Abstract

This article explores the burgeoning literature on status in world politics. Toward that end, it reviews three recently published books. The three books are representative of the different theoretical perspectives that have come to dominate status research in international relations. Renshon's Fighting for Status offers a rationalist–instrumental approach; Larson and Shevchenko's Quest for Status draws on insights from social identity theory; and Murray's The Struggle for Recognition is informed by constructivist theory. The article contrasts and compares the three works. Moreover, it identifies shortcomings and limitations in each book and, based on this discussion, suggests areas for further research. In particular, it is argued that scholars should devote more attention to competitive theory testing through process tracing; incorporate domestic politics more systematically into approaches of status seeking; develop case-specific explanations that fuse insights from the various perspectives; and examine how the interplay of material and ideational factors shapes states’ status aspirations.

中文翻译：

---

世界政治中的地位问题

摘要

本文探讨了新兴的关于世界政治地位的文献。为此，它回顾了三本最近出版的书。这三本书代表了在国际关系中的地位研究中占主导地位的不同理论观点。Renshon的“争取地位”提供了一种理性主义-工具主义的方法。拉尔森（Larson）和舍甫琴科（Shevchenko）的《身份追求》借鉴了社会认同理论的见解。和默里（Murray）的《为认可而奋斗》以建构主义理论为基础。本文对这三部作品进行了对比和比较。此外，它还指出了每本书的不足和局限性，并基于此讨论提出了需要进一步研究的领域。特别是，有人认为学者应该通过过程追踪更多地关注竞争性理论测试。将国内政治更系统地纳入寻求身份的方法；提出针对具体案例的解释，以融合来自各个角度的见解；并研究物质和概念因素之间的相互作用如何影响国家的地位愿望。