Chilling and warming effects on the production of international law scholarship

Abstract

How do international law scholars decide what to write about? I hope that most of us try to write about what interests us or, for the more idealistic, what best serves humanity. In this article though, I suggest that more insidious influences swirl around us, chilling and warming our interest in research topics. We may not even be aware of these subtle threats, pressures and incentives, and even when we are, we may underestimate their impact. I reflect on how two aspects of my own research environment – the implicit intimidation of (usually political and institutional) power and the pressure to publish – quietly seep into my epistemological decisions. I never imagined that I could simultaneously be such a coward and opportunist. The piece also draws on insights from psychology, sociology and other academic literature to better understand how we respond to and can manage these influences. In the end though, I suggest that we not be too hard on ourselves. Rather than feeling bad or good about our decisions, our aim should be to decide whether our choices about what research to pursue are at their foundation compatible with our personal values and those of the greater scholarly enterprise.