RBPI and the Study of IR: Fostering a Multifaceted Platform for Global Dialogue, Debate and Academic Cooperation

Abstract

This paper provides an in-depth analysis of the evolving landscape of international politics, the challenges this scenario presents for the field of International Relations (IR) and the pivotal role played by Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional (RBPI) in shaping both academic knowledge and policy frameworks. The study aims to achieve two primary objectives. First, to contextualize the significant shifts in international politics in the last few years, such as the rise of China and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, while advocating for interdisciplinary approaches and highlighting the contributions of Latin American, particularly Brazilian, scholars to global academic debates. Second, to trace the history, evolution, and international impact of RBPI since its inception in 1958, emphasizing its role in leveraging the standards of academic publishing in Brazil and Latin America, fostering international collaborations, and influencing policy decisions. The paper proposes that RBPI serves as an indispensable platform for advancing rigorous academic inquiry and offers a more inclusive perspective on international relations, thereby having a lasting impact on both the academic and policy landscapes globally.

IR research; Brazilian Foreign Policy; Global South; scientific publishing

Introduction

The field of International Relations (IR) has undergone significant transformations in recent decades, influenced by a myriad of factors ranging from geopolitical shifts to technological advancements. Within this evolving landscape, academic journals serve as critical platforms for scholarly discourse, policy formulation, and the dissemination of research. One such influential journal is Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional (RBPI), which has been at the forefront of academic publishing in Brazil and Latin America since its inception in 1958. This paper aims to achieve two primary objectives. First, to provide a nuanced understanding of the major transformations in the international political landscape, with focus on interdisciplinary methodologies. Second, to trace the history, evolution, and international impact of RBPI.

The paper places particular emphasis on perspectives from the Global South, a region often marginalized in mainstream IR discourse. The inclusion of these perspectives is not merely an act of academic inclusivity, but a necessity for a more comprehensive understanding of global politics and governance. By doing so, the study argues that the Global South offers unique and invaluable insights that can enrich the field of IR in meaningful ways.

In examining RBPI’s role, the paper underscores its contributions to elevating academic standards, fostering international collaborations, and influencing policy outcomes. Through a rigorous analysis of its publications, editorial practices, and impact metrics, the study aims to demonstrate how RBPI has become a pivotal academic platform that not only advances scholarly research, but also shapes real-world policy implications. The paper concludes by highlighting RBPI’s enduring influence in both the academic and policy arenas, advocating for its continued role in enriching the field of IR.

The past two decades have been a period of unprecedented change in both the international political arena and the academic field of International Relations (IR). This era has been marked by a series of transformative events, each with far-reaching implications for the global order and the academic community that studies it. The rise of China as a global superpower, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the eruption of violent conflicts such as the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war and the recent Israel-Hamas conflict of October 2023, have been particularly impactful. These events have been unfolding in real time, not just on traditional media, but also on social media platforms, making the international scene more immediate and complex than ever before.

The decline of U.S. hegemony and the ascension of China have demanded a reevaluation of existing theories and frameworks in IR. China’s “peaceful rise” has not only altered the balance of power, but has also introduced new paradigms that challenge the U.S.-centric theories that have long dominated the field. The COVID-19 pandemic has further complicated the international landscape, introducing new variables related to global health, economic stability, and governance that were previously underexplored in IR-specialized academia.

The international academic community specialized in IR has found itself at a crossroads, dramatically challenged by this radically moving international scene. Traditional theories and models have been put to the test, and scholars have been compelled to integrate various academic traditions — ranging from International and Comparative Politics to Foreign Policy Analysis and International Law — to make sense of these complex phenomena. The need for interdisciplinary approaches has never been more apparent, especially in understanding the decline or transformation of the International Liberal Order in the face of unpredictable events (Villa and Ramanzini Junior 2021).

