fieldwork, Detection and the Method of Bruno Latour. Qualitative Research 5 (2): 147–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bacchi, Carol L. 2009. What’s the Problem Represented to Be? Frenchs Forrest: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2012. Why Study Problematizations? Making Politics Visible. Open Journal of Political Science 2 (1): 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, Michael N. 1997. The UN Security Council, Indifference, and Genocide in Rwanda. Cultural Anthropology 12 (4): 551–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, Michael N., and Martha Finnemore. 2004. Rules for the World: International Organizations in Global Politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry, Andrew. 2013. Material Politics. Disputes along the Pipeline. Malden: John Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bartels, Koen P.R. 2012. The Actionable Researcher. Administrative Theory & Praxis 34 (3): 433–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bicchi, Frederica. 2011. The EU as a Community of Practice: Foreign Policy Communications in the COREU Network. Journal of European Public Policy 18 (8): 1115–1132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumer, Herbert. 1954. What Is Wrong with Social Theory? American Sociological Review 19 (1): 3–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boltanski, Luc, and Ève Chiapello. 2007. The New Spirit of Capitalism. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonditti, Philippe, Andrew Neal, Sven Opitz, and Chris Zebrowski. 2014. Genealogy. In Critical Security Methods: New Frameworks for Analysis, ed. Claudia Aradau, Jef Huysmans, Andrew McNeal, and Nadine Voelckner, 159–214. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brigg, Morgan, and Roland Bleiker. 2010. Autoethnographic International Relations: Exploring the Self as a Source of Knowledge. Review of International Studies 36 (3): 779–798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bueger, Christian. 2011. The Clash of Practice: Political Controversy and the United Nations Peacebuilding Commission. Evidence and Policy 7 (2), Special Issue on the Practice of Policymaking: 171–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2013b. Communities of Security Practice at Work? The Emerging African Maritime Security Regime. African Security 6 (3–4): 297–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2014. Pathways to Practice. Praxiography and International Politics. European Political Science Review 6 (3): 383–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bueger, Christian, and Felix Bethke. 2014. Actor-Networking the Failed State – An Enquiry into the Life of Concepts. Journal of International Relations and Development 17 (1): 30–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bueger, Christian, and Manuel Mireanu. 2014. Proximity. In Critical Security Methods: New Frameworks for Analysis, ed. Claudia Aradau, Jef Huysmans, Andrew McNeal, and Nadine Voelckner, 118–141. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, Lisa M., and J. Peter Brosius. 2010. Collaborative Event Ethnography: Conservation and Development Trade-Offs at the Fourth World Conservation Congress. Conservation and Society 8 (4): 245–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clifford, James, and George E. Marcus, eds. 1986. Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2007. Shadowing and Other Techniques for Doing Fieldwork in Modern Societies. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2008. A Theory of Organizing. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dany, Endres. 2011. Parliament Politics. A Heterotopology of Liberal Democracy. Ph.D. Dissertation, Lancaster University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dauphinee, Elizabeth. 2010. The Ethics of Autoethnography. Review of International Studies 36 (3): 799–818.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2013a. The Politics of Exile. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2013b. Writing as Hope: Reflections on the Politics of Exile. Security Dialogue 44 (4): 347–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Laet, Marianne, and Annemarie Mol. 2000. The Zimbabwe Bush Pump: Mechanics of Fluid Technology. Social Studies of Science 30 (2): 225–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Volo, Lorraine Bayard, and Edward Schatz. 2004. From the Inside Out: Ethnographic Methods in Political Research. PS: Political Science & Politics 37 (2): 267–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2010. Autoethnography – Making Human Connections. Review of International Studies 36 (4): 1047–1050.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Down, Simon, and Michael Hughes. 2009. When the ‘Subject’ and the ‘Researcher’ Speak Together: Co-producing Organizational Ethnography. In Organizational Ethnography. Studying the Complexities of Everyday Life, ed. Sierk Ybema, Dvora Yanow, Harry Wels, and Frans Kamsteeg, 83–98. London: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Eckl, Julian. 2008. Responsible Scholarship After Leaving the Veranda: Normative Issues Faced by Field Researchers-and Armchair Scientists. International Political Sociology 2 (3): 185–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edkins, Jenny. 2003. Trauma and the Memory of Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2013. Novel Writing in International Relations: Openings for a Creative Space. Security Dialogue 44 (4): 281–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eikeland, Olav, and Davide Nicolini. 