International Organization and the Study of World Politics

advertisement
International Organization and the Study of World Politics
Author(s): Peter J. Katzenstein, Robert O. Keohane, Stephen D. Krasner
Reviewed work(s):
Source: International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 4, International Organization at Fifty:
Exploration and Contestation in the Study of World Politics (Autumn, 1998), pp. 645-685
Published by: The MIT Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2601354 .
Accessed: 03/01/2012 11:34
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
The MIT Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to International
Organization.
http://www.jstor.org
International
Organization
and theStudyofWorldPolitics
PeterJ.Katzenstein,
Robert0. Keohane,
andStephenD. Krasner
In thisarticlewe tellthestoryofthecreationandevolutionof a subfield,
popularly
knownas "IPE," thathas beencloselyassociatedwithInternational
Organization
IPE was definedby thetopicsthatit investi(IO) foralmostthirty
years.Initially,
gated,suchas trade,finance,
rawmaterials
politics,andmultinational
corporations.
Scholarsassociatedwiththefielddrewon economicsand on a varietyof existing
and Marxismat the systemic
theoretical
orientations,
notablyrealism,liberalism,
level,andMarxism,statism,
andpluralism
atthedomesticlevel.
Overtimetheboundariesof thissubfield,
as we defineit,have been setless by
subjectmatterthanby theoretical
perspectives.
Whereassome researchprograms
havereliedheavilyon economics,othershave distancedthemselves
bothfromthe
substantive
concerns
ofthatdisciplineandtherationalism
itrepresents.
Sincewe are
seekingin thisarticletodescribehowtheorizing
aboutworldpoliticsas represented
inIO evolved,we focuson IPE, rather
thanon thesubstantive
issuesofinternational
politicaleconomywithwhichit began.We use the terminternational
political
whenwe referto real-world
connections
economy
betweenpoliticsandeconomics;
we usethetermIPE whenwe refer
tothesubfield
ofwork,centered
inIO since1971,
thatevolvedfromthestudyofinternational
of
politicaleconomytoanalyzea variety
aspectsofworldpolitics.
Like anynarrative,
ourstoryreflects
theviewpoints
of itsauthors;and sincewe
a
in
it
reflects
ourownexperiences
andbiases.As
played role theseevents, inevitably
notedinthepreface,
as a perspective,
notas a canonical
we putouraccountforward
of whatis mostimportant.
we makeno claimthatthe
representation
Furthermore,
of thisarticlewe receivedlong,thoughtful,
and detailedcommentson previous
Duringthewriting
drafts.
and equilibrating
thehistorical
narrative
thatwe are
Theywereenormously
helpfulin clarifying
here.Severalcolleaguesoffered
valuableoralcomments
as well.WewouldliketothankEmanuel
offering
PeterGoureAdler,David Baldwin,MarcL. Busch,BenjaminJ.Cohen,David Dessler,Judith
Goldstein,
Miles Kahler,CharlesKupchan,David
vitch,StephanHaggard,ErnstB. Haas, PeterHall,RobertJervis,
SimonReich,ThomasRisse,JohnGerard
Lake,RobertLieber,HenryNau,JosephNye,M. J.Peterson,
ArthurStein,JaniceStein,AlexanderE. Wendt,and Oran R.
Ruggie,Bruce Russett,KironSkinner,
Young.
International
Organization
52, 4, Autumn1998,pp. 645-685
? 1998byThe 10 Foundation
andtheMassachusetts
ofTechnology
Institute
646 Intemational
Organization
evolvingsubfield
ofIPE encompassesthemostimportant
workthathasbeendonein
international
politicsoverthelastthirty
years.Majorresearch
hasbeencarriedouton
subjectssuch as war initiation,
the "democraticpeace," and alliancepolitics,to
mentiononlya few.Some theoretical
orientations
thathavebeenhighlysalientfor
thestudyof security,
especiallyorganization
theory
andcognitive
psychology,
have
been muchless consequential
forIPE. Studiesgenerated
by large-Nstatistical
researchprograms
suchas theCorrelates
ofWarprojecthavenotbeenprominent
inthe
pages of IO. Since thisarticlewas written
foran anniversary
issue of IO, it seems
appropriate
to groundit in themajorlinesof workforwhichthejournalbecame
known.
ofina variety
ofways.In thisarticlewe focus
Theoryinourfieldhasbeenthought
on twoof its meanings:generaltheoretical
orientations
and specificresearchprograms.General theoreticalorientationsprovideheuristics-they
suggestrelevant
variablesandcausalpatterns
fordevelopingspecificresearch
thatprovideguidelines
programs.
Politicalscienceis an eclecticdisciplinethatfindsmanyofitsmostfiuitfulideas elsewhere,
andmanyofthegeneraltheoretical
thathavebeen
orientations
relevantforIPE wereborrowedfromotherdisciplines,especiallyeconomicsand
sociology.
Rationalist
theories
derivedfromeconomics,
forinstance,
offer
thefollowifyouhavea puzzle,formulate
itas a problemforrationalactorswith
ingheuristic:
unproblematically
specified
interests,
competing
ina situation
characterized
byscarce
resources.Constructivist
in contrast,
lookto thehumanities
theories,
and sociology
forinsightsintohow "reality,"includingtheinterests
thatpartiallyconstitute
the
ofactors,is sociallyconstructed.
We argueinthefourth
identity
sectionofthearticle
thatrationalism
bothliberalarguments
(encompassing
groundedin economicsthat
emphasizevoluntary
agreement
andrealistarguments
thatfocuson powerandcoernow providethemajorpointsof contestation
cion) and constructivism
forinternationalrelations
scholarship.
variablesto a set of outcomes,or
Specific researchprograms linkexplanatory
variables.Whatare theeffectsof variousdistributions
of power,or of
dependent
on thepropensity
of statesto fightwars?Underwhatconditionsdo
democracy,
international
institutions
Whatinstitutional
features
actuallypromotecooperation?
of state-society
in theeffectiveness
of foreign
ecorelationships
explainvariations
nomicpolicy?Whensuchtheories
aretestedwithevidence,answersareproposedanswersthatarevirtually
becauseofthedifficulties
oftheory
alwayscontested
speciandcontrolled
statistical
fication,
testing,
analysisthatbedevilthenonexperimental
sciencesin general,andfieldssuchas oursinparticular.
General theoreticalorientations-such as realism,Marxism,liberalism,
statism,
historical
rational
choice
and
construcpluralism,
institutionalism,
institutionalism,
inthestudyofintemational
IPE
tivism-havebeenparticularly
relations.
prominent
is no exception.
Suchgenericapproachesdo notdisappeareasily.Theyprovidesugbutareconsisgestionsaboutrelevantvariablesandtheirpossibleinterrelationships
tentwithmanyspecificresearch
tasksandclusters
oftestablehypotheses.
Werefer
to
as specificresearchprograms,without
thesesetsoftasksandhypotheses
necessarily
The StudyofWorldPolitics 647
acceptingImreLakatos'sphilosophy
ofscienceas applicableto ourfield.,The connectionbetweengenericorientations
andresearch
programs
meansthattheintellecof genericorientations
tualstanding
is affected,
thoughnotentirely
determined,
by
withevidence,andalso dueto shifts
empiricalevidence.As a resultofconfrontation
in worldpoliticsitself,somehypotheses,
and theresearchprograms
in whichthey
wereembedded,have receivedmoresupportthanothers.Genericolientations
that
sheltered
productive
programs
benefited
at theexpenseof competitors;
thosethat
seemedtoilluminate
newdevelopments
intheworldalso gainedadherents.
Dissatisfactionwithexistingorientations
and researchprograms,
coupledwithchangesin
theworld,has createdopeningsforalternative
Thisevolutionary
conceptualizations.
andimperfect:
processis oftenindirect
thereareno "decisiveexperiments"
ininternationalrelations
a research
muchless a genericapproachthat
thatdiscredit
program
has spawnedresearchprograms.
Fromits inceptionIPE has evolvedtwo relatedthoughdistinctive
sitesforresearch:theinternational
betweendomesticpoliticsand
systemand theinteractions
international
politicaleconomy.
The first
sitefocusesattheleveloftheinternational
on theinternational
system.In the 1970s systemicscholarship
politicaleconomy
ofthedistribution
ofpoweramong
drewon realistarguments
abouttheimportance
in international
orientation
relations.
states,thentheprevailinggeneraltheoretical
ofliberalresearch
IPE scholarsalso developeda variety
thatwerereflected
programs
in discussionsof Europeanintegration,
thegrowingroleof multinational
corporaIn the 1980s thedifferences
tions,and increasesin intemational
interdependence.
betweenrealismand liberalismweresharpenedas neorealistsand neoliberalsdebatedtherelativemerits
oftheircontrasting
analytical
programs.
Ourstoryaboutthesystemic
variantofIPE goes as follows.In thelate 1960sand
international
relationsseizedan
mid-1970ssomeyoungpoliticalscientists
studying
openingcreatedbothby eventsin theworldand in thesocial sciences.Growing
levelsofinternational
interdependence
pointedtobya feweconomists
helpedin the
of transnational
relationstheory.
This analyticalapproachproconceptualization
thestudyof
videdan alternative
tothestate-centric,
realistapproachthendominating
It was thefirst
formulation
thatone
international
relations
moregenerally.
analytical
field.Transnationalism
was challenged
couldclearlyassociatewithIPE as a distinct
whichhad bothliberaland realistvariants.These
by hegemonicstability
theory,
werereformulated
as a resultoftheirinteraction
witheach
initialresearchprograms
otherand withsomevariantsof Marxism.Hegemonicstability
theoryencountered
was difficult
to
relations
bothlogicalandempiricalanomalies.Transnational
theory
In the1980sneoliberal
institutionalism
anda specificrealistformulaoperationalize.
tionknownas neorealism
becametheprincipal
interlocutors-institutionalists
emphatheimportance
sizedthepotential
forinterstate
whereasrealistsstressed
cooperation,
andratioof statepower.Sincethelate 1980sa newdebatebetweenconstructivism
has becomemoreprominent
as connalism(includingbothrealismandliberalism)
1. Lakatos1970.
648 International
Organization
tructivists
have builton epistemological
challengesrootedin sociologicalperspecsharednormsandvalues.
tivesemphasizing
The secondsiteforresearchhas beenthelinkagebetweendomesticpoliticsand
theinternational
politicaleconomy.Scholarsworkingon theseissuesinquiredinto
oftheforeign
thedeterminants
economicpoliciesof statesandcorporate
strategies,
whichtheyhaveinvestigated
withclose attention
to empiricaldetail.The questions
andautonomy
askedinthislineofresearch
focusedontherelativeinfluence
ofsocial
forcesandpoliticalinstitutions.
Researchwas in generalmoreempirically
oliented.
Metatheoretical
concernsloomedless largeforscholarsin thisarea thanforthose
leveltheories,
indomesticas wellas systemic
withsystemic
working
although
analyresearch
choice
sesgeneral
orientations-such
as pluralism,
statism,
Marxism,
rational
institutionalism,
and historicalinstitutionalism-informed
specificresearchprothefocuson state-society
relationsstarted
withconcreteanalygrams.Empirically,
ses oftheOECD countries
andLatinAmericanstates.It spreadfromtheretoencomtheanalysis
pass thepoliticaleconomyof statesin otherworldregions,specifically
of varietiesof state-leddevelopment
outof socialismin
in Asia and thetransition
eastemEuropeandthestatesoftheformer
SovietUnion.
Scholarsof comparative
wereat best
politicsinsistedthatsystemicarguments
in domesticstructures
incomplete;
variations
(definedin termsof socialstructure
as
nationaland corporate
well as groupand partyalignments)
wouldlead to different
responsesto the same externalpressuresand opportunities.
Some of theearliest
domesticpoliticsformulations
associatedwithIPE drewon pluralism,
thenthepreof approaches,
hisvailingapproachto U.S. politics.Overtime,a variety
including
toricalinstitutionalism
rationalchoiceinstitutionalism,
and,morerecently,
wereapnumber
ofpoliticaleconomiesworldwide.
pliedtoa growing
Therewas a close interaction
and international
relations
betweencomparative
theboundaliesbetweenthesetwo
scholars;indeed,some individualstranscended
fields.But dulingthe1970sand 1980sthedifference
betweentheinternational
and
domesticstrands
oftheIPE fieldremained
That
distinction
somesalient.
hasblulred
bothrealism
whatinthe1990sbecause,as we arguelater,rationalism
(incorporating
and liberalism)and constructivism
have establisheda new pointof contestation.
Someofthespecific
research
programs
generated
bygeneraltheoretical
orientations,
suchas rationalchoiceinstitutionalism,
aremorereadilyapplicableacrossdifferent
and domesticorientalevelsof analysisthanwas thecase formostof thesystemic
in earlierperiods.
thatwereprominent
tions,suchas realismandpluralism,
The difference
betweeninternational
and domesticperspectives
does notovershadow,however,a commonresearchpracticethathas markedempiricalworkin
ofIPE. Scholarshavespecified
research
bothofthemainbranches
ina way
problems
thatwas empirically
and politicallysignificant.
tractable,
intellectually
interesting,
whichoutvariablesin causal mechanismsthrough
They embeddedexplanatory
comesseemedtotakeplace.Theyconducted
research
thatsoughttocontrol
forsome
otherexplanatory
factors.
Andtheysoughttodetermine
whether
theselectedexplanaeffecton specifiedoutcomes.Fruitful
research
toryvariableexerteda discernible
combineddeductiveandinductive
Butinthe
workindifferent
programs
proportions.
The StudyofWorldPolitics 649
finalanalysis,anyproductive
researchprogram
had to suggestwaysin whichvariablesorconceptscouldbe operationalized;
anditspropositions
hadtobe,at leastin
principle,
empirically
falsifiable.
Generalorientations
andtheirassociatedspecificresearchprograms
typically
enterintocomplexmutualinterrogations
withtheirpreviouslyestablishedcounterparts.As a resultof suchdialogues,orientations
arereconfigured
ormerged;orthey
remainseparate,withone approachlosingadherents;
ortheycoexist,competing
on
relatively
equal terms.ThomasKuhndoesnotprovidean accuratedescription
ofthe
studyof IPE or,forthatmatter,
international
relations
moregenerally.2
IPE has not
beencharacterized
byscientific
revolutions
succeededbya periodofnormalscience
inwhicha particular
generaltheoretical
orientation
is uncontested.
Therehas always
beenvigorousdebatebetweencompeting
generaltheoretical
orientations
andassociatedresearchprograms.
Thelinesofthinking
originally
nurtured
inIO, andlargelylimitedtointernational
politicaleconomyand its intersections
withcomparative
politicsand international
seemin the1990sto be merging
institutions,
intoa broaderandrichlyreconfigured
fieldof worldpolitics.Insightsoriginallygeneratedin studying
the international
politicaleconomyhavebeenextendedtootherissueareas,suchas environmental
or
securityaffairs.Linkagesamongissues meanthatmanyimportant
phenomenain
worldpoliticscan no longerbe neatlyclassifiedbyissuearea,suchas economicsor
security
affairs.
Andold boundaries
betweeninternational
relations
andcomparative
politics,orbetweenIPE andtherestofinternational
relations,
havebecomeincreasinglyfluid.Respondingto thesechanges,scholarshave modifiedexistinglinesof
researchand initiated
new ones.Theyhave sharpened
someanalyticaldistinctions
and erasedothers.Theyhave soughtto advancereformulated
synthetic
interpretationsandfocusedon newpointsofintellectual
contestation.
andrationalism
Sincethemid-1980sa newdebatebetweenconstructivism
(includhasbecomemoreprominent.
Newtheoretical
develingbothrealismandliberalism)
institutional
opmentsin rationalist
theory,
open-economy
economics,andcomparativepoliticsprovidedscholarswithnewintellectual
openingsas theColdWarended.
influenced
in thehumanities,
Conventional
andcriticalcontructivists,
bynewtrends
thatemphasizedsharednormsandvaluesbut
putforward
sociologicalperspectives
frompostmodemism.
termssharplydifferentiated
whichwere in epistemological
In thefieldof nationalsecuritythediscussionbetweenrationalism
(in its realist
andliberalvariants)andconstructivism
has beenmorefullyjoinedthanin thefield
ofIPE.
of eitherworldpoliticsor international
We do notpresumeto predictthefuture
ofthesubfield
of
relations
Butwe do insiston twopoints.First,theevolution
theory.
andhypothesis
IPE is better
describedintermsoffocalpointsofcontestation
testing
overanother.
thanas an all-outwarleadingto thevictory
ofone generalorientation
intellectual
in IPE canbe mademorecomprehensible
Second,current
developments
andpoliticalopenings
themwiththelastcycle-fromtheintellectual
bycomparing
2. Kuhn1962.
650 International
Organization
of the 1970s to therelativesyntheses
of thelate 1980s,whichpresagedanother
the
politicaland intellectual
upheavalbeginningaround1990. Thus,we interpret
pastinordertounderstand
thepresent.
In thefirst
sectionofthearticlewe briefly
reviewsomeaspectsofthefieldin the
yearsbetweenthelate 1940s(whenIO was founded)and 1968.We thendiscussthe
intellectual
openingforIPE, beginning
in thelate 1960s.In thesecondsectionwe
betweenrealismandliberalism
duranalyzethesymbiotic
yetcontested
relationship
ingthelastthirty
years.In thethirdsectionwe tracetheevolutionofdomesticpoliticsresearchanditseventualdifferentiation
intohistorical-institutionalist
andrationaliststylesofresearch.
In thefourth
sectionwe analyzethenewintellectual
opening
createdby theend of theCold Warand arguethatefforts
fromvariousquartersto
understand
actorpreferences
in thestudyof
arecreating
newpointsofcontestation
worldpoliticswhileblurring
someestablished
faultlines.In theconclusionwe argue
is integrating
IPE evenmorefullyintothebroaderdiscipline
thatcurrent
scholarship
of international
relationsand intooverarching
debatesin thenaturaland social sciencesandinthehumanities.
An IntellectualOpening,1968-78
an established
tradition
in the
IO existedfortwodecadesbefore1968,representing
studyof international
organizations.
Duringthe 1960s IO publishedsome of the
leadingworkon Europeanintegration,
workthatchallengedrealismand provided
As discussed
conceptsfortheanalysisofthepoliticsofeconomicinterdependence.
inthissection,after1968an intellectual
openingforthestudyofinternational
political economyemerged.
IO's FirstTwoDecades, 1947-67
10 was founded
relations.
An
at a timeofprofound
andrapidchangeininternational
extensiveanduntried
setofinternational
had beenestablished
organizations
during
butalso to
andjustafterWorldWarII. Seekingnotonlyto describetheiractivities,
and whytheyhaveor
promote"a comparative
studyof international
organizations
havenotworkedinvarying
the
trustees
of
the
WorldPeace Foundacircumstances,"
issueappeared
tiondecidedinthespringof 1946toestablishthisjournal,whosefirst
in February1947.3By thattime,relationsbetweentheSovietUnionand itsformer
Western
allieshadbecomehighlystrained,
andwhatlaterbecameknownas theCold
Warwas beginning,
markedbycrisesin IranandGreeceand,in thespringof 1947,
bytheTrumanDoctrineandtheMarshallPlan.
boththeformation
ofnewintemational
IO hadthetaskofanalyzing
organizations
andthesuperpower
thatthreatened
to killor maimthemat birth.In thelead
rivalry
3. TheWorldPeace Foundation
was established
in 1910byEdwinGinn,headofthepublishing
companybearinghisname.
The StudyofWorldPolitics 651
articlein thefirst
issue,LelandM. GoodricharguedthatthenascentUN was uncomfortably
similarto theLeague of Nationsin its design:"Like theLeague,butfor
somewhat
different
technical
reasons,theUnitedNations,inso faras itsenforcement
activitiesare concerned,
is an organization
fortheenforcement
ofpeace amongthe
smallerstates."4Otherarticlesin thefirst
threeyearsof thejournal'sexistenceofferedgeneralarguments
on theroleofinternational
inworldpoliticsas
organizations
wellas articleson specifictopicssuchas thepoliticsofinternational
airtransport
and
theoperationof theUN SecurityCouncil.5Laterthejournalpublishedtrenchant
analysesof theUN's adaptation
to theCold War.Some of theoutstanding
workin
thisvein,by scholarssuchas Inis L. Claude,Jr.,and StanleyHoffmann,
shrewdly
commented
on thepoliticsof international
organizations
and theconsequentlimits
on theirpotential
rangeofsuccessful
operation.
UN peacekeeping
operations
inSuez
andtheCongowerea particular
focusofattention.
Thisworkwas notnaive.Neither
legalismnormoralism-thoseallegedbugaboos
ofAmericans-obscured
are
theauthors'
recognition
thatinternational
organizations
transformative
profoundly
affected
by worldpolitics,and thattheseorganizations'
is modest,atleastintheshortrun.However,despiteitsemphasison realispotential
tic descriptive
informed
analysis,researchwas notparticularly
by generalsocial
sciencetheory,
anditwas less concemedwithtesting
alternative
arguments
thanwas
thecase forsubsequent
worksuchas RobertCox andHaroldJacobson'sanalysisof
decisionmakingininternational
organizations.6
Perhapsforthesereasons,workpublishedin 10 in the1950sand 1960swas closerto policyanalysisand commentary
thanworkpublished
inthejournalsincethemid-1970s.Thejournalremained
sharply
focusedon formalinternational
organization,
withsubstantial
spacedevotedto summariesofactivities
invariousUN agenciesuntilthelate1960s.Evenwhenbehavioralism enteredthepages of thejournal,it tookthe formof statistical
analysisof
GeneralAssemblyvoting.
If theUN had continued
to be as significant
in worldpoliticsas itbriefly
became
underSecretary-General
Dag Hammerskj6ld
(1953-61), boththeshrewdpolitical
behavioralstudyofpolitics-withintheUN andin
analysisandthemoresystematic
tootherintergovernmental
havecontinued
tocomcomparison
organizations-might
audience.But Hammerskj6ld's
manda significant
deathin a planecrashwas followed by thecollapseof theUN operationin theCongo and by the "Article19
Crisis"overwhether
theSovietUnioncouldbe deprivedof itsvotein theGeneral
forUN peacekeeping
ofassessments
Assemblyinresponsetoitsnonpayment
operain Vietnamtookplace without
UN involvement.
tions.U.S. intervention
significant
Andin 1967 theUN peacekeeping
forcewas withdrawn
fromSuez rightbeforethe
JuneWar.ActionsagainstIsrael,including
thenotorious
"Zionismas Racism"resofortheUN, including
reducedU.S. support
severalofthespeciallution,drastically
irrelevant
tomajorquestionsofworld
ized agencies.As theUN becameincreasingly
ofworldpoliticslostinterest
init.
politics,students
4. Goodrich1947,17.
5. See Rothwell1949;Little1949;andDennett1949.
6. Cox andJacobson1973.
652 International
Organization
TheIntellectual
RootsofIPE
Realismhas beenat thecenterof thetheoretical
debatesof U.S. international
relationsscholarship
fora longtime.Historically,
realismwas a breedalientotheliberal
and progressive
intellectual
and politicalsensibilities
of theUnitedStates.At its
inception
in theearlytwentieth
century,
thedisciplineofinternational
relations
was
partoftheprogressive
movement
thatsoughttobuilda systematic
socialsciencefor
thebetterment
ofmankind
intheUnitedStatesand,byimplication,
worldwide.
World
WarII and theHolocaust,experienced
and interpreted
by a generation
of brilliant
intellectuals
closelylinkedto Europe,changedthis.And so did theprotracted
Cold
Warthatheldtheworldin its gripforfourdecades.Prudentstatecraft,
realismargued,requireda space fordiplomacyand strategy
thatwas uncontested
by normal
domesticpolitics.The granddebatesinthefield-idealismandrealismin the1930s,
neoliberalism
andneorealism
inthe1980s-are products
ofthisdistinctive
historical
legacy.