The internationalization of the academic community has been particularly significant in Latin America and Brazil, where scholars have been actively engaged in global networks of collaboration in the last two decades. These networks have been instrumental in broadening the scope of academic debates, incorporating perspectives that reflect the complexities of the current international system ( Acharya 2014 ; Deciancio 2016 ). The contributions from these regions have been pivotal in shaping the future of the discipline, especially in the areas of global health, international political economy, and the challenges to U.S. hegemony.

Moreover, the role of domestic politics and public opinion in shaping foreign policies has gained prominence. The digital age has contributed to democratizing access to information, but it has also introduced new challenges, such as the proliferation of fake news. This has led to a complex interplay between public opinion, domestic politics, and foreign policy, adding another layer of complexity to the academic study of IR ( Farrell and Newman 2019 ).

The seismic shifts in the international political landscape have had a profound impact on the global IR academic community. The rise of China, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the eruption of violent conflicts have not only challenged existing theories, but also demanded a more nuanced, interdisciplinary approach to studying international phenomena. The internationalization of the academic community, particularly in Latin America and Brazil, has enriched the field, making it more responsive to the complexities of a rapidly changing world. This has elevated the contributions of scholars from these regions to global academic debate, thereby shaping the future of the discipline ( Acharya et al. 2021 ).

The trajectory and the legacy of a special venue for the Brazilian and Latin American thinking on International Relations

RBPI has been a cornerstone in the academic dialogue on international relations and Brazilian foreign policy since its establishment in 1958 by the Brazilian Institute for International Relations (Instituto Brasileiro de Relações Internacionais). Its inception aimed to foster rigorous scholarly dialogue, a mission it has consistently upheld. The journal’s regular publications have made it an indispensable resource not just in Brazil, but globally ( Lessa 2017 ). The journal has served as a vital platform for the dissemination and exchange of scholarly ideas, thereby influencing both academic and policy landscapes ( Casarões 2018 ).

The journal’s history is deeply entwined with Brazil’s socio-political landscape and the broader field of International Relations. Over the course of its sixty-year existence, RBPI has mirrored Brazil’s international trajectory, reflecting the nation’s growing awareness of the limiting potential of major international constraints on society. The journal has also served as a primary vector for significant debates on development and modernization and their relationship with international issues. Pioneering analyses on crucial movements in Brazilian foreign policy, such as Juscelino Kubitschek’s Pan-American Operation (1958), Jânio Quadros’ Independent Foreign Policy (1961), and Geisel’s Responsible Pragmatism (1974), have found their home in RBPI’s editions.

Moreover, the journal has been a conduit for Latin American thought on international matters, echoing the influence of ECLAC theses on development-oriented policies, regional integration cycles, and the cooperation and dissent between Brazil and Argentina, among other key issues in Latin American internationalist intellectual journey.

During its formative years in the 1960s and 1970s, a period marked by military dictatorship in Brazil, RBPI functioned as a significant forum for the dissemination of ideas and debates on Brazilian foreign policy. While the political climate was repressive, the journal provided a space for intellectual exchange, subtly challenging the status quo and publishing high-quality articles on a diverse range of topics in international relations.

During the era of democratization in Brazil, spanning from 1985 to 2002, RBPI underwent a transformative phase that paralleled the country’s own changes. Notably, in 1994, the journal was relocated to Brasilia and began to be edited by faculty members of the University of Brasilia. From that point onward, RBPI definitively took on the characteristics of an academic journal. It published seminal articles that offered nuanced analyses of Brazil’s integration into the globalized world, thereby contributing to a deeper understanding of the implications for Brazilian foreign policy.

The journal also gained prominence for its comprehensive works on various facets of economic globalization, issues concerning regional integration — particularly Mercosur — and detailed analyses of foreign policy strategies implemented by successive governments. Noteworthy from both empirical and conceptual standpoints were the articles on the Foreign Policy of the Fernando Henrique Cardoso administration, the breadth of Latin American thought on international relations, and the features of political and economic multilateralism.