2011. Turning Practically: Broadening the Horizon. Journal of Organizational Change Management 24 (2): 164–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engert, Kornelia, and Björn Krey. 2013. Das lesende Schreiben und das schreibende Lesen. Zeitschrift für Soziologie 42 (5): 366–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erwin, Panofsky. 1970. Meaning in the Visual Arts. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flyvbjerg, Bent. 2006. Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research. Qualitative Inquiry 12 (2): 219–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, Richard, and Maybin Jo. 2011. Documents, Practices and Policy. Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice 7 (2): 155–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedrichs, Jörg, and Friedrich Kratochwil. 2009. On Acting and Knowing: How Pragmatism Can Advance International Relations Research and Methodology. International Organization 63 (4): 701–731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, Noella J. 2010. Sea Change: Exploring the International Effort to Promote Marine Protected Areas. Conservation and Society 8 (4): 331–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greiffenhagen, Christian, Michael Mair, and Wes Sharrock. 2015. Methodological Troubles as Problems and Phenomena: Ethnomethodology and the Question of ‘Method’ in the Social Sciences. The British Journal of Sociology 66 (3): 460–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halkier, Bente. 2010. Focus Groups as Social Enactments: Integrating Interaction and Content in the Analysis of Focus Group Data. Qualitative Research 10 (1): 71–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2011. Methodological Practicalities in Analytical Generalization. Qualitative Inquiry 17 (9): 787–797.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2017. Questioning the ‘Gold Standard’ Thinking in Qualitative Methods from a Practice Theoretical Perspective: Towards Methodological Multiplicity. In Methodological Reflections on Practice Oriented Theories, ed. Michael Jonas, Beate Littig, and Angela Wroblewski, 193–204. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer International Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hamati-Ataya, Inanna. 2014. Transcending Objectivism, Subjectivism, and the Knowledge In-between: The Subject In/of ‘Strong Reflexivity. Review of International Studies 40 (1): 153–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2011. Theorizing the Image for Security Studies: Visual Securitization and the Muhammad Cartoon Crisis. European Journal of International Relations 17 (1): 51–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2015. How Images Make World Politics: International Icons and the Case of Abu Ghraib. Review of International Studies 41 (2): 263–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heath, Christian, and Jon Hindmarsh. 2011. Analysing Interaction: Video, Ethnography and Situated Conduct. In Qualitative Research in Practice, ed. Tim May. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heck, Axel, and Gabi Schlag. 2013. Securitizing Images: The Female Body and the War in Afghanistan. European Journal of International Relations 19 (4): 891–913.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hitchings, Russell. 2012. People Can Talk About Their Practices. Area 44 (1): 61–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Humphreys, Michael, and Tony Watson. 2009. Ethnographic Practices: From ‘Writing-up Ethnographic Research’ to ‘Writing Ethnography’. In Organizational Ethnography. Studying the Complexities of Everyday Life, ed. Sierk Ybema, Dvora Yanow, Harry Wels, and Frans Kamsteeg, 40–55. London: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jonas, Michael, Beate Littig, and Angela Wroblewski, eds. 2017. Methodological Reflections on Practice Oriented Theories. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalthoff, Herbert, Stefan Hirschauer, and Gesa Lindemann, eds. 2008. Theoretische Empirie. Zur Relevanz Qualitativer Forschung. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapiszewski, Diana, Lauren M. MacLean, and Benjamin L. Read. 2015. Field Research in Political Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2001. Objectual Practice. In The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory, ed. Theodore R. Schatzki, Karin Knorr Cetina, and Eike von Savigny, 175–188. London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knorr Cetina, Karin, and Urs Bruegger. 2002. Global Microstructures: The Virtual Societies of Financial Markets. American Journal of Sociology 107 (4): 905–950.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koopman, Colin. 2013. Geneaology as Critique. Foucault and the Problems of Modernity. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2011. Making Sense of ‘International Practices’. In International Practices, ed. Emanuel Adler and Vincent Pouliot, 36–60. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kurowska, Xymena, and Benjamin Tallis. 2013. Chiasmatic Crossings: A Reflexive Revisit of a Research Encounter in European Security. Security Dialogue 44 (1): 73–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuus, Merje. 2013. Foreign Policy and Ethnography: A Sceptical Intervention. Geopolitics 18 (1): 115–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1996. Aramis, or the Love of Technology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, Jean, and Etienne Wenger. 