Constructivism and foreign policy
January 16, 2014
Overview
 Rational vs Reflective theories
 Why ‘Constructivism’?
 Applied constructivism
 The key aspects of constructivism
 Constructivism meets foreign policy
Rational theories
Liberalism and realism
The two dominate theories
Much of the debate in traditional international
politics has been between these two groups
Both sides make much of the differences
between the two
Critical scholars argue that actually there isn’t
much differences between them - really a very
narrow debate
The “neo-neo” debate
Neorealism
Neoliberalism
Primary
actor
State
State (NGOs,
MNCs)
Global
system
Role of
institutions
anarchy
anarchy
Skeptical - can’t
mitigate anarchy
Can help foster
cooperation
Cooperation Skeptical - relative Possible gains
absolute gains
Key focus
Security
Economy
Rational theories
These theories all share some key points:
Problem-solving - take the world as it is
and try to explain it and make run as best
as possible
 Positivist - use “scientific” approach, to
discover the “truth”, make strong
distinction between facts and values
Reflective theories
Diverse collection of theoretical
approaches, which include:
Normative theory
Critical theory
Post-modernism
Feminist theory
United more by what they reject of rational
approaches than what they have in
common
Reflective theories
Constitutive - the way we think about and
approach the world helps create the world,
so can’t just observe the world in a neutral
way
E.g. the belief that states are naturally
aggressive helps create that reality - become
self-confirming (constitutive)
Reflective theories
Challenge distinction rational approaches
make between facts and values
Limits the study of politics - only how things
work, but not asking why they are that way
Naturalizes the current system - no alternative
All theories reflect certain values, none are
value neutral, by trying to make a distinction
between facts and values, rational theories are
putting the values embedded in them beyond
discussion - hidden
Constructivism
Constructivism as an attempt to bridge the
two camps
Attempt to take some of ideas of reflective
approaches and apply them to more
rational theories
So get Wendt making the argument that
anarchy is what states make of it
Why constructivism?
 Failure of mainstream theories to predict end
of Cold War and changing nature of global
system creates space for new approaches to
become more mainstream
 Constructivism appealing because not that far
from mainstream approaches
 Constructivism does not directly challenge
either realism or liberalism,
 Instead offer alternative understanding to
some of the most central themes in
international relations.
 Can see the idea of trying to bridge between
rational and reflective
Three cultures of anarchy
Wendt - not just one way of looking at
anarchy
Conflictual - based on self-help of realists
Competitive - based on rivalry of some
liberal perspectives
Friendly - based on cooperation
See Box 4.1 p.82, Ego & Alter on a desert
island, as illustration
Key point - both anarchy and culture can
change
Changing culture isn’t easy because the
system is self-reinforcing
E.g. if many see anarchy as a conflictual they
will act in a way that makes it hard to see
alternatives
Using constructivism
Can help shed light on how old
practices of rivalry and war-making may
be changed through the
institutionalization, of new identities,
interests and practices, e.g. (European
security).
 According to constructivists, the only reason
why we might be in a self-help system is
because practice made it that way.
 So this means that practice could also ‘unmake’ a ‘conflictual’ culture.
 NATO and the EU could play important roles
in these ‘un-makings’.
 Need to understand how agents’ shared
knowledge, identities and interests are interlinked and may contribute to changing deeply
embedded practices and structural
conditions.
 But, to do this we need a fundamental break
with some of the realist and liberal
assumptions about how the world works.
The essence of constructivism
 The four key constructivist propositions :
 a belief in the social construction of reality
and the importance of social facts
 a focus on ideational as well as material
structures and the importance of norms and
rules
The essence of constructivism
 a focus on the role of identity in shaping
political action and the importance of ‘logics
of action’
 a belief in the mutual ‘constitutiveness’ of
agents and structure, and a focus on practice
and action
Social construction of reality
Facts can have different shared meanings
E.g. French nuclear warhead vs North Korean
nuclear warhead
Some facts aren’t really facts at all,
instead are social facts - only appear as
facts through common agreement,
reinforced through social practice
E.g. money
Social construction of reality
Argue that many of the most important
concepts and understandings of
international relations are social facts
Over time social facts become reified
through practice and routine, so appear
objective and independent from those that
constructed them.
Thus, change is difficult
Ideational and material structures
Ideas matter
Ideas language, rules, symbols etc all
shape how we interpret the material world
and the actions of others
Structures are codified in rules and norms
Structural change is possible by changing
norms
Identity, interests and ‘logics of
action’
Identity is important because it is tied to
particular interests and preferences.
This means the social, cultural, historical and
political contexts in which agents operate
becomes important
Logics of action
Logic of consequence and logic of
appropriateness
Agents, structure and practice
Agents and structures are mutually
constituted
Agents are influenced by structures (e.g. states
influenced by anarchy)
But agents also influence the structure through
their practices
So…
Change is possible but difficult
Constructivism meets foreign policy
 NATO’s post-Cold War roles could be defined
as:
 still keeping member states safe from threats
Shift from protecting territory to security
 still maintaining a common identity, shared
knowledge and shared understandings
among all NATO’s members
Socialization of new members
 still engaging in transforming relationships
and practices between NATO members and
former adversaries
Conclusion
Constructivism can be seen as an attempt
bridge between rational and reflective
theories
Looks at the role of things like identity,
interests, norms and how they shape
actions and understanding of the world
Provide important alternative perspectives
for analyzing foreign policy