The fourth period of the Journal, spanning from 2002 to the present, marks a significant phase in the journal’s history, characterized by consolidation, diversification, and international recognition. This period is marked by the deliberate adoption of an internationalization policy, coinciding with the exponential growth of the Brazilian community in the field of international relations. During this time, there was a proliferation of undergraduate programs, but most notably, a significant increase in the number of graduate studies programs in the area.

In terms of educational infrastructure, the Brazilian community of international relations has seen remarkable growth between 2002 and 2023. The number of undergraduate programs has evolved from around two dozen, primarily offered by private educational institutions, to over a hundred today, including programs at state and federal public institutions. Similarly, Graduate Programs in political science and international relations have grown from fewer than half a dozen in 2002 to 41 in 2023, of which 14 are specifically focused on International Relations (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior 2022). This indicates that the community has not only grown in size, but also become more complex and diversified.

During this period, RBPI has evolved into a comprehensive platform for contemporary debates in International Relations (IR), publishing scientific articles on a wide array of topics, such as international security, global politics, international economics, environmental issues, economic issues, human rights, and sustainable development. This thematic expansion has enriched the journal’s content, making it a go-to source for scholars interested in diverse aspects of IR.

The period has also seen more intense debate on Brazilian foreign policy. RBPI has been a critical platform for scrutinizing the foreign policy approaches of successive Brazilian governments, including that of Presidents Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1994-2002), Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (2003-2010) and Dilma Roussef (2011-2016). RBPI has also published articles that critically analyzed the international strategies designed and implemented by Cardoso (1994-2002) and Roussef (2011-2016).

The journal has remained open to scientifically referenced criticisms of the foreign policy strategies that are still being articulated about the most recent Brazilian governments. For example, some articles critically examined aspects of Lula’s foreign policy, while others have identified a more independent and autonomous foreign policy. These examples illustrate that RBPI serves as a continual platform for echoing diverse academic debates on various topics, irrespective of the prevailing political circumstances. This enduring openness has established RBPI as an essential forum for constructive criticism and a multiplicity of perspectives, thereby influencing Brazilian foreign policy.

One of the most noteworthy achievements of RBPI during this period has been international recognition. In terms of visibility, RBPI has made significant strides. It has been indexed by major international indexing services and was included in the SciELO Brazil collection. Furthermore, the journal has been indexed in the Web of Science and has achieved an impact factor in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR), and it has also been indexed in Scopus – SJR, further enhancing its international visibility and academic credibility.

The journal’s high impact factor and its top-tier classification in academic quality scales like the Qualis Periódicos of CAPES affirm its standing in the Brazilian academic community¹. The journal also highly performs in the scientific production evaluation systems of several other countries, making it a valuable resource for publishing scientific outcomes produced by international researchers.

A comparative analysis with other journals in the field reveals that RBPI is one of the few social science journals from Latin America to achieve such high levels of international recognition, making it a benchmark for academic excellence in the region.

In summary, has RBPI currently been marked by a series of significant advancements that have solidified its role as a leading journal in the field of International Relations. Through its thematic diversification, critical debates on Brazilian foreign policy, and international recognition and visibility, RBPI has established itself as a journal of high academic quality and international standard. It continues to play a crucial role in shaping debates on international relations, not just in Brazil but around the world. At the same time, reflecting the connection with the social reality and compromise of the community, RBPI continues to play a fundamental role in enhancing research agendas and proposing paths forward for key themes and questions for Brazil, Latin America and the Global South.

Changing the standards for publishing and communicating on International Relations in Brazil and Latin America

In his 2014 article “Global International Relations (IR) and Regional Worlds: A New Agenda for International Studies,” Amitav Acharya argues that the discipline of IR has been too focused on the Western experience and that it needs to become more inclusive and pluralistic in order to reflect the changing realities of the world. He proposes a new approach to IR that he calls “Global IR,” which would be based on the six following dimensions:

• Pluralistic universalism: Global IR would recognize the legitimacy of multiple perspectives and values, rather than assuming that Western values are universal.