1991. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lisle, Debbie. 2017. Learning How to See. In Routledge Handbook of International Political Sociology, ed. Xavier Guillaume and Pinar Bilgin, 295–304. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Little, Paul E. 1995. Ritual, Power and Ethnography at the Rio Earth Summit. Critique of Anthropology 15 (3): 265–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2010. The ‘I’ in IR: An Autoethnographic Account. Review of International Studies 36 (4): 1023–1045.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, Judi. 2011. Images of Changing Practice Through Reflective Action Research. Journal of Organizational Change Management 24 (2): 244–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, Seonaidh. 2005. Studying Actions in Context: A Qualitative Shadowing Method for Organizational Research. Qualitative Research 5 (4): 455–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McEntee-Atalianis, Lisa J. 2011. The Role of Metaphor in Shaping the Identity and Agenda of the United Nations: The Imagining of an International Community and International Threat. Discourse & Communication 5 (4): 393–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2013. Stance and Metaphor: Mapping Changing Representations of (Organizational) Identity. Discourse & Communication 7 (3): 319–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mol, Annemarie. 2002. The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice. Durham/London: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2010b. Actor-Network Theory: Sensitive Terms and Enduring Tensions. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 50 (1): 253–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, Sophie Merit. 2016. Becoming the Phenomenon? An Alternative Approach to Reflexivity in Ethnography. Qualitative Inquiry 22 (9): 705–717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2007. ‘A Speech That the Entire Ministry May Stand For,’ or: Why Diplomats Never Produce Anything New. International Political Sociology 1 (2): 183–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2010. Autobiography, Ontology, Autoethnology. Review of International Studies 36 (4): 1051–1055.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2012. At Home with the Diplomats: Inside a European Foreign Ministry. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2013. Diplomatic Sites. A Critical Enquiry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nicolini, Davide. 2009. Articulating Practice Through the Interview to the Double. Management Learning 40 (2): 195–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2013. Practice Theory, Work, & Organization: An Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2017b. Practice Theory as a Package of Theory, Method and Vocabulary: Affordances and Limitations. In Methodological Reflections on Practice Oriented Theories, ed. Michael Jonas, Beate Littig, and Angela Wroblewski, 19–34. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer International Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Park-Kang, Sungju. 2014. Fictional International Relations. Gender, Pain, and Truth. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, Tony. 2012. Making Serious Measures: Numerical Indices, Peer Review, and Transnational Actor-Networks. Journal of International Relations and Development 15 (4): 532–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2013. Methodology. In Bourdieu in International Relations. Rethinking Key Concepts in IR, ed. Rebecca Adler-Nissen, 45–58. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prior, Lindsay. 2008. Repositioning Documents in Social Research. Sociology 42 (5): 821–836.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pugh, Allison J. 2013. What Good Are Interviews for Thinking About Culture? Demystifying Interpretive Analysis. American Journal of Cultural Sociology 1 (1): 42–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reckwitz, Andreas. 2002. Toward a Theory of Social Practices: A Development in Culturalist Theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory 5 (2): 243–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2008. Praktiken und Diskurse. Eine Sozialtheoretische Und Methodologische Relation. In Theoretische Empirie. Zur Relevanz Qualitativer Forschung, ed. Herbert Kalthoff, Stefan Hirschauer, and Gesa Lindemann, 188–209. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R.A.W. 2011. Everyday Life in British Government. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riles, Annelise. 1998. Infinity Within the Brackets. American Ethnologist 25 (3): 378–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2006. [Deadlines]: Removing the Brackets on Politics in Bureaucratic and Anthropological Analysis. In Documents. Artifacts of Modern Knowledge, ed. Annelise Riles, 71–94. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2008. Models and Documents: Artifacts of International Legal Knowledge. International & Comparative Law Quarterly 48 (4): 805–825.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1996. Engaging Science. How to Understand Its Practices Philosophically. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruddin, Lee Peter. 2006. You Can Generalize Stupid! Social Scientists, Bent Flyvbjerg and Case Study Methodology. Qualitative Inquiry 12 (4): 797–812.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandberg, Joergen, and Mats Alvesson. 