Knowing Afghanistan: interveners’ knowledge production in the in-between

Amelie Harbisch

Journal of International Relations and Development2025https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-025-00359-4article
ABDC C
Weight
0.37

What the paper says

Abstract This article advances a sociological analysis of the knowledge production about peacebuilding in an intervening country. Departing from Bourdieusian field theory, I analyse the production of knowledge about Afghanistan in German think tanks and academia, combining biographical data of Afghanistan experts, in-depth interviews with 18 such experts, and a bibliographic review. The analysis reveals that this knowledge production on Afghanistan in Germany occurs in an interstitial field, a space located between and dependent on multiple fields. I investigate the effects of this structuration of knowledge production on its outcome. First, topical (security) knowledge is more likely to be rewarded rather than deep country-specific knowledge. Second, the logics of policy orientation reward (critical) knowledge that enables the implementation of existing policies rather than questioning the political project of the intervention overall. The article highlights the need to dissect the social conditions of knowledge production about peacebuilding in the metropole, rather than focusing exclusively on the site of intervention, to apprehend and transform practices of peacebuilding.

1 citation

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-025-00359-4

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{amelie2025,
  title        = {{Knowing Afghanistan: interveners’ knowledge production in the in-between}},
  author       = {Amelie Harbisch},
  journal      = {Journal of International Relations and Development},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-025-00359-4},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Knowing Afghanistan: interveners’ knowledge production in the in-between

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.37

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.16 × 0.4 = 0.06
M · momentum0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.