• Grounding in world history: Global IR would take a longer view of history, rather than focusing on the post-World War II period. This would allow for a better understanding of the non-Western contributions to IR and the diversity of historical experiences.

• Rethinking IR theories and methods: Global IR would challenge the dominance of Western-centric theories and methods in IR. It would also encourage the development of new theories and methods that are more inclusive and relevant to the experiences of non-Western societies.

• Integrating regions and regionalisms into IR: Global IR would recognize the importance of regions and regionalisms in world politics. It would also integrate the study of regions and regionalisms into the core concerns of IR.

• Avoiding ethnocentrism and exceptionalism: Global IR would avoid the assumption that Western values and institutions are superior to those of other cultures. It would also avoid the tendency to view the non-Western world as exceptional or problematic.

• Recognizing a broader conception of agency: Global IR would recognize that agency is not just about states and individuals, but also about social movements, non-state actors, and transnational networks ( Acharya 2014 ).

Acharya argues that Global IR is necessary to understand the complex and changing world in which we live. He also argues that Global IR would be more beneficial to all countries, including the West. Overall, his work and several others that followed this pathway stress the importance of thinking, researching, writing, and publishing IR from different perspectives, including the Global South’s, for a more accurate and nuanced understanding of world politics, and this is essential for a number of reasons. First, it helps to ensure that the discipline of IR is more inclusive and representative of the diversity of worldviews and experiences. Second, it helps to challenge the dominance of Western-centric theories and methods in IR, which can lead to a more nuanced and accurate understanding of world politics. Third, it helps to give voice to scholars and practitioners from the Global South, whose perspectives are often underrepresented in mainstream IR discourse.

Journals from the Global South play an important role in promoting and disseminating IR research from different perspectives. They provide a platform for scholars from the Global South to publish their work and to engage in dialogue with their peers around the world. They also help to raise the profile of IR research from the Global South and to challenge the dominance of Western-centric journals in the discipline. As pointed out by Barma and Goldgeier (2022) this is particularly important for the IR discipline, since the failure to consider and include Global South perspectives in a systematic way impoverishes our collective ability to understand global affairs.

RBPI’s commitment to bridging the academic divide between the Global North and the Global South is evident in its work. The journal has been a platform for alternative perspectives, often marginalized in mainstream IR discourse, thereby enriching the field with nuanced understandings emanating from diverse socio-political and economic contexts ( Acharya 2014 ; Deciancio 2016 ). This has not only diversified the global IR scholarly debate, but also contributed to elevating the standards of scholarship emanating from Brazil and Latin America.

The journal’s devotion to academic rigor has had a cascading effect on the quality of IR research in the region. By adhering to stringent peer-review processes and high editorial standards, RBPI has set a benchmark for academic excellence, encouraging scholars to produce research that is globally competitive. This has been instrumental in raising the academic stature of IR scholarship in Latin America, making it more competitive on the international stage.

RBPI’s role in connecting scholars and practitioners from different parts of the world is invaluable. The journal’s global reach has helped intellectual exchanges that are mutually beneficial. Scholars from the Global South have gained invaluable visibility and recognition, while their counterparts from the Global North have been exposed to underrepresented issues and perspectives ( Tickner 2003 ; Deciancio 2016 ). This symbiotic relationship has enriched the global academic community, making RBPI a hub for international academic collaboration.

The journal’s influence is not confined to the academic realm; it extends to the corridors of power. Articles published in RBPI often serve as critical reference points for policy analysts and decision-makers. RBPI’s circulation is notable in diplomatic, military, and intelligence circles, as well as among senior officials in various sectors related to the formulation and implementation of policies with international repercussions. This ensures that academic insights are not just theoretical exercises but contribute to shaping real-world policies, particularly in Brazil.

RBPI has been instrumental in internationalizing scientific outcomes in the field of International Relations. Its role is multifaceted, influencing not just academic scholarship, but also policy decisions. Through its commitment to academic rigor, its facilitation of international collaborations, and its significant impact and recognition evidenced, among others, by its international indexing and a growing impact factor, RBPI has indelibly contributed to shape the global discourse on IR. It serves as a reference for how academic journals can contribute to a more inclusive and comprehensive understanding of international relations.

Unique perspectives of the discipline: publishing special issues

RBPI has long served as a cornerstone for academic communication in the field of International Relations (IR) in Brazil, Latin America, and the Global South. One of the journal’s most impactful contributions to the field has been its special issues, which delve into timely and critical topics.

The annual publication of these special issues serves as more than just a scholarly contribution to the field of International Relations. It acts as a dynamic platform for establishing substantive dialogues across diverse academic communities and fostering collaborative synergies among research groups. In doing so, these special issues not only enrich the intellectual landscape, but also function as a critical bridge that unites varying traditions, methodologies, and perspectives within the discipline.

In 1998, the first special edition of the journal was organized, setting a precedent for future thematic issues. The special issue commemorating the 40th anniversary aimed to offer a comprehensive, critical examination of Brazil’s foreign policy and international relations over a span of four decades. It was uniquely structured, featuring authors who contributed articles on pressing topics in the history of Brazil’s foreign policy, as well as on the contemporary agenda of the time. This issue presented a historical perspective on the journal’s role in shaping intellectual discourse on Brazil’s global engagement. It underscored the journal’s resilience and relevance in an academic landscape that had few specialized journals in international relations, while also setting the stage for its future contributions to the field ( Almeida, 1998 ).

The special issue titled “An Assessment of the Lula Era” (2010) provided an in-depth evaluation of the presidency of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who served from 2003 to 2010. This edition not only scrutinized Lula’s foreign policy initiatives, but also delved into the broader socio-political and economic contexts in which these policies were formulated and executed. It examined the successes and failures of Lula’s administration in areas such as regional integration, relations with major powers, and participation in international organizations. The issue further explored the implications of these policy choices for Brazil’s evolving role in global politics, its diplomatic strategies, and its aspirations for leadership in the Global South. By offering a multifaceted analysis, the issue contributed to a nuanced understanding of the complexities and outcomes of Lula’s foreign policy, thereby enriching the discourse on Brazil’s position in the international arena ( Cervo and Lessa 2010 ).

The special edition on “Global climate governance and transition to a low-carbon economy” (Vol. 55, 2012) delves into the intricate dynamics of the international political economy as it pertains to climate change. This issue stands as a seminal contribution to the academic discourse, particularly at a time when the global community is grappling with the exigencies of climate change. It offers a multi-dimensional analysis that goes beyond mere policy prescriptions, examining the structural and systemic factors that both facilitate and hinder the transition to a low-carbon economy ( Viola and Lessa, 2012 ).

The special edition on “China rising – strategies and tactics of China’s growing presence in the world” (Vol. 57, 2014) offers an incisive examination of the multifaceted dimensions of China’s ascendancy on the global stage. This issue gains significance when viewed through the lens of China’s burgeoning influence in various spheres, including global politics, economics, and security. Notably, the issue was strategically designed and published in anticipation of China’s trajectory toward achieving superpower status, a development that has profound implications for the international order ( Oliveira and Lessa 2014 ).

The special issue titled “Many worlds, many theories?” (Vol. 59, No. 2, 2016) challenges the prevailing notion that the discipline is dominated by a limited set of theories primarily emanating from the United States or the broader ‘Western world.’ This issue aligns closely with Amitav Acharya’s (2014) groundbreaking argument for a ‘Global IR,’ which calls for the incorporation of diverse perspectives, particularly from the Global South, into the mainstream academic discourse on international relations ( Inoue and Tickner 2016 ).