2011. Ways of Constructing Research Questions: Gap-Spotting or Problematization? Organization 18 (1): 23–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schäfer, Franka, Anna Daniel, and Frank Hillebrandt, eds. 2015. Methoden einer Soziologie der Praxis. Bielefeld: Transcript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schatz, Edward. 2009. Political Ethnography. What Immersion Contributes to the Study of Power. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schatzki, Theodore R. 2012. A Primer on Practices. In Practice-Based Education. Perspectives and Strategies, Practice, Education, Work and Society, ed. Joy Higgs, Ronald Barnett, Stephen Billett, and Maggie Hutchings, vol. 6, 13–26. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2017. Sociology of Social Practices: Theory or Modus Operandi of Empirical Research? In Methodological Reflections on Practice Oriented Theories, ed. Michael Jonas, Beate Littig, and Angela Wroblewski, 3–17. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2014. Security as Controversy: Reassembling Security at Amsterdam Airport. Security Dialogue 45 (1): 23–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2012. Interpretive Research Design. Concepts and Processes. Milton Park/New York: Routledge Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sclavi, Marianella. 1989. Ad Una Spanna Da Terra. Milan: Feltrinelli.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seale, Clive. 1999. The Quality of Qualitative Research. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Shim, David. 2017. Sketching Geopolitics: Comics and the Case of the Cheonan Sinking. International Political Sociology. Online First, doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olx016.

  • Stepputat, Finn, and Jessica Larsen. 2015. Global Political Ethnography: A Methodological Approach to Studying Global Policy Regimes. DIIS Working Paper (1): 1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, David G. 2003. The Practical Turn. In The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of the Social Sciences, ed. Stephen P. Turner and Paul A. Roth, 185–206. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sylvester, Christine. 2012. War as Experience. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, Gary. 2010. Doing Case Study: Abduction Not Induction, Phronesis Not Theory. Qualitative Inquiry 16 (7): 575–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trowler, Paul Richard. 2014. Practice-Focused Ethnographies of Higher Education: Method/ological Corollaries of a Social Practice Perspective. European Journal of Higher Education 4 (1): 18–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Munster, Rens, and Casper Sylvest. 2015. Documenting International Relations: Documentary Film and the Creative Arrangement of Perceptibility. International Studies Perspectives 16 (3): 229–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrasti, Wanda. 2008. The Strange Case of Ethnography and International Relations. Millennium: Journal of International Studies 37 (2): 279–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wacquant, Louis. 2004. Body and Soul. Notebooks of an Apprentice Boxer. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagenaar, Hendrik. 2004. ‘Knowing’ the Rules: Administrative Work as Practice. Public Administration Review 64 (6): 643–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walters, William. 2002. The Power of Inscription: Beyond Social Construction and Deconstruction in European Integration Studies. Millennium: Journal of International Studies 31 (1): 83–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wedeen, Lisa. 2010. Reflections on Ethnographic Work in Political Science. Annual Review of Political Science 13 (1): 255–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisser, Florian. 2014. Practices, Politics, Performativities: Documents in the International Negotiations on Climate Change. Political Geography 40 (May): 46–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, Hayden. 1975. Metahistory: The Historical Imagination in Nineteenth-Century Europe. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wight, Colin, Lene Hansen, and Tim Dunne. 2013. The End of International Relations Theory? European Journal of International Relations 19 (3): 405–665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winner, Langdon. 1980. Do Artifacts Have Politics? Daedalus 109 (1): 121–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, Deborah A. 2002. Policy Paradox. The Art of Political Decision Making. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolcott, Harry F. 1973. The Man in the Principal’s Office. An Ethnography. Walnut Creek: Altamira Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wong, Theresa, and Joel Wainwright. 2009. Offshoring Dissent. Critical Asian Studies 41 (3): 403–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yanow, Dvora. 2009. Dear Author, Dear Reader: The Third Hermeneutic in Writing and Reviewing Ethnography. In Political Ethnography: What Immersion Contributes to the Study of Power, ed. Edward Schatz, 275–302. Chicago/London: Chicago University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahle, Julie. 2012. Practical Knowledge and Participant Observation. Inquiry 55 (1): 50–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Bueger, C., Gadinger, F. (2018). Doing Praxiography: Research Strategies, Methods and Techniques. In: International Practice Theory. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73350-0_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics