Forsker
Ole Jacob Sending
Kontaktinfo og filer
Sammendrag
Ole Jacob Sending er forsker 1 i Forskningsgruppen for global orden og diplomati.
Han forsker på global styring, med særlig fokus på internajonale og ikke-statlige organisasjoners rolle i fredsbygging, humanitær bistand og utvikling. Sending har publisert i blant annet International Studies Quarterly, European Journal of International Relations og International Theory.
Ekspertise
Utdanning
2004 Dr. polit, Universtitet i Bergen: How does knowledge matter?
1998 Mastergrad i statsvitenskap, State University of New York, Albany
1997 Cand.mag., UiB (økonomi, statsvitenskap og sosiologi)
Arbeidserfaring
2023- Forsker 1, NUPI
2012-2023 Forskningssjef, NUPI
2008-2009 Gjesteforsker (Fulbright-stipendiat), Institutt for Sosiologi, UC Berkeley
2008-2014 Tilknyttet seniorforsker, Chr. Michelsen Institute, Bergen
2008- Seniorforsker, NUPI
2006-2008 Seniorrådgiver, Utenriksdepartementet
2003 Seniorforsker, NUPI
2002 Gjesteforsker, Stanford University (SCANCOR)
1999-2003 Forsker, NUPI, doktorgradsstipendiat, UiB
Aktivitet
Filter
Tøm alle filtreStates before relations: On misrecognition and the bifurcated regime of sovereignty
The symbolic structure of the international system, organised around sovereignty, is sustained by an institutional infrastructure that shapes how states seek sovereign agency. We investigate how the modern legal category of the state is an institutional expression of the idea of the state as a liberal person, dependent on a one-off recognition in establishing the sovereign state. We then discuss how this institutional rule co-exists with the on-going frustrated search for recognition in terms of socio-political registers. While the first set of rules establishes a protective shield against others, regardless of behaviour, the second set of rules specify rules for behaviour of statehood, which produces a distinct form of misrecognition. States are, at one level, already recognised as sovereign and are granted rights akin to individuals in liberal thought, and yet they are continually misrecognised in their quest to actualise the sovereign agency they associate with statehood. We draw on examples from two contemporary phenomena - fragile states, and assertions of non-interference and sovereignty from the populist right and non-Western great powers, to discuss the misrecognition processes embedded in the bifurcated symbolic structure of sovereignty, and its implications for debates about hierarchy and sovereignty in world affairs.
Frustrated Sovereigns: The agency that makes the world go around
In this special issue we build on the growing interest in recognition to suggest that a shift from recognition to misrecognition open up new theoretical perspectives. Our point of departure is that failure – not obtaining the recognition one seeks – is built into the very desire for recognition. Thus understood, the desire for recognition is not simply a desire for social goods, for status or for statehood, but for agency. This, we suggest, is Hegel’s fundamental lesson. On this basis, we argue that the international system is defined by a symbolic structure organised around an always unrealisable ideal of sovereign agency. We discuss the implications of such a focus on the workings of misrecognition and the ideal of sovereign agency, and introduce the key themes – focused on failure and the negative, the striving for unity and actorhood, and sovereignty and the international system – that the contributors address in their respective articles.
Teoriseminar: The prospects for Chinese leadership in an age of upheaval
Srdjan Vucetic skal diskutere artikkelen sin om dei kinesiske moglegheitene i ei tid der forholdet mellom vesten og USA er meir usikkert enn før.
Teoriseminar: Why weak states persist and alternatives to the state fade away
Arjun Chowdhury besøkjer NUPI for å diskutere sine nye bok “The Myth of International Order: Why weak states persisa and alternatives to the state fade away”.
Nordiske svar på geopolitiske utfordringer
Ukens analyse for DNAK er skrevet av seniorforsker Kristin Haugevik og forskningssjef Ole Jacob Sending, begge ved Norsk utenrikspolitisk institutt (NUPI). De skriver om hvordan de fem nordiske landene responderer på omveltningene i internasjonal politikk.
Teoriseminar: Byråkrati og diplomatisk representasjon i Kosovo
Tobias Wille besøkjer NUPI for å diskutere notatet sitt om korleis Kosovo prøvde å hevde statsdanninga si gjennom profesjonalisering av utanrikstenesta.
AVLYST: Teoriseminar: It Takes Time: Forecasts, Democracy, and Academia
Dette teoriseminaret er dessverre avlyst.
Menneskerettar som tryggingspolitikk? OSSEs rolle i ei usikker verd
Spiller OSSE framleis ei viktig rolle for menneskerettar og samarbeid mellom land? Det skal utanriksminister Eriksen Søreide, ODIHR-direktør Gísladóttir og to andre ekspertar diskutere 19. april.
Expertise and Practice: The Evolving Relationship between Study and Practice of Security
The chapter details the evolving relationship between the study and the practice of international security. This relationship is seen as one of differentiation: international security has proliferated into several sub-fields - cyber security, conflict management etc - with increased specialisation of techniques of governing. This specialisation is matched by a differentiation in academic research and expertise, so that there is by now a broad array of different types of security expertise. This differentiation into sub-fields reflects a broader trend also found in other issue-areas.
Diplomacy as Global Governance
The chapter details how diplomacy - the case study being Norwegian diplomacy - is no longer solely about representing the state vis a vis other states. It has evolved to also include governing specific issues. This governance aspect of diplomacy becomes even more interesting as an expression of the transformation of diplomacy when we consider that what is being governed is not directly linked to the security of the state, but to ideals and principles that attain meaning as first and foremost "international" issues or goals. We find evidence of a gradual shift of diplomacy towards governing of international issues, and reflect on what this means for the presentation of the state vis a vis other states.