The overarching goal of the special issue “International Security and Defense - Taking stock of Brazil’s changes” (Vol. 60, No. 2, 2017) was to provide a comprehensive examination of Brazil’s evolving role in defense and traditional security matters since its transition to democracy. This issue aimed to contribute to a nuanced understanding of Brazil’s domestic and international security landscape, addressing a range of topics from nuclear non-proliferation and peacekeeping operations to intelligence reform and legislative oversight. It sought to foster a rigorous, objective debate on these complex issues, filling a critical gap in the existing literature ( Costa and Lessa 2017 ).

The 2018 special edition on “Rethinking Power in Global and Transnational History” (Vol. 61, No. 2, 2018) offers a critical examination of power dynamics in the context of international relations. This issue not only enriches broader academic debates, but also challenges traditional Eurocentric views. By incorporating diverse scholarly perspectives, it aims to foster interdisciplinary dialogue and provide a more nuanced understanding of how power is exercised and negotiated across different geopolitical contexts. Overall, the edition serves as a platform for reevaluating prevailing theories and introducing innovative approaches to the study of power ( Moreli 2018 )

The 2019 special issue titled “Brazil ups and downs in global environmental governance, 2008-2018” offered an in-depth exploration of Brazil’s evolving role in the realm of global environmental governance over a span of ten years. This issue served as a critical platform for dissecting Brazil’s environmental policies, strategies, and initiatives, examining their broader implications for international environmental governance frameworks. It delved into the complexities of Brazil’s engagement with multilateral environmental agreements, its influence in international forums, and its bilateral and regional partnerships. The issue also scrutinized the country’s domestic environmental challenges and how they intersected with its international commitments ( Viola and Gonçalves 2019 ).

The 2020 special issue on “International Development Cooperation and Multipolarity” (Vol. 63, No. 2) examined the challenges of development cooperation in a multipolar world. It focused on the roles of emerging powers like Brazil, India, and China in reshaping international development landscapes. The issue explored South-South Cooperation, new financing mechanisms, and ethical considerations, offering a nuanced perspective on the changing dynamics of global development cooperation ( Esteves and Zoccal 2020 ).

The 2021 issue titled “Crisis and Changes in International Governance in the Dawn of the 21st Century” (Vol. 64, No. 3) delved into the transformative shifts in international governance triggered by a series of crises in the early 21st century. This issue gained particular relevance by addressing a multitude of crises that have rattled the international system, ranging from financial collapses and economic downturns to escalating geopolitical tensions and conflicts. It provided a comprehensive analysis, incorporating perspectives on institutional adaptations, policy responses, and the evolving roles of state and non-state actors in navigating these turbulent times (Villa and Ramanzini Junior 2021).

The 2022 issue titled “Beyond COVID-19: Global Health in the Spotlight” (Vol. 65, No. 1) stands as a pivotal contribution to the field, examining global health challenges through the lens of the COVID-19 pandemic. Not only has this issue been instrumental in shaping and refining the discourse surrounding global health governance, but it has also served as an invaluable platform for scholars and experts to discuss and analyze the far-reaching implications of the pandemic on international relations, public policy, and healthcare systems. The issue goes beyond merely chronicling the immediate impacts, offering critical insights into long-term strategies, ethical considerations, and the evolving role of international organizations in health crises.

The special issue on “Regionalism and the Sustainable Development Goals” (Vol. 66, No. 2, 2023) is a case in point. This issue focuses on the role of regionalism in achieving sustainable development goals, offering a nuanced understanding of how regional frameworks can facilitate or hinder sustainable development. It contributes to the ongoing debates on regionalism and sustainable development, particularly in the context of the Global South.

