Many disciplinary analyses have exposed IR as a Western-centric discipline, unaware or uncaring of its own ethnocentric outlook. A growing consensus in the Global IR framework argue that it is time to move beyond disciplinary critique but scholars disagree on how to proceed. Three key issues remain debated: “Who can talk?”, “how to go local?” and “how to make the local global?” The paper confronts these questions by offering three interlinked contributions. First, it develops a typology of scholarly profiles by combining the typically isolated debates on scholarly origin, embeddedness within local context, and location. Secondly, the paper identifies three main strategies for discovering and developing theories outside the core. Third, it offers two different avenues for applying local theories to the larger global canvas, underlining that Global South theories should not necessarily be limited to their ‘own’ region. Together these three contributions constitute a comprehensive roadmap of how to advance Global IR’s research agenda. The paper provides examples focused on Latin America highlighting the benefits of the roadmap while also giving agency to regional theoretical debates that are often overlooked in the Global IR debate.

中文翻译：

---

推动全球 IR 向前发展——路线图

许多学科分析表明，国际关系是一门以西方为中心的学科，不知道或不关心自己的种族中心观。全球 IR 框架中越来越多的共识认为现在是超越学科批评的时候了，但学者们对如何进行存在分歧。三个关键问题仍然存在争论：“谁会说话？”、“如何去当地？” 以及“如何让本地全球化？” 本文通过提供三个相互关联的贡献来解决这些问题。首先，它通过结合关于学术起源、在当地背景下的嵌入性和位置的典型孤立辩论，发展了学术概况的类型学。其次，本文确定了发现和发展核心之外的理论的三种主要策略。第三，它提供了两种不同的途径将局部理论应用于更大的全球画布，强调全球南方理论不一定限于他们的“自己的”地区。这三项贡献共同构成了如何推进全球 IR 研究议程的综合路线图。该论文提供了专注于拉丁美洲的例子，突出了路线图的好处，同时也为全球 IR 辩论中经常被忽视的区域理论辩论提供了代理权。