No independently
fieldforstudying
theinternational
recognized
politicaleconomy
existedin the1950sand 1960s.Specialistsof international
relations
paid littlesystematicattention
to thepoliticalanalysisof economicissues.For publicpolicyas
wellas fortheacademy,thefocuswas on security
issuesand "highpolitics."Communismwas seenas an omnipresent
threat.
The SovietUnion,armedwithnuclear
weaponsandrockets-as thesuccessfullaunchof Sputnikin 1957 indicated-was
perceivedas a seriousmilitary,
technological,
economic,andideologicalrivalofthe
UnitedStates.Leadingstudents
ofworldpoliticsanalyzedtheroleofnuclearweapofdeterrence,
andtheoperation
ofU.S.-ledalliancessuchas NATO.
ons,techniques
ThomasSchellingintroduced
rationalchoiceanalysisto international
affairs;
Henry
andU.S. nuclearandalliancestrategies
in
KissingerwroteaboutEuropeanstatecraft
the
Europe;GrahamAllisonusedtheCubanMissileCrisisas a case studyto sharpen
theoretical
lensesofthediscipline.7
Innovative
analysesalso dealtwithissuesofwar
and peace,includingmajorconceptualcontributions
by KennethN. Waltzand the
ofWarProjectledbyJ.David
ofanimpressive
datasetbytheCorrelates
development
Singer.8
stockofintellecForthestudyoftheinternational
politicaleconomya substantial
tualcapitalcamefromclassicworkson politicaleconomy,suchas thoseofAlbert
andJacobViner.9
for
Hirschman,
EugeneStaley,CharlesKindleberger,
Hirschman,
ofpoliticalpressure
tradewas usedas an instrument
example,explainedhowforeign
in central-eastern
EuwhichGermany
builtitspoliticalsphereofinfluence
through
thecomplementarity
ofpowerandwealth
illuminated
rope.VinerandKindleberger
in theseventeenth
and eighteenth
and
centuriesand in theinternational
monetary
financialsystem.Staleyexaminedhow barriersagainsttradewithstatessuch as
conflict.These authorsoffered
Japancreatedconditionsforpolitical-military
7. See Schelling1960,1966;Kissinger1957a,b,1965;andAllison1971.
8. See Waltz1959;andSinger1972.
9. See Hirschman
[1945] 1980;Staley1939;Viner1948;andKindleberger
1973.See also D. Baldwin
1985.
The StudyofWorldPolitics 653
insights
intothewaypowerprovidedthefoundations
fortheinternational
economy.
Withinthefieldof international
relations,
EdwardHallettCarrused his blendof
Marxismand realismto analyzethecollapseof theinternational
order,including
theinternational
economy,in theinterwar
period.10
The analyticalfocusof these
books on materialcapabilitiesand asymmetric
bargainingpowerprovidedthe
basis forparsimonious
accountsof developments
in theinternational
economythat
had a profoundeffecton the studyof theinternational
politicaleconomyin the
1970s.
Studentsof comparative
politicswho soughtto linktheirworkto international
relations
drewon a richtradition
ofworkthatemphasizedtheimportance
ofinstitutionalfactorsin theshapingof politicalregimes,notably,
in the1960s,J.P. Nettl's
articleon thestateand SamuelHuntington's
analysisofpoliticaldecay.11
Theyalso
drewon economicsand economichistory,
suchas workson technology
by David
Landesand on tariffs
byCharlesKindleberger.12
Some bookson U.S. politicswere
politics.13Furthermore,
widelyreadby scholarsof comparative
thedomesticdeterminants
offoreign
policyreceivedextended
attention
byinternational
relations
scholarsinthe1960s,a factthatreceivedmorethanpassingnoticebycomparative
politics
specialistswhowereinterested
ininstitutions.
In 1959Kenneth
Waltzinsistedon the
primacy
oftheinternational
system
inshapingstatepolicy,foreshadowing
hisTheory
14 A decadelater,
in a
Politicspublishedtwenty
ofInternational
yearslater.
however,
brilliant
bookon democratic
foreign
policyhe offered
a theory
offoreign
policy.15In
the1960sandearly1970sWaltzwas notalonein pointing
to theimportance
ofthe
domesticdeterminants
(such as politicalleadership,
institutions,
and bureaucratic
organizations)
of stateaction.HenryKissinger,
GrahamAllison,MortonHalperin,
andJohnSteinbruner,
amongothers,
publishedimportant
articlesandbookson the
subjectthatwerewidelyread,discussed,andcited.16
forstudents
Yet,themainsourceof inspiration
seekingto connectinternational
relations
withdomesticpoliticsarosefromwithin
thefieldofcomparative
politics.In
to explain
the 1960s discussionsin comparative
analysisrevolvedaroundefforts
in thepathstakenbymodernstates-towardliberaldemocracy,
differences
fascism,
orstatesocialism,forexample.Interactions
anddomesticfacbetweeninternational
torshad beenlargelyignoredby thestructural-functional
approach,whichwas the
focalpointofworkincomparative
politicsduringthe1960s.Butforscholarssuchas
and subsequently
Barrington
Moore,ReinhardBendix,AlexanderGerschenkron,
weretheresultnotonlyof a
CharlesTillyand Theda Skocpol,thesetrajectories
intotheinternational
characteristics
butalso ofhowitwas inserted
polity'sinternal
of comparative
systembotheconomicallyand politically.17A youngergeneration
10. Carr[1946] 1962.
11. See Nettl1968;andHuntington
1968.
12. See Kindleberger
1962,1978;andLandes1969.
13. Bauer,Pool,andDexter1972.
14. Waltz1959.
15. Waltz1967.
16. See Kissinger1969;Allison1971;Halperin1974;andSteinbruner
1974.
17. See Bendix1964;Gerschenkron
1962;Moore1966;Tilly1975,1990;andSkocpol1979.
654 International
Organization
scholarswouldsoonadapttheinsights
oftheseseminalstudiestotheanalysisofthe
domesticdeterminants
oftheinternational
politicaleconomy.
Despitethisrichintellectual
legacy,the1960slackeda coherent
bodyofpoliticaleconomyliterature
in international
relations,and thescattered
worksthatexisted
werefarfromthemainstream
ofinternational
relations.
couldgo
Graduatestudents
through
international
relations
programs
atmajorAmerican
universities,
focusingon
diplomatichistory,
theoriesof war and peace, and policyissuesrevolvingaround
deterrence,
andremainlargelyinnocent
ofeconomicsoritslinkstoworldpolitics.It
didnothelpthateconomists
werepayinglittleattention
tohowpoliticalandinstitutionalcontexts
affected
theirsubjectofstudy.
EconomicsPh.D. students
wereincreasinglyrewarded
fortheirmathematical
acumenrather
thantheiranalysisofhoworganizationsactuallyoperated;economistscould not fashionsuccessfulcareersby
investigating
thelendingpractices
oftheInternational
Monetary
Fund.Hence,inthe
analysisofinternational
relations
neither
politicalsciencenoreconomicswereconductingsustained
research
on subjectsthatwouldlaterbe termed
IPE.
European Integrationas an IntellectualOpening
Fromtheearly1960s untiltheearly1970s,theliveliestdebateson international
organizations
focusedon thesignificance
ofpoliticalintegration
forthenation-state:
"obstinateor obsolete?"as StanleyHoffmann
putit in a famousdebatewithErnst
Haas.18Haas and some youngerstudentsand colleaguesdevelopeda specificresearchprogram
aboutpoliticalintegration,
drawingon modernization
theory
andon
thetheory
offunctionalism
as articulated
byDavidMitrany.'9
Thisresearch
program
a generalliberaltheoretical
of
reflected
orientation
thatpointedto thepossibility
of voluntary
agreemultipleactorsin theinternational
systemand theimportance
ment.Theirworkcomplemented
theanalysisofnationalandsupranational
communityformation
thatKarl Deutschand his students
had pioneeredin the 1950s and
1960s,a research
program
thatforeshadowed
whatlatercametobe labeledconstrucofidentity
formation
measuredbysocialtranstheimportance
tivism.Ithighlighted
a substantial
hadspecified
actionsandcommunications.20
By 1970integration
theory
a seriesofpolitinumber
ofeconomicandsocialbackground
factors
thatconditioned
and
cal processes.These,in turn,shapedhowpoliticalactorsdefinedtheirinterests
states.A nascentfieldof
thusthepolicystrategies
thatelitesadoptedin different
studieswas formed,
basedon fieldwork
comparative
regionalintegration
byscholars
who wentto East Africaand LatinAmericaas well as to Europe.2'In 1970 10
editedbyLeon LindbergandStuart
publisheda specialissueon regionalintegration
Thearticlesinthisvolumerepresented
touse behavioralsocial
Scheingold.
attempts
inthesuccessofefforts
atregionalintegration.22
scienceto accountforvariation
18. Hoffmann
1966.
19. See Haas 1958,1961,1964b;andMitrany1966.
1966.
20. See Deutsch1953;Deutschetal. 1957;Russett1963;andMerritt
includeLindbergand
21. Outstanding
bookssynthesizing
thisliterature
andpresenting
newfindings
Scheingold1970;andNye 1971.
22. LindbergandScheingold1971.
The StudyofWorldPolitics 655
Comparative
regionalintegration
studiesfoundered
on theoverlyoptimistic
assumptionof neofunctionalism
thatsuch efforts
wouldsucceedaroundtheworld.
Non-European
efforts
at regionalintegration
in the1960sfailed,and theEuropean
effort
afterCharlesDe Gaulle'smaneuvers
ofthemid-1960sandtheLuxstagnated
embourgCompromise
of 1966.The fieldofintegration
studiesatrophied.
Formerly
optimistic
theorists
becamepessimistic.
Theirarguments
becamemoreindeterminateas an increasing
number
ofexplanatory
variableswas neededto accountforthe
andretardation
acceleration
ofintegration
processes.
The difficulty
encountered
after1966byneofunctionalism
was ironically
similar
tothatfacedbyneorealism(whoseerrorwas excessivepessimism)after1989.Both
approachesinvolvedspecificresearchprograms
withtestablepropositions,
someof
whichwereinvalidatedby events.Theirarguments
in waysthat
wereformulated
couldbe falsified.
Whendisillusionment
setin,manyyounwithintegration
theory
gerscholarsturnedto newerthemessuchas thoseofinternational
andcomparative
politicaleconomy.Integration
theory,
however,providedmuchof theexistinganalyticalcapitalforinvestigating
theconnections
betweenpoliticsandeconomics.Severalyearslater,ErnstB. Haas publishedan articleon the"obsolescence"ofregional
integration
theory.23
However,empiricalworkon theEuropeanCommunity
continued in Europe,and whenU.S. scholarsregainedinterest
in thesubjectin thelate
1980s,theyreliedheavilyon thisEuropeanworkand wereless inclinedto putforwarda generaltheory
ofintegration
processes.24
The Emergenceof IPE
As longas security
concernsdominated
theattention
of academicsandpolicymakvacuumin thestudyoftheinternational
ers,theintellectual
politicaleconomycould
in thelate 1960s,however,
a seriesofdevelopments
be ignored.Beginning
brought
economicissues:therevivalof theEuropeanand
politicalsalienceto international
intheUnitedStates,theabandonment
of
Japaneseeconomies,inflationary
pressures
Bretton
Woodsin 1971,andtheOPEC oil embargoin 1973-74all combinedto end
the era of overwhelming
U.S. dominanceof theworldeconomyand theregime
constructed
inthelate1940s.
A fewpoliticalscientists
beganattheendofthe1960stoobservethesechangesin
theinternational
stimulated
politicaleconomy,
especiallybyworkoneconomicinterdependenceby RichardCooperand on multinational
enterprises
by RaymondVerIn 197110 publisheda specialissueon transnational
relations.26
Thisvolume
non.25
doneby Vernonand others:
was inspiredby theworkon multinational
enterprises
in theeditors'introduction
overa thirdofthethirty-one
worksreferenced
scholarly
to theactivities
ofthesefirms.
The editorssoughtto broadenthestudyof
pertained
23. Haas 1975,1976.
24. See Moravcsik1991, 1998; and thecollectionseditedbyWallace 1990; Keohaneand Hoffmann
1991;andSbragia1992.
25. See Cooper1968;andVernon1971.
witha twenty-year
perspective,
26. KeohaneandNye 1972.For a reviewofthesubsequent
literature
see Risse-Kappen1995b.
656 International
Organization
worldpoliticsto include"transnational
relations,"
involvingtheactivitiesof nonstateactors,and "transgovemmental
relations,"
in whichsubunitsof governments
dealtdirectlywiththeircounterparts
The transnational
relationsspecial
abroad.27
activity
issuewas chieflya pointingexercisethatmadeclearhowmuchinteresting
paradigm.
No
hadescapedtheattention
ofanalystsimprisoned
inthe"state-centric"
testabletheorywas presented.
The editorsfocusedon theimpactof changingecoassumptions
were
nomicand technological
forceson politics.Theirfundamental
borrowed
frompluralism,
whichwas thereigning
theoretical
orientation
ondomestic
politics,atleastintheUnitedStates.Actorswerethestarting
point;theirpreferences
werenotexplained.The factthatactorshad different
createdopportunipreferences
tiesformutually
beneficial
trade-offs.
Beginning
withtheperceivedrealityoftransdepennationalrelations,
Robert0. KeohaneandJosephS. Nyediscussedinterstate
thetrade-offs
andpolitical
dence,andtheyhighlighted
betweentheeconomicbenefits
oftransnational
relations
costsofinterdependence.
theimplications
By considering
to classic issues in
forstateautonomy,
theylinkedthestudyof interdependence
politicalscience.
RobertGilpinchallengedtheeditors'liberalorientation
witha powerfulessay
inthesamevolume.28
relations
couldonly
published
Gilpinarguedthattransnational
A central
be understood
within
thecontext
ofinterstate
andcontinuing
issuepolitics.
theinteractions
economicchanges,on theonehand,andstate
betweentransnational
power,on theother-was embeddedin theinternational
politicaleconomydebate
Gilpindevelfromtheoutset.In a subsequent
bookon multinational
corporations,
andself-consciously,
a realistanalysisoftheinternational
politioped,systematically
cal economy.His trenchant
and
corporations
analysisof therole of multinational
U.S. foreign
andpolicyconcernsintoa
policyfusedrealism'sanalytical,
historical,
powerful
synthesis.29
Gilpinshowedhow realism'semphasison powercouldprovidebotha politicalexplanation
oftheemergence
ofliberalprinciples
andpractices
in U.S. foreign
economicpolicyand a parsimonious
critiqueof liberalscholarship.
whichinterpreted
His dynamicmodelof changeparalleledsomeMarxistwritings,
thatdrovepower-seeking
theVietnam
Waras a reflection
ofeconomiccontradictions
a counterrevolutionary
elitesto devise,undertheflagof international
liberalism,
imperialist
strategy.30
inthe
a debateabouttheroleofstatesandmarkets
Gilpin'sworkhelpedcrystallize
international
politicaleconomy,whichbecamea majorthemeduringthenextdeandtotry
whattheymeantbyinterdependence
cade.Scholarsbegantoconceptualize
relations."TheyquoteArnoldWolfers
27. KeohaneandNyedidnotinventthephrase"transnational
publishedin 1959.See KeohaneandNye 1972,x. Wolferstreatsthe"transnaas usingitin an essayfirst
toidentify
a set
stating
that"thereis no lackofa suitablevocabulary
tional"terminology
as conventional,
called
thatall thetermsreferto something
significance
ofnon-state
corporate
actors,butitis notwithout
Wolfers1962,20.
feature
ofthenation-state."
'national,'whichis thecharacteristic
28. Gilpin1972.
orpowerful
as
workwitha realistcast,albeitnotso systematic
29. Gilpin1975.Forotheroutstanding
Gilpin's,see Knorr1975;andStrange1976.
30. See BaranandSweezy1966;Magdoff1969;Mandel1976;andGilpin1975,1981.
The StudyofWorldPolitics 657
to measureit.3IThe writings
ofSusanStrangewereparticularly
in focusimportant
ingattention
on markets
andhow statesinteracted
withthem.32
On one side of the
debatein the1970s wereliberalanalysesthatemphasizedeconomicprocessesand
technological
changein theprocessofmodernization.33
Thesearguments
havetheir
counterparts
in some contemporary
workon globalization,
which,in thewordsof
Strange,contendsthat"the authority
of thegovernments
of all states,largeand
small,strongandweak,has beenweakenedas a resultoftechnological
andfinancial
changeandoftheacceleratedintegration
ofnationaleconomiesintoone singleglobal market
economy."34
In contrast
to thesemarket-oriented
is thestatearguments
structural
orientation
ofGilpinorofStephenKrasner,
whoarguedin 1976thatvariationsinthedegreeofopennessorclosureinforeign
tradewereinexplicable
without
understanding
configurations
of stateinterests
andpower."In recentyears,"he declared,"students
ofinternational
relations
havemultinationalized,
transnationalized,
bureaucratized,
and transgovernmentalized
thestateuntilit has virtually
ceased to
exist as an analytic construct.
.
. This perspectiveis at best profoundlymislead-
ing."35
Whether
one emphasizedtheroleof markets
or of states,it becameclearduring
the1970sthatneither
couldbe adequatelyanalyzedwithout
phenomenon
accounting
fortheother.As KeohaneandNyeexplicitly
recognizedin theirbookpublishedin
1977,powerandinterdependence
wouldhavetobe analyzedtogether.36
IPE: Liberal Challengesto Realism
Duringthedecadeafterthepublication
of Gilpin'sbookthevariousapproachesto
and cooperation
problemsof bargaining
drewtheirinspiration
fromlong-standing
andMarxism.Eachperspective
genericorientations,
notably
realism,
liberalism,
gave
prideofplace to a different
explanatory
variable:thedistribution
ofpowerforrealof different
of theeconomyor,
ists,theinterests
groupsforliberals,thestructure
moresimplistically,
theinterests
ofcapitalists
forMarxists.
Each perspective
emphasized different
causal relations:powerand coercionforrealism,mutualagreement
and contracting
forliberalism,
mechanisms
of exploitation
forMarxism.Thesegenericorientations
createdspecificresearchprograms
thatweresubjectto empirical
anddepenliberalregimetheory,
verification,
including
hegemonicstability
theory,
variants
The mostprominent
debateswerethosebetweendifferent
of
dencytheory.
realismand liberalism,
and increasingly
betweensystemic-level
analysis(particuand analysisrootedin domestic-level
interests
and
larlyneoliberalinstitutionalism)
31. See Waltz1970;RosecranceandStein1973;andKatzenstein
1975.
32. Strange1979,1988.
between
33. Morse1970and 1976.In an investigation
ofwar,Gilpinfurther
exploredtherelationships
technological
changeandworldpolitics.Gilpin1981.
34. Strange1996,14.
35. Krasner1976,317.
36. See KeohaneandNye 1977;andBaldwin1979.
658 International
Organization
institutions,
whichsoughttounderstand
"stateinterests,"
rather
thantakingthemfor
granted.
Realism and Its Critics in the 1970s
For mostAmericanstudentsof international
politics,at least through
the 1980s,
realismwas theperspective
againstwhichnewideashadtobe tested;andduringthe
1960s,whenIPE emergedas an independent
fieldofstudy,
realismwas intellectually
hegemonic.
HansMorgenthau's
PoliticsAmongNationswasthemostimportant
text.37
Kenneth
Waltzhadpublishedhisfirst
bookin 1959inwhichhe initiated
theintellectualprojectthatculminated
in his influential
expositionof whatcameto be termed
neorealismtwentyyearslater.38
Systemstheorywas guidedby a realistrhetoric,
as Waltzlaterpointedout,thesestudiesweremorereductionist
although,
thaneither
theirauthors
orreadersrealized.39
But realismhas alwaysbeen vulnerable,
because some of its core assumptions
wereproblematic,
andbecauseitsempiricalvalidationwas nevercompelling.
Realism's coreassumptions
can be variouslyclassified,
butfourareparticularly
important:(1) statesarethekeyactorsin worldpolitics;(2) statescan be treated
as homogeneousunitsactingon thebasis of self-interest;
(3) analysiscan proceedon the
basis of theassumption
thatstatesactas iftheywererational;and (4) intemational
in the international
anarchy-theabsence of any legitimateauthority
systemmeansthatconflict
betweenself-interested
statesentailsthedangerof warand the
possibilityof coercion.The state-centric
assumption
was challengedby workon
transnational
thehomogeneity
of domesticstrucrelations,
assumption
by students
tureand bureaucratic
politics,therationality
assumption
by analystsof cognitive
of
andgroupdecisionmaking,andtheanarchyassumption
psychology
bytheorists
intemational
societyandinstitutions.
their
Duringthe1960sand1970sthreemajorliberalchallengestorealismdirected
fireat theassumption
thatstatescouldbe treated
rationalactors:neofuncas unified
andlinkagepolitics.40
All
bureaucratic
relations
tionalism,
politics,andtransnational
threeweregroundedin a pluralistconceptionof civil societyand thestate.Public
interests.
policywas theresultof clashesamongdifferent
groupswithconflicting
whichwouldvaryfromone
Groupscouldoftenonlysucceedbybuildingcoalitions,
issueareatoanother.
RobertDahl,themostinfluential
Americanexponent
ofpluralof
thatthesecross-cutting
ism,emphasized
cleavageswouldprecludethedominance
about
anyone specificgroup,an observation
designedto rebutMarxistarguments
theformulation
theabilityofmajorcapitalists
todominate
ofpublicpolicy.4'
of
Neofunctionalism
thatinstitutional
stipulated
changewouldaltertheincentives
groupsin civil society,leadingthemto supportpoliciesthatwouldpromotestill
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
Morgenthau
1948.
Waltz1959,1979.
See Kaplan1957;Rosecrance1963;andWaltz1979,1986.
See Haas 1958,1964a,b;Allison1971;KeohaneandNye 1972;andRosenau1969a.
Dahl 1961.
The StudyofWorldPolitics 659
moreintegration
ina processthatwouldspilloverfromoneissueareatoanother.
But
as we have seen,thisargument
apparently
failedto predictor explainthedirection
takenbytheEuropeanCommunity
after1966.42Bureaucratic
politicsextendedpluralistinterest
grouparguments
intothegovernment
itself:"whereyoustanddepends
uponwhereyousit."43Policy,including
foreign
policy,is a productofcompromise
amongdifferent
bureaucratic
actors,reflecting
thepowerandintensity
ofinterest
of
bureaus,whichvaryfromone issueareato another.
Coherent
foreign
policyis elusive,sincedecisionsin different
issueareasarebeingtakenbydifferent
actorswith
different
Theoriesabouttransnational
preferences.
relations,
whichwerecentral
when
IPE emergedas a distinct
fieldin the1970s,canied thepluralist
argument
one step
further:
therecouldbe manydifferent
actorsintheinternational
includenvironment,
inggroupsfromcivilsociety.Thesenongovernmental
actorscouldbe directly
linked
in othercountries,
withtheircounterparts
in tiesthatwouldnotnecessarily
be controlledbystates.Transgovernmental
relations
werealso possible:situations
inwhich
therewouldbe directrelationsamonginterested
bureaucracies
in different
countries.44
For IPE, bureaucratic
politicsand transnational
relationsorientedearlyworkin
thefield,buttheseresearchprogramsfaltereddespitethefactthattheirpolitical
a nuancedlandscapecomposedof manydifferent
ontology,
elements,was much
richerthantheblack-boxviewof thestateprovidedby realism.Transnational
relainterests
and
tionspositeda worldcomposedofmanydifferent
actorswithdifferent
Buttheoperationalization
capabilities.Sucha modelcan providea richdescription.
ofcauseandeffect
is complexbecauseitis difficult
to specifyinterests
relationships
andcapabilitiesex ante.The largerthenumberofactors,thegreater
thediversity
of
and thewiderthenumberof
theirresources(ideas,money,access, organization);
suchspecification
possiblealliances,themoredifficult
becomes,especiallyifthere
areinteraction
effects
amongdifferent
groups.
Bureaucratic
and
politicscaptured
thecomplexity
involvedin policyformulation
in any advancedpolity-complexity
thateludedrealismwithits
implementation
the
aboutthenatureofthestate.In someinstances
radicallysimplifying
assumptions
interests
ofbureaucracies
wereclear,butin otherstheyweremoreelusive.Some of
ofbureaucratic
thatthemostobviousspecitheinitialproponents
politicsrecognized
fication
ofbureaucratic
interests,
maximizing
budgetsize,didnotalwayswork.For
WorldWarII didnottrytokeepcontroloftheairforce
example,theU.S. Armyafter
thecreation
servicethatwouldbe coequal
butrather
ofa third
supported
independent
withthearmyandthenavy.45
Armyleadersrejectedkeepingtheairforceas partof
WorldWarII) becauseitwouldhave
thear-my
(itwas theU.S. ArmyAirForceduring
changedthe "bureaucratic
essence,"or whatwouldbe called todaythecollective
andtheinfantry.
Bureaucratic
ofthearmy,
whichwas rootedinlandwarfare
identity
through
theEuropeanjudicialprocess,over42. BurleyandMattlisuggestedthatspillovercontinued
lookedbymanyanalysts.BurleyandMattli1993.
thisaphorism
toDon K. Price.Allison1971,316,n. 71.
43. Allisonattributes
44. KeohaneandNye 1974.See also Rosenau1969a.
45. Halperin1974.
660 International
Organization
politics,like transnational
relations,
had greatdifficulties
in operationalizing
varitorealistperspectives.
ables.It didnotbecomea compelling
alternative
In themid-1970sa newliberalchallengeto realismbeganto emerge.This challengefocusedon theconceptof "international
regime,"drawnfroma long-standing
tradition
ofinternational
law andfirst
usedin thepoliticalscienceliterature
byJohn
Ruggieand subsequently
elaboratedby Keohaneand Nye.Ruggiedefinedregimes
as setsof "mutualexpectations,
rulesandregulations,
plans,organizational
energies
and financial
commitments,
whichhave beenacceptedby a groupof states."KeohaneandNyetreatedthemsimplyas "governing
arrangements
thataffect
relationwas sociologicalorconstructivshipsofinterdependence."46
Ruggie'sunderstanding
ist,emphasizing
theimportance
ofintersubjective,
sharedunderstanding
thatdefines
rather
thanjust reflects
thepreferences
of actors;Keohaneand Nye understood
regimesas devicesforenhancingtheutilityof actorswhoseinterests
weretakenas
given.Studentsof international
regimesdid notchallengeone of themeaningsof
"anarchy":thatno institutional
hierarchy
capableofenforcing
rulesexistsin world
thatanarchy
inthissenseimplied
politics.Theydidquestionthefrequent
implication
theabsenceofinstitutions
basedon rules.
However,regimescouldalso be explainedinrealistterms-as GilpinandKrasner
had,ineffect,
soughttodo. By theendofthe1970sstudents
ofinternational
regimes
had introduced
a potentially
important
new dependent
variableintotheanalysisof
worldpolitics.At thattime,however,thisnew dependent
variablewas notlinked
setof explanatory
causal mechawitha distinctive
variablesthrough
an articulated
nismand,therefore,
didnotseriously
thewell-articulated
threaten
explanatory
project
ofrealismbasedon interests,
power,andanarchy.
Supportforrealisttheorywas enhancedby thefactthatthebest-operationalized
oftheseyears,hegemonic
consisnewresearch
program
stability
theory,
was entirely
itsfirst
tentwithrealistpremises-although,
articulation
ironically,
(withsomewhat
different
wasbya liberaleconomist,
terminology)
Kindleberger.47
Hegemonicstabilthatan open international
itytheorymaintained
systemwas mostlikelyto occur
Kindlewhentherewasa singledominant
economicsystem.
powerintheinternational
bergerarguedthattheGreatDepression,a marketfailureof monumental
proporfinantions,was causedbytheabsenceofa lenderoflastresortin theinternational
cial system.
iftherewerea singledominant
Therecouldonlybe a lenderoflastresort
powerin theinternational
system.Onlya hegemonwouldhave thecapacityand
interest
used a
to providethepublicgood of financialstability.
Thus,Kindleberger
realistontology
(theactorswerestates)anda halfrealistcausality(theoutcomewas
thevolundetermined
of poweramongstates,althoughthrough
by thedistribution
theprovision
tarychoiceofthehegemonnotcoercion)to analyzea liberalproblem,
ofcollectivegoodsin theinternational
system.
GilpinandKrasnersuggestedthata similaranalysiscouldbe appliedto multinationalcorporations
andtrade.48
Notonlyweretheontology
andcausalityfullyrealist,
46. See Ruggie1975,570; andKeohaneandNye 1977,19.
47. Kindleberger
1973.
48. See Gilpin1975;andKrasner1976.
The StudyofWorldPolitics 661
butso was thefundamental
problem.
Stateswereinterested
inmaximizing
theirown
interests.
Andthepromotion
oftheseinterests
couldinvolverelativegainsanddistributionalconflicts.
In theiranalyses,thedistribution
ofpowerwas thekeyexplanatoryvariable,accounting
fortherulesgoverning
multinational
corporations,
andfor
tradeopennessor closure.All stateshad a few simplegoals thattheysoughtto
in theinternational
promote
economicsystem-economic
utility,
growth,
socialstability,
andpoliticalleverage.Becauseitprovided
economicutility
withlimitedsocial
instability
and enhancedthepoliticalleverageof thedominant
power,fora hegemonicstatean opensystemwas themostattractive
wayto securetheseobjectives.
The firmsof thehegemonicpowerwouldmostbenefit
froman opensystem,since
theywerethemostcompetitive
andhadtheeasiestaccesstocapital.
Hegemonicstability
theory-or,moregenerally,
arguments
abouttherelationship
betweenthedistribution
of powerand thecharacteristics
of international
economic
behavior-operationalized
theexplanatory
variable,statepower,in termsof some
overallmeasureof size (such as GNP or shareof worldtrade)and thedependent
economicbehavior,
interms
ofopennessintheworldeconomy
variable,intemational
as indicated
bothbyrulesandthepattern
ofexchange.Thesesystemic
theories
could
ofinternational
be provenwrong:eitherthepattern
economicbehaviorchangedwith
thedistribution
of poweramongstatesor it did not.The operationalization
of variof causal relationships,
and falsifiability
ables,specification
made systemicpower
researchprogram.
Its findings
couldbe elaboratedand systematitheorya fruitful
callycriticized.
However,theveryclarityofhegemonicstability
theory
anditsease ofoperationalizationmadeitvulnerable
topersuasivecritiques.
Timothy
McKeownshowedthat
withthetheory,
GreatBritain'sbehaviorin thenineteenth
was inconsistent
century
andArthur
Steinarguedthatthetradeliberalization
measuresofthatcentury
didnot
thatpermitted
discrimiemergefromhegemonic
policybutfromasymmetric
bargains
nationagainstthehegemon.49
David Lake and DuncanSnidaldemonstrated
thata
of powerwas nottheonlyone thatwas consistent
withan
hegemonicdistribution
open economicsystem.Reasoningfromontologicaland epistemological
premises
that
thatwereentirely
consistent
withhegemonicstability
theory,
theydemonstrated
an
a smallnumber
ofleadingstateswouldhavetheinterest
andcapability
to support
of a realistapEven thoughsome arresting
open system.50
reconceptualizations
tradewerelaterputforward,51
proachtointernational
bythemiddleofthe1980sthe
of thefieldwas thathegemonicstability
generalassumption
theoryhad been seriouslyundermined.
At theendofthe1970s,theserefutations
tohegemonicstability
theory
layin the
WhenRonaldReaganwonthepresidency,
realistanalysisstillheldprideof
future.
beforea
place in theUnitedStates;it was stillthetheorythathad to be refuted
itsdominant
Realismmaintained
intellectual
convincing
challengecouldbe offered.
todescribeacthatappearedmoreaccurately
positiondespitealternative
arguments
49. See McKeown1983;andStein1984.
50. See Lake 1984;andSnidal1985b.See also,on tradepolicy,Milner1987,1988;andOye 1992.
51. Gowa 1989,1994.
662 International
Organization
tors,and despitethefactthatitsempiricalvalidation
had alwaysbeenproblematic.
Realismcontinued
tobe primus interpares becauseliberalism
didnotofferan alternativeresearch
program
thatspecified
causalityandoperationalized
variablesclearly
The renewalof theCold WaraftertheSovietinvasionof
enoughto be falsifiable.
Afghanistan
attheendof 1979seemedtoreinforce
realism'sintellectual
triumph.
Neoliberal Institutionalism
The development
ofneoliberalinstitutionalism
poseda seriouschallengeforrealist
in 1982.In hisintroduction
analysis.A specialissueof10 laid thefoundations
Stea definition
phenKrasnerpresented
of regimes,developedby thegroupof authors
forthisissue:"setsofimplicit
orexplicit
writing
principles,
norms,
rules,anddecisionaroundwhichactors'expectations
makingprocedures
convergein a givenarea of
international
relations."52
This agreeddefinition
was ambiguous;butit identified
as advoregimesas socialinstitutions
andavoideddebilitating
definitional
struggles,
catesof theregimesresearchprogram
soughtto showthattheirworkcouldilluminatesubstantive
issuesofinternational
relations.
In hisarticleinthatvolume,andmorecomprehensively
twoyearslaterina book,
toexplaintheexistenceofinternaRobertKeohanedevelopeda rationalist
argument
tionalinstitutions.53
Drawingan analogytoproblems
ofmarket
failureineconomics,
he arguedthathightransaction
costsandasymmetrical
uncertainty
couldlead,under
conditions
suchas thosemodeledbyPrisoners'
Dilemma(PD) games,tosuboptimal
to actors(notby enforcing
outcomes.Chieflyby providing
information
rulesin a
centralized
institutions
couldenablestatesto achievetheirownobjectives
manner),
moreefficiently.
Institutions
wouldalterstatestrategies
by changingthecostsof
institutionalization
could thuspromotecooperation.Keohaneargued
alternatives;
thatinstitutions
mattered
becausetheycouldprovideinformation,
monitor
complifacilitate
issue linkages,definecheating,
and offersalient
ance,increaseiterations,
solutions.Keohanedidnotdenytheimportance
ofpower,butwithintheconstraints
statescouldreapgains
imposedby theabsenceof hierarchical
globalgovernance,
fromcooperation
institutions.
bydesigning
appropriate
forthislineofargument
camefromnewworkineconomics
Theinitialinspiration
andfromtherenewedattention
beingpaid to PD games.Economistshad begunto
of institutions.54
RobertAxelrodsuggestedthatPD could
recognizetheimportance
be resolvedifthepayoffmatrixwerenotskewedtoo muchin favorof thesucker's
ifthecostsofmonitoring
ifgameswereiterated
andindefinitely,
payoff,
frequently
others'behaviorandofretaliating
weresufficiently
low,andifactorsdidnotdiscount
thefuture
at too higha rate.55
Institutions
could,it was argued,affectthevaluesof
theseparameters,
forinstance,
bynestingparticular
gamesin durablerules,provid52. Krasner1983b,1.
53. See Keohane1982and 1984.
54. See Olson 1965;Akerlof1970;North1981and 1990;andWilliamson1975.
55. See Axelrod1981, 1984; and Oye 1986. See also Rapoportand Chamnah1965. For a further
development
ofthislineofwork,see Axelrod1997;andCederman1997.
The StudyofWorldPolitics 663
inginformation
aboutotherstates'activities,
andfurnishing
standards
forevaluating
whether
cheatingwas takingplace.In the1990sU.S. andEuropeanscholarsdevelopeda numberofdifferent
thoughcomplementary
approachesto analyzinginternationalregimes.56
Wheretheneoliberalinstitutionalism
researchprogram
differed
withrealistargumentswas noton itsassumptions
aboutactors,butrather
on thenatureoftheexemplaryproblemintheinternational
system:werestatesprimarily
concerned
withmarketfailureorwithrelative
gainsanddistributional
conflicts?
Couldissuesbe resolved
through
thevoluntary
acceptanceofinstitutions
thatleftall actorsbetter
off,orwould
coercionand powerbe moreimportant
fordetermining
outcomes?Krasnersugconflicts
thanmarket
failureorrelativegainsarethe
gestedthatdistributional
rather
centralconcernforstatesin theinternational
system.The issueis notjust reaching
theParetofrontier,
butthepointon thefrontier
thatis chosen;an issuethatcan be
resolvedonlythrough
bargaining
andpower,notjustoptimalinstitutional
design.57
JosephGriecoarguedthatstateswere,infact,concerned
withrelativegainsevenin
theEuropeanCommunity,
whichseemedto be designedto enhanceabsolutewellRobertPowellclarified
thisrelative
thatevenwithin
being.58
gainsdiscussion,
arguing
iftheycompromised
a state'sfuture
a realistlogicrelativegainsonlymattered
ability
A numberof important
to secureabsolutebenefits.59
studiesin theearly1990s exploredtheconnections
betweenpowerandpotential
gainsfrompoliticalexchange.60
Neoliberalinstitutionalism
has offered
a set of heuristically
powerfuldeductive
be mademoreprecise.Indeed,sucharguments
can
arguments
thatcouldeventually
be formalized
as HelenMilnerarguesin herarticlein thisissue.
usinggametheory,
Hypotheses
generated
byneoliberalinstitutionalism
wereappliedto a widerangeof
suchas bargaining
betweentheUnitedKingdomandtheother
empiricalproblems,
members
oftheEuropeanCommunity
overtheFalklandsortheevolution
ofinternationalregimesfordebtrescheduling.61
The appealofneoliberalinstitutionalism
was
enhancedby itsaffinity
withthereigning
kingof thesocial sciencesin theUnited
States-economics.
DomesticPoliticsand IPE
andinternational
FromtheoutsetIPE blurredtheboundaries
betweencomparative
politics.Even analystswho tookthestate-as-actor
approachdid so explicitlyfor
theories-rather
thanon phenomconvenience-toenablethemtodevelopcoherent
1993.
56. See, forexample,Young1989,1994,1997;Lipson1991;andRittberger
57. Krasner1991.
58. Grieco1988,1990.
in Baldwin1993.See also Keohane1993.The relativegainsdiscussionis
59. Powell 1991,reprinted
ofneorealism
"isms"-the assumptions
thatbeganatthelevelofcompeting
an exampleofa controversy
research
andeventually
yielded
generated
someempirical
respectively-that
andneoliberal
institutionalism,
to an analytical
solution.
60. See Stein1990;Martin1992a;andOye 1992.
61. See Martin1992c;andAggarwal1996.
664 International
Organization
enologicalgrounds.In fact,realismand liberalismas generalresearchorientations
forrealism,andpluhad specificdomesticandsystemic
researchprograms:
statism
of
for
liberalism.
The actorswere
ralismand varioustheories interest
aggregation
at
the
domestic
and
but
the
causal
voluninternational
mechanisms,
different
levels,
as
remained
the
same.
Usingclass
taryexchange opposedto powerand coercion,
anddomesticpolitical
an integrated
viewofinternational
analysis,Marxismoffered
economy.Analystsof theinternational
politicaleconomycontinuedto emphasize
in domesticpoliticsaffected
how variations
foreignpolicyand to suggestwaysin
could
affect
domestic
and interwhichtheinternational
system
politicalstructures
ests.WebeginthissectionbydiscussingwhathappenedtoMarxism;we thenturnto
statist
ofdomesticstructure
arguments
andto a variety
approaches.
Marxism
ForMarxists,
theorganization
ofcapitalismdetermined
politicalandeconomicoutlevels.Marxismoffered
a structural
or
comesatboththedomesticandinternational
rather
an integrated
picture
institutional
thanan actor-oriented
argument,
providing
ofbothdomesticandinternational
politics.
instrumenArguing
thatthestatewas simplythehandmaiden
ofleadingcapitalists,
talMarxismoffered
clearcausal statements
thatprovedto be empirically
problematic.Manyof themajorpublicpolicyinitiatives
of thetwentieth
suchas
century,
social security
and therecognition
of laborunions,had been opposedby leading
thisproblem
andproposedstruccapitalists.
Sophisticated
Marxistanalysts
recognized
turalMarxismas a morepersuasive
framework
withMarx's
thatwas moreconsistent
ownformulations.
Structural
Marxistsarguedthatcapitaliststateswouldact in the
autonomous
interest
of preserving
capitalismas a whole.The statewas relatively
inanempirifromitsowneconomyandsociety.
thisorientation
However,specifying
Ifthestatewererelatively
autonomous,
exactlyhow
callytractable
waywas difficult.
autonomous
coulditbe? Whatpolicywouldbe inconsistent
withthisperspective?
Bothpoliciesthatreflected
thepreferences
of thecapitalistclass and thosethatdid
notcouldbe accountedforbystructural
Marxistanalyses.
Scholarsinfluenced
by Marxismalso emphasizedsocial forcesand production
influential
research
as in theworkof RobertW. Cox.62One particularly
relations,
In thelate
basedon a genericMarxistorientation
was dependency
theory.
program
anArgentinian
attheUN EconomicComeconomist
1940sRaoulPrebisch,
working
missionforLatinAmerica,arguedthattheworldeconomyenmeshedpoorercountriesexporting
rawmaterials
in relationships
ofunequalexchange.Prebisch'sargufrom
weredevelopedby social scientists
ments,and olderones aboutimperialism,
developingareas,especiallyLatinAmerica,as well as fromNorthAmericaand
ofthestatesofthesouth
thatexplainedthepoverty
Europe,intoa researchprogram
in termsof theirpositionin theworldeconomy.63
The worldsystemsresearchproand his colleaguespresenteda similar
gramelaboratedby ImmanuelWallerstein
62. R. Cox 1981,1987.
63. See Prebisch1959;Cohen1973;andCardosoandFalleto1979.
The StudyofWorldPolitics 665
In a 1978 specialissueofIO JamesCapoanalysisfora muchlongertimeperiod.64
rasoemphasizedthedistinction
anddependency.
In contrast
to
betweendependence
theory
offered
a disguised
theintemationalism
of traditional
Marxism,dependency
in whichtheroleofthestateloomedlarge,especiallyforweak
formofnationalism
and weak,but
polities.It was notjust thatthepolitiesof thesouthweredependent
thatundermined
theirautonomy
and
thattheywerein a relationship
ofdependency
ofexploitation
includedbothspecificecoexploitedtheirwealth.Thesemechanisms
ofdeveloping
statesbymorepowernomicarrangements
andthegeneralpenetration
fulandbetter
statesofthenorth.65
organizedcapitalist
and as
As theexperienceof thedevelopingworldbecamemoredifferentiated
thanothers,
somestatesandworldregionsdidbetter
dependency
theorists
suggested
thattherecouldbe a pattern
ofdependent
Some groupswithindeveldevelopment.
wouldallythemselves
with
opingstates,suchas largercapitalistsand themilitary,
miliactorsfromthenorth,
suchas multinational
corporations
andnorthern
powerful
taries.Statesin thesouthcouldprosper,
buttheiroptionswouldalwaysbe truncated
intotheworldcapitalist
system.66
bythewayinwhichtheywereinserted
theoryencountered
seriouscriticism
Fromtheearly1980s onward,dependency
andanomalies.It was criticized
forfailingtoclearlyspelloutcausalregularities
that
it had greatdifficulty
Furthermore,
could be empirically
supportedor falsified.67
in whatwas knownas theThirdWorld,espetheunevenratesofgrowth
explaining
ofEastAsiancountries.
economicdevelopment
ofa number
Crossciallythestunning
inendowments,
andpoliciesseemedtoprovidemore
nationalvariations
institutions,
promising
explanations.
Politicaleconomyworkon developingcountriesincreasof economicsandcomparative
thanon
politicsrather
inglyreliedon a combination
FerOne oftheleadingexponents
ofdependent
development,
dependency
theory.68
ofBrazil.
president
nandoHenriqueCardoso,evenbecametheliberalreformist
theprofound
The collapseoftheSovietempireand,moreimportantly,
corruption
thatdrewon
revealedby its demisedealta heavyblow to theresearchprograms
orientation.
orientaMarxismfortheirtheoretical
However,Marxismas a theoretical
tiondidnotdisappear.
Marxistshavegrappledwithsomeofthesameissuesthathave
ofMarxistscholarship
hasbuilton
strand
engagedliberalscholars.A neo-Gramscian
and sourcesof legitimating
a tradition
of analysisthatemphasizestheimportance
moreconsistent
withconstructivThisscholarship
is therefore
ideasandideologies.69
of
sectionofthisarticle)thatstressestheimportance
istwork(reviewedinthefourth
versionsofMarxism.
ideasandculturethanarematerialist
ofMarxistanalysessimplyin termsof
It wouldbe a mistaketojudgetheinsights
Marxistanalysisposes probingquestionsabout
anyone specificresearchprogram.
64. See Wallerstein
1974,1979,1991;andArrighi1994.
65. Caporaso1978a.
66. Evans 1979.
67. Packenham1992.
68. See, forexample,Haggard1990;Wade 1990;Evans 1995;andHaggardandKaufman1992,1995.
69. Fora collectionofessayson Gramsciandinternational
relations,
see Gill 1993,whichreprints
the
seminalessaybyCox 1983.
666 International
Organization
therelationship
a conceptualapparatus
betweenpowerandwealth.It offers
thatcan
be appliedbothtointemational
anddomesticdevelopments
andtotheirconnections.
Andit addressesenduiingmoralconcernsconcerning
equalityandjustice.Specific
researchprograms
generated
by a genericMarxistorientation
can,likespecificliberaland realistresearchprograms,
be calledintoquestionby problemsof variable
andempiricalevidence.Thisdoes notmean,however,
specification
thatMarxismas
a generalorientation
willnecessarily
be discarded.
Rather,
itis precisely
theheuristic
richnessofthemajorgeneralresearchorientations
thatallowsthemto be reformulatedto addresschangedempiricalandpoliticalcontexts.
The fateofa generaltheoreticalorientation
doesnotdependonthesuccessofanyonespecific
research
program.
Statism:
ReactionAgainstLiberalismandMarxism
Statismis a generaltheoretical
orientation
thathas generatedseveralspecificresearchprograms,
all ofwhichasserttheautonomy
of stateinstitutions.
Statismthus
tothesocietally
standsincontrast
oriented
domesticpoliticalperspectives
thatdominatedmuchofliberalandMarxistpoliticalanalysisinthe1970s.Statismgavegreater
thestability
attention
to stateinstitutions,
especiallythosechargedwithmaintaining
ofthepolityas a whole.The statecouldbe conceivedofas an actor,
andwell-being
notsimplyan arenain whichconflicting
to securetheir
societalinterests
struggled
prefeiTed
policyobjectives.Statescould be strongor weak,relativeto theirown
societies.70
Statistarguments
didnothavea particularly
ofthe
sophisticated
conceptualization
Statescouldbe strongin someissueareasbut
relationship
amongstateinstitutions.
weakinothers.Specifying
thetrade-off
amongdifferent
issueareaswas problematic.
Statismhaddifficulty
thenuancesofstate-society
Itdetachedthe
relations.
capturing
statenotonlyfromparticular
grouppressures
butalso fromthelargerpolityinwhich
itwas embedded.71
These empiricaldifficulties
led notto thedisappearance
of statismas a general
theoretical
orientation
buttothereformulation
ofspecificresearch
Instead
programs.
of a narrowfocuson the state,whichwas itselfa reactionto an overlysocietal
of
additionalworkanalyzedinteractions
betweendifferent
perspective,
components
thepolity.In 1988 JohnIkenbeiTy,
David Lake, and MichaelMastandunoediteda
theeffect
on U.S. foreign
economic
specialissueofIO inwhichauthors
investigated
of interest,
theabilityof stateleadersto mobilize
policyof different
configurations
societalsupport,
andtheconsequencesofideas,as wellas thediscretionary
powerof
relationsemployinga
theexecutive.72
More recently,
discussionsof state-society
and Skocpol 1985; and
70. Krasner1977, 1978. See also Katzenstein1976; Evans,Rueschemeyer,
Evans 1995.
71. In a prescient
articlethatdrewondiscoursetheory,
BruceAndrewssuggested
thatthestatecouldbe
seenas a rule-governed
social actor.This lineof analysislay dormant
formorethana decade.Andrews
1975.