Over the past two decades, the special issues released by RBPI have significantly influenced the academic landscape in the field of International Relations in Brazil and in Latin America. They have provided a platform for the socialization of scientific-academic knowledge on the discipline, not just in Brazil and Latin America, but also in the Global South. Moreover, they have offered a publication space for authors from the North, further solidifying RBPI’s reputation as one of the most consolidated journals in Latin America and in the Global South for the study of International Relations.

Conclusion

Scientific journals serve as indispensable pillars for the advancement of academic inquiry and the dissemination of knowledge. In the context of Brazil, Latin America, and the Global South, the sustenance and flourishing of robust scientific journals are of paramount importance. These platforms not only amplify the scholarly contributions from these regions but also navigate the complexities of gaining representation in premier journals of the Global North.

Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional (RBPI) stands as a testament to the pivotal role scientific journals can play in shaping academic disciplines. Established in 1958, RBPI has been an influential conduit for scholarly dialogue in the field of international relations in Brazil and in Latin America. It has been the publishing venue for eminent scholars and has significantly influenced analysis and practices of Brazilian foreign policy.

This editorial is collaboratively penned by three editors of RBPI, each representing a different generation involved in the journal’s 65-year history. The celebration of this milestone is not merely symbolic, but a significant achievement, especially considering the current landscape of dwindling scientific funding in Brazil. The journal’s longevity and continued relevance are a testament to its resilience and its invaluable service to the academic community.

The Center for Global Studies of the University of Brasília (CEG-UnB), inheriting the rich legacy of RBPI, is also committed to serving as a nexus for diverse perspectives within the discipline on a global scale. The Center is steadfastly committed to nurturing scientific journals in Brazil, Latin America, and the Global South. It provides indispensable resources and support for the publication of high-quality research and acts as a catalyst for scholarly collaborations across different regions.

Inheriting the mantle from the now-extinct Instituto Brasileiro de Relações Internacionais (IBRI) — a pioneering institution established in 1954 in Rio de Janeiro for the study and promotion of international relations thought in Brazil — the CEG-UnB bears the responsibility of upholding and invigorating the esteemed tradition and vitality of RBPI. The center aims to extend the journal’s legacy, ensuring its continued relevance and impact in the academic community and policy communities.

The enduring vitality of scientific journals like RBPI holds transformative potential for the future of academic research in underrepresented regions. As knowledge platforms, these journals amplify the voices of scholars from these regions, ensuring their contributions reverberate throughout the global academic landscape. In doing so, they not only enrich the collective corpus of knowledge, but also chart a promising trajectory for the continued role to be played by RBPI in the years to come.

References

• Acharya, A. “Global International Relations (IR) and regional worlds: a new agenda for international studies.” International Studies Quarterly 58, no. 4 (2014): 647-659. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/ISQU.12171
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/ISQU.12171
• Acharya, A., M. Deciancio, and D. Tussie. Latin America in global international relations . London: Routledge, 2021. doi: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003028956
  » https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003028956
• Almeida, P. R. “Nota liminar do organizador Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional: a continuidade de um empreendimento exemplar.” Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional 41, no. spe (1998), 5–7. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-73291998000300001
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-73291998000300001
• Barma, N. H., and J. Goldgeier. “How not to bridge the gap in international relations.” International Affairs 98, no. 5 (2022), 1763-1781. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiac102
  » https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiac102
• Casarões, G. “The evolution of foreign policy studies.” In Routledge handbook of brazilian politics , edited by G. Casarões, 406-429. London: Routledge, 2018. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315543871-24
  » https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315543871-24
• Cervo, A. L., and A. C. Lessa. “An assessment of the Lula era.” Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional 53, no. spe (2010), 5–6. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-73292010000300001
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-73292010000300001
• Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior – Capes. Evaluation report of the area of political science and international relations concerning the performance of its graduate programs for the period 2017 to 2020. Brasília, 2013. https://www.gov.br/capes/pt-br/acesso-a-informacao/acoes-e-programas/avaliacao/sobre-a-avaliacao/areas-avaliacao/sobre-as-areas-de-avaliacao/colegio-de-humanidades/ciencias-humanas/ciencia-politica-e-relacoes-Internacionais
  » https://www.gov.br/capes/pt-br/acesso-a-informacao/acoes-e-programas/avaliacao/sobre-a-avaliacao/areas-avaliacao/sobre-as-areas-de-avaliacao/colegio-de-humanidades/ciencias-humanas/ciencia-politica-e-relacoes-Internacionais
• Costa, E. P. L. D., and A. C. Lessa. “International security and defense: taking stock of Brazil’s changes: a special issue of RBPI.” Revista Brasileira De Política Internacional 60, no. 2 (2017): e001. https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329201700201
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329201700201
• Deciancio, M. “International relations from the south: a regional research agenda for global IR.” International Studies Review 18, no. 1 (2016): 106–119. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viv020
  » https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viv020
• Esteves, P., and G. Zoccal. “International development cooperation and multipolarity: scrambling north and south?” Revista Brasileira De Política Internacional 63, no. 2 (2020): 1-10. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329202000213
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329202000213
• Farrell, H., and A. L. Newman. “Weaponized interdependence: how global economic networks shape state coercion.” International Security 44, no. 1 (2019): 42-79. doi: https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00351
  » https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00351
• Inoue, C., and A. B. Tickner. “Many worlds, many theories?” Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional 59, no. 2 (2016): 1-4. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329201600201
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329201600201
• Lessa, A. C. “Helio Jaguaribe: the generation of national developmentalism.” In Brazilian diplomatic thought: policymakers and agents of foreign policy (1750-1964), edited by J. V. S. Pimentel, 891–913. Brasília: Fundação Alexandre de Gusmão, 2017.
• Moreli, A. “Thinking about complexity: the displacement of power along time and through space.” Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional 61, no. 2 (2018): 1-9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329201800209
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329201800209
• Oliveira, H. A., and A. C. Lessa. “China rising strategies and tactics of China’s growing presence in the world: a special issue of RBPI.” Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional 57, no. spe (2014): 5-8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329201400201
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329201400201
• Tickner, A. B. “Hearing Latin American voices in international relations studies.” International Studies Perspectives 4, no. 4 (2003): 325-350. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1528-3577.404001
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/1528-3577.404001
• Villa, R. D., and H. Ramanzini Junior. “Crisis and changes in international governance in the dawn of the 21st century: rethinking the spheres of international politics.” Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional 64, no. 2 (2021): 1-13. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329202100213
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329202100213
• Viola, E., and A. C. Lessa. “Global climate governance and transition to a low-carbon economy: a special issue of RBPI.” Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional 55, no. spe (2012): 5-8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-73292012000300001
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-73292012000300001
• Viola, E., and V. K. Gonçalves. “Brazil ups and downs in global environmental governance in the 21 st century.” Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional 62, no. 2 (2019): 1-10. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329201900210
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329201900210

• 1
  Managed by the Brazilian Federal Agency for Support and Evaluation of Graduate Education (CAPES), Qualis Periódicos serves as a classification system to evaluate the quality of scientific journals in Brazil, subsequently influencing the assessment of Graduate Studies Programs (Master and Doctorate Courses) and the allocation of federal research funds. The system employs a seven-tier classification ranging from A1, denoting international journals with high impact factors and exceptional editorial boards, to E, indicating the lowest quality. Categories A2 through C represent varying degrees of quality, both in national and international contexts. Classification criteria incorporate multiple factors, such as the journal’s impact factor, the h-index of its editorial board, and the overall quality of its published articles. Updated quadrennially, with the last update occurring in 2022, Qualis Periódicos aids Brazilian researchers in selecting appropriate publication outlets and evaluating journal quality.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  20 Nov 2023
• Date of issue
  2023

History

• Received
  24 Oct 2023
• Accepted
  06 Nov 2023