72. Ikenberry,
Lake,andMastanduno1988.
The StudyofWorldPolitics 667
rationalchoiceperspective
on institutions,
especiallytheimportance
ofcommitment,
have shownthatsomeof thefactorsthatstatismidentified
as weaknesseswere,in
fact,sourcesof strength.
Democraticstatesareoftenable to extract
moreresources
fromtheirown societiesthanare autocratic
states,preciselybecause membersof
civilsocietybelievethatwhatwouldhavebeenconsidered
a weakstatewillkeepits
promises.In thisanalytic
jujitsu,thenotionthatstateswerestrong
becausetheywere
independent
oftheirsocietiesis turned
on itshead.Statescan secureresourcesfrom
theirown societiesonlyiftheyareconstrained.73
Reformulated
versionsof statism
focuson stateguidanceoftheeconomy,
thelinksbetweenpoliticalpartiesandstate
howstateinstitutions
bureaucracies,
relateto socialmovements,
andtheroleoflaw.
As a generaltheoretical
orientation,
statism
has beenrefurbished
butnotabandoned
as someofitsresearchprograms
encountered
empirical
anomalies.
Domestic Structuresand TheirRelation to theInternationalSystem
between
ofcomparative
on theconnections
Students
politicsfocusedtheirattention
domesticstructures
andinternational
whichwerebracketed
relations,
byneoliberalinformed
taxism and realism.Katzenstein,
forexample,reliedon a historically
ofstateandsocietyindifferent
politionomythatemphasized
different
constellations
cal settings.
and Moore,Katzenstein
argued
DrawinginsightsfromGerschenkron
thatearlyindustrializers
likeBritaindiffered
fromlateindustrializers
systematically
of thedominantsocial coalitionand in thedegreeof
like Japanin thecharacter
In sharpcontrast
ofstateandsociety.74
tothestatist
centralization
anddifferentiation
thatviewedstatesas actors,theanalysisofdomesticstructures
privileged
literature
Different
social coalitionsdefinethecontentof policy.
state-society
relationships.
indomestic
ontheformulaAnddifferences
policynetworks
havediscernible
effects
tionand implementation
of foreigneconomicpoliciesin different
economicissues
to thepoliticsof
suchas moneyand trade.JohnZysmanextendedthisperspective
andfinance.75
industry
scholarsanalyzedcontrasts
In variouspolicydomains,bothforeign
anddomestic,
welfarestatecapibrandofAnglo-American
betweentheliberalmarket
capitalism,
and developmental
statecapitalismin Japanand
talismon theEuropeancontinent,
EastAsia. EllenComissoandLauraTysonediteda specialissueofIO on comparativesocialism.76
Subsequently,
comparative
politicaleconomyspreadto encompass
fromsocialismin thesuccessorstatesof theSoviet
LatinAmerica,thetransitions
in the
Unionand east-central
Europe,and even theLeninistcapitalismemerging
People's Republicof China.77This body of researchspecified,in contextualand
73. See NorthandWeingast1989;Fearon1994b;andSchultz1996.
74. Katzenstein
1978.
75. Zysman1977,1983.
76. ComissoandTyson1986.
77. The literature
is too largeto be listedhere.Since theearly1980s,CornellStudiesin Political
volumeson thissubject.
Econony,forexample,comprisemorethanseventy
668 International
Organization
or corporateactorsto choose
historicaldetail,incentivesforstates,governments,
specificstrategies.
thattheinternational
state
PeterGourevitch
emphasizedthepervasiveinfluences
and
systemandtheintemational
politicaleconomycan haveon domesticstructures
lead,analystspointedto
thepolicypreferences
ofgroups.78
FollowingGourevitch's
intheworldeconomycouldaffect
twodifferent
different
waysinwhichenmeshment
structures
of polipolities:first,
involvement
couldinfluence
thebasic institutional
ties,includingtheirgoverning
norms;second,it could affectthecapabilitiesand
of different
interest
included
strategic
opportunities
groups.This researchprogram
oftheinternational
corporatism
of
analysesoftheeffects
systemon thedemocratic
thesmallEuropeanwelfarestates,on societalgroupsor economicsectors,and on
coalitions,
institutions,
ideologies,andeconomicstructures.79
to
The conceptof two-levelgameselaboratedby RobertPutnamwas one effort
andconstraints,
domesticstructures,
opportunities
systematically
integrate
systemic
andforeign
economicpolicy.80
mustsatisfy
bothother
Anyintemational
agreements
statesand domesticconstituencies.
The bargaining
powerof a statecould be enwouldonlyaccept
hancedifitsrulerscan demonstrate
thattheirdomesticsupporters
a narrow
rangeofoutcomes.In morerecentwork,AndrewMoravcsikhaselaborated
a relatedperspective
on domestic-international
interactions
thatemphasizeshowsocietalinterests
shapethepoliciesofstates.8'
One difficulty
encountered
withthislineofresearchwas theabsenceofa general
In a boldandimaginaandsystematic
forclassifying
domesticstructures.
taxonomy
tivebookRonaldRogowskioffered
one answerto thistaxonomic
issue.He applied
theelegantreasoningoftheStolper-Samuelson
modelofinternational
tradeto show
how,in general,tradepoliciesand practiceswouldaffectsocial cleavages.Exportoriented
thefactorsofproduction
withwhicha country
was
goodsusedintensively
Iftradebecamemoreopen,theabundant
factorwouldbenwell-endowed.
relatively
In
efit.If itbecamemoreclosed,therelatively
scarcefactorwouldbe advantaged.
by,andwould
generala moreopeninternational
trading
systemwouldbe supported
therelatively
abundantfactorin different
states.These changesin the
strengthen,
suchas laborand theownership
of landand
domesticpositionof different
factors,
Friedenemcapital,couldinfluence
policy.82
Usingbasicallythesamelogic,Jeffry
such as labor
of factorspecificity;
factorsof production
phasizedtheimportance
werenothomogenousbutratherwereassociatedwithspecificeconomicsectors.
andbe affected
macroeconomic
Moreover,
policy,notjusttradepolicy,couldaffect
bya country's
opennesstotheworldeconomy.83
78. Gourevitch
1978.
1984,1985; Snyder1991; Kupchan1994; andSim79. See Cameron1978; Kurth1979; Katzenstein
mons1994.
80. See Putnam1988;andEvans,Jacobson,
andPutnam1993.
81. Moravcsik1997.
82. Rogowski1989.
83. Frieden1991.
The StudyofWorldPolitics 669
Rogowski,Frieden,andotherswhofollowedtheirlead werefullyawarethattheir
perspective
offered
no easywayofincorporating
variations
in institutional
arrangethatHelenMilnerandDavid Lake,amongothers,
havesought
ments,a shortcoming
to correct.84
But theyprovideda parsimonious,
generalexplanation
thatlinksthe
worldeconomytodomesticinterests
andpolicies.Theiranalyticframework
requires
no specificknowledgeaboutcontext.
Itcanbe appliedto anypoliticalsystem.
In the
framework's
sparseformulation
thepreferences
of actorscan be read directly
off
materialstructures,
bypassingtheanalysisofpoliticalprocessesandideationalpheitrequiredinformation
nomena.Although
aboutwhichfactors
wererelatively
abundant,itdidnotrequireanyinstitutional
knowledgeaboutspecificpolities.However,
suchgeneralstructural
theories
encounter
numerous
empirical
anomalies,as Rogowski'shistorical
discussionrevealed.
and DomesticPolitics
Globalization
levelsoftransboundary
andtheirassociatedeffects,
Increasing
movements
whathas
come to be termedglobalization,
encouragea moreintimateanalyticrelationship
betweeninternational
flowsare
and domesticpolitics.Highlevelsof cross-border
notan unprecedented
development.
Labormigration
reacheditshighestlevelsinthe
nineteenth
century.
By somemeasuresinternational
capitalmarkets
weremoreintegratedat theendof thenineteenth
century
thantheyare now,sincefinancial
flows
felldramatically
withthetwo worldwarsand theGreatDepression.Tradeflows
have followeda similarpattem,increasingsharplyduringthenineteenth
century,
thenfallingin thefirst
andreachingunprecedented
levelsfor
partof thetwentieth,
somecountries,
mostnotablytheUnitedStates,inthelasttwodecadesofthetwentiethcentury.
has dramatically
reducedthecostsofcommunications.
SoTechnology
cial movements
havebeenmobilizedin specificlocalesforglobalissuessuchas the
Illicitactivities
humanrights,
andfeminism.
crime
environment,
including
organized
and tradein drugshave becomemoresalient.All of thesedevelopments,
lumped
underthelabelofglobalization,
haveaffected
bothnationalpolitiesandtheinternationalsystem.85
totheincreasing
Globalization
drawsourattention
politicalsalienceoftransboundof politiesin theinternational
aryactivities.Is thegrowingenmeshment
political
andpolicies,groupsandindividuals
morealike,or are
economymakinginstitutions
mostof theirdifferences?
Is globalizationaltering"inter"national
theyretaining
or is it fundamentally
themto "trans"national
relationsmarginally,
transforming
relations?
Thosewhoemphasizehowglobalization
is remaking
worldpoliticsstress
howpolicypreferences
andpoliticalcoalitionsat homechangeas a resultofchangs conGarrett'
inginternational
pressures.
Conversely,
analyses,including
Geoffrey
tothisissue,thatemphasizethepersistence
ofdistinctive
nationalpractices
tribution
84. See FriedenandRogowski1996,42-47; Milner1997;andLake 1996andforthcoming.
85. See KeohaneandMilner1996,10-14;FeldsteinandHorioka1980;Oman1994;Shaw 1994;Jones
1995;Rodrik1997;andObstfeldandTaylor1997.
670 International
Organization
have shownhow domesticinstitutions
blockpricesignals,freezeexistingpolitical
coalitionsandpolicies,andshapethenationalresponsetoglobalchange.86
Bothof thesearguments
focuson domesticpoliticalinstitutions,
firms,
interests
groups,and economicsectorsas unitsof analyses.An altemative
conceptualization
on therelationships
focusesnoton theunitsthemselves,
butrather
amongthemand
makesproblematic
thenatureoftheseunitsinthefirst
place.Households,communiin a gloreconstitute
themselves
ties,regions,andsocialmovements,
amongothers,
bal setting.
This conceptualization
pointsto processesof "glocalization"thatare
theidentities,
and strategies
of actorsthrough
a combination
transforming
interests,
ofglobalandlocal processesandarethusaddingnewpoliticalactorsandprocesses
toan increasingly
globalpolitics.87
of a phenomenon
howeverconceived,is a reflection
thatscholars
Globalization,
associatedwithIPE have recognizedsincetheinceptionof thefield:international
anddomesticpoliticscannotbe isolatedfromeachother.Neorealists
andneoliberals
did notincorporate
domesticpoliticsintotheirtheoretical
butthey
formulations,
neverdenieditsimportance.
Statesdidnotall respondinthesamewaytotheopportunitiesand constraints
presented
by theinternational
system.Studiesof domestic
of whatneorealistsand neoliberalstookfor
politicsenhancedour understanding
intheirtheories
inthe1980s:"statepreferences."
analygranted
Domesticstructure
in twopossiblycomplementary
sis suggestedthatpreferences
couldbe understood
of the
normsor as theaggregations
ways: eitheras theresultof institutionalized
preferences
ofindividuals,
firms,
andgroups.Historical-institutional
researchon the
ofdomesticstructures
andtheintemational
reciprocaleffects
politicaleconomyhas
beencomplemented
bya decidedlyeconomicandmaterialist
variantthatpaysvirtutotheroleofideas,norms,
andinstitutions.
allyno attention
Different
interpretations
oftheprocessofglobalization
reflect
thisdifference
in orientation.
A Post-Cold War Opening:Rationalism
and SociologyRevisited
EvenduringtheCold War,therewas substantial
withreigning
realist
dissatisfaction
andliberalapproachestointernational
relations,
especiallyoutsidetheUnitedStates
and in therelatedfieldof comparative
politics.The end of the Cold War was a
inseveralways.Itraisednewissuesfortheongoingrationalist
catalyst
debate,which
pittedrealists,who stressedtheroleof coercion,againstliberals,who emphasized
contractual
The endoftheCold Waralso openedup spaceforcultural
relationships.
to as "constructivist,"
and sociologicalperspectives,
oftenrefeffed
thathad been
neglectedbybothrealistsand liberals.Andthediscussionsthatensuedhighlighted
of rationalism
betweenpossiblepointsof complementarity
conceptualdifferences
andconstructivism.
86. See KeohaneandMilner1996; Garrett
andLange 1995 (reprinted
in KeohaneandMilner1996);
PaulyandReich1997;andSamuels1994.
87. See Rosenau1990,1997;andAppadurai1996.
The StudyofWorldPolitics 671
Rationalism:
Realismand Liberalism
AftertheCold War
Realismhas beennotonlya salientgeneraltheoretical
orientation
butalso partofa
moreenduringnormative
discourse,like liberalismand constructivism,
aboutthe
mostappropriate
way to securepeace, stability,
andjusticein humansociety.Its
self-conscious
intellectual
pedigreeis longandimpressive.
It willnotdisappear.
However,recentdevelopments
in worldpoliticsandwithinspecificresearchprogramshaveconfronted
realismwithmuchgreater
challengesthanithas facedsince
ofIO. Forrealism,powerandconflict
thefounding
areinherent
aspectsof internationalpolitics.Theinterests
ofstateswilldiffer.
Forceandcoercionarealwaysavailable options.The astonishingly
peacefulendoftheCold Warandthecollapseofthe
SovietUnionare notwhata realistwouldhave expected.88
Realismhas notbeen
fortheendoftheCold Waris thatSoviet
silent,ofcourse.The simplest
explanation
powerdeclined;theSovietUnionwas a challenger
thatcouldno longerchallenge.
Predictions
aboutrelativechangesin statecapability
haverarelybeenincorporated
intorealistresearchprograms,
and realismdid notpredictthisdecline.89
Realists,
especiallyWaltz,haveemphasizedtheimportance
ofnuclearweaponsinaltering
the
likelihood
ofwar.Withsecuresecond-strike
itis moreevidentnowthanat
capability,
anyothertimein humanhistory
thata conflict
amongthemajorpowerswouldreduce thewell-beingof all states.At least some observersview thissituationas a
in the
changein thenatureof theinternational
systemitself,notjust an alteration
ofindividual
Froma realistperspective,
ina nonnuclear
world
characteristics
states.90
itwouldhavebeenmuchriskier
fortheSovietUniontoabandonitsempireineastern
Europeandforanyleaderto breakup theSovietUnionitself,actsthatwouldhave
leftevenRussia'scoreterritory
toinvasion.
morevulnerable
inthe1980sanalystsworking
withina realistframework
werearguNevertheless,
ingthatbipolarity
wouldcontinue.
Andtheyassumedthatneither
pole coulddisapWhentheSovietUniondid collapse,realistswereskepticalabout
pearpeacefully.
therobustness
of international
institutions,
especiallythoserelatedto international
in theinternasuchas NATO,andtheprospects
forcontinued
security,
cooperation
outmuchbetter
thanrealists
tionaleconomy.
Overthelastdecadethingshaveturned
hadanyrighttoexpect.91
The challengesto realismpresented
by thepeacefulend of theCold Warwere
salienceofneorealism
as a specificresearchprogram.
aggravated
bytheintellectual
was to forceanalyststo makea fundamental
Waltz'smostimportant
contribution
distinction
betweenwhathe calledstructural
andreductionist
Waltzwas,
arguments.
ofdomesticpoliticalfactors,
ofcourse,awareoftheimportance
buthe insistedthat
neorealism
was concernedonlywiththedistribution
of poweramongstates.States
88. See Lebow 1994;andStein1994.
89. Wohlforth
1994.
90. See Waltz1990;andSnyder1996.
91. See Mearsheimer
1990;andWaltz1993.See also Mearsheimer
1994andthesubsequent
exchange
inInternational
Security.
672 International
Organization
wereinterested
in security,
notin expandingtheirpower.Treating
all statesas ifthe
international
relations
goalswerethesamewas a departure
fromearlierrealistdiscussion,muchofwhichhadbeenbasedon theassertion
thatitwas necessaryto distinThe conflict
guishbetweenrevisionist
and statusquo states.92
betweentheSoviet
withbotha strictly
neorealist
Unionand theUnitedStateswas consistent
analysis
that
(thepoles in a bipolarworldwouldbe in conflict)and withrealistarguments
positedtheimportance
ofexogenously
givenvariations
instateobjectives(a revisionistSovietUnionwouldbe inconflict
witha statusquo UnitedStates).
Withtheend of theCold War,neorealismoffered
less purchaseon international
invariations
conflict
thatappearedtobe embeddedprimarily
inthegoalsofstatesor,
inthecase ofethnicconflict,
substate
actors.Manyscholarsarguedthatthematerialistassumptions
ofneorealist
itfromexplaining
analysisprevented
therapidchanges
observedin core nationalsecurity
issues.Accordingto theseauthors,historically
constructed
norms,ideas,and discoursesneededto be analyzedbeforeone could
make sense of patterns
and changein worldpolitics.93
of stability
Some realists
thatall
responded
tothischallengebyrejecting
thesparseassumption
ofneorealism
stateswouldseeksecurity
andembracing
insteadtherecognition
thatstateobjectives
notsystemic
couldvarybecauseofdomestic,
factors.
States'goalscouldbe aggresTheextent
siveorpassive,revolutionary
ortolerant.
to
orstatusquo,ethnonationalist
whichthepresenceof revisionist
stateswouldresultin confrontations,
especially
of materialpowerin theinternational
war,would stilldependon thedistribution
a manisystem.The rulersof greedystateswouldnotcommitsuicideby attacking
festlystronger
enemy.Butknowledgeof thedistribution
ofpoweralonewouldnot
allowanalyststounderstand
ofinternational
conflict
patterns
andcooperation.94
The burgeoning
of ethnicconflictin thelast decade has presented
thekindsof
thatrealistperspectives
weredesignedtoanalyze,although
notnecessarily
problems
withstatesas themostsalientactors.Ethnicconflicts
havearisenbetweenstatesand
inenvironments
whereauthority
amonggroupswithinstates,albeitgroupsoperating
structures
have erodedor disappearedand wheresecurity
dilemmasoperateat the
of variations
in
substatelevel.95However,thisreturn
to a focuson theimportance
stateobjectives(ofwhichethnicconflict
is onlyone example),as a resultoffactors
realist
of powerin thesystemas a whole,confronts
exogenousto thedistribution
shouldexist-a chalanalysiswiththechallengeofexplaining
whysuchvariations
a moresystematic
of realismwith
lengethatcan onlybe metthrough
integration
domesticpolitics.
In international
politicaleconomythespecificresearchprogramsthatreflecta
ofcoercionthat
orientation
havefocusedon thepossibility
generalrealisttheoretical
can leave someactorsworseoff,on theconsequencesof bargaining
asymmetries,
and on theproblemsof commitment
in an anarchicenvironment.
Some of these
of constructivist
More
theinfluence
or liberalperspectives.
specificprojectsreflect
92.
93.
94.
95.
See Morgenthau
1948,chap.2, 3; andSchweller1996.
See Katzenstein
1996b;andLapidandKratochwil
1996.
Forexample,Frankel1996.
See FearonandLaitin1996;andPosen 1993a.
The StudyofWorldPolitics 673
thatweakeractorshave
powerful
statesmaybe in a positiontoaltertheconceptions
oftheirownself-interest,
especiallywheneconomicandmilitary
powerhas delegitimatedideologicalconvictions
in weakerordefeatedpolities.The UnitedStates,for
instance,pressedfora particular
visionof how international
societyshouldbe orthisprojectaftertheendof
deredafterWorldWarII andrenewedandreinvigorated
but
theCold War.The goal was notsimplytopromote
a particular
setofobjectives,
toalterhowothersocietiesconceivedoftheirowngoals.ThisemphasisonwhatNye
hascalledsoftpowerengagesbothconventional
realistconcernsaboutrelativecapabilitiesandconstructivism's
focuson beliefsandidentity.96
in some
Powerful
statescan also alterstrategic
optionsin waysthatskewpayoffs
cases by unilaterally
changingtheirown policies.97
Theymaybe able to establish
institutional
arrangements
thatprecludecertaininitiatives
or facilitate
thestrategic
to engagein
use ofinformation.98
Commitment
problemsmaymakestatesreluctant
intheshortterm,especiallyif
thatprovidethemwithabsolutebenefits
arrangements
theymaybe relatively
worseoffin the long term.If a state'sfuturebargaining
leveragewouldbe compromised,
itmightrejectimmediate
gainsbecauseofitsanxiofagenda
etyaboutpotential
future
losses.99
Arguments
emphasizing
theimportance
andstrategic
arebasedonthesamegame-theoretic
setting,
uncertainty,
manipulation
emformulations
thathaveguidedmuchrecentworkfrommoreliberalperspectives
phasizingthemutualbenefits
of cooperation.
In thepost-ColdWar worldrealist
in stateobjectivesand to a more
projectshavebecomemoresensitiveto variations
setofrelationships
betweenabsolutegainsanddistributional
conflicts.
complicated
Neoliberalinstitutionalism
thattheendoftheColdWarwould
correctly
anticipated
notundermine
suchinstitutions
as NATO andtheEuropeanUnion,so it didnotgo
an "agonizingreappraisal"suchas thatexperienced
through
by somerealists.Insuch as
deed, institutionalists
began to applytheirtheoryto securityinstitutions
terms.100
alliancesandto interpret
And,as
post-ColdWarpoliticsin institutionalist
thearticlesin thisissue by Lisa Martinand BethSimmonsand by Helen Milner
fromotherfields,notably
workdrewheavilyon scholarship
indicate,institutionalist
morerigorous.
workis so
U.S. politics,tobecometheoretically
Sinceinstitutionalist
thereis no needforus toreviewitindetailhere.
welldiscussedinthesetwoarticles,
as indicating
Brevityshouldnotbe interpreted
insignificance.
years,
Institutionalist
thinking
hasmadea bigimpactonIPE duringthelastfifteen
a set of researchprogramsthathave illuminated
relationships
among
stimulating
But it was of less valuein understanding
shifting
interests,
power,and institutions.
hadforsevAdvocatesofdomesticstructure
identity
politicsafterwards.
approaches
relationsresearch,
eraldecadescriticizedinternational
includingneoliberalinstituor identities
of theactorswhomit
fortakingforgrantedthepreferences
tionalism,
forexample,to the
no attention,
studied.Neoliberalinstitutionalism
paid virtually
96. See Nye 1990;andIkenberry
andKupchan1990.
97. See ScottandLake 1989;andNau 1990.
98. Morrow1994b.
99. Fearon1995.
100. See Keohane,Nye,andHoffmann
1993;andWallander1998.
674 International
Organization
phenomenon
ofnationalism.
Anditcouldnotcapturethefactthatduringthe1980s
increasedinterest
in humanrightsand environmental
issuesseemeddrivenlargely
After1989,somerationalists
bynormative
concerns.
begantothinkofideasas variables thataffected
thesolutionsto games-forinstance,
or
byreducinguncertainty
'0' Ideas couldbe incorporated
focalpoints.
framework
providing
intoaninstitutional
howparticular
becomeinstitutionalized
byemphasizing
conceptions
and,therefore,
Sinceitwas notweddedexclusively
persistovertime.'02
to a materialist
conception
of structure,
neoliberalism
could engagesomeof theissuesof changingbeliefsor
identities
posedbyendoftheCold War.
TheRevivalofSociologicaland CulturalPerspectives
Sociologicalperspectives
have alwaysbeenimportant
forcomparative
politicsand
haveneverbeencompletely
absentfrominternational
studies.In Europe,wherethe
boundary
betweeninternational
anddomesticpoliticswas neverparticularly
salient,
thesociologicalbentofscholarship
differed
fromprevailing
Americanperspectives.
This was true,forexample,of Scandinavianand Germanpeace research,which
intheUnitedStatesandwas oftenregarded
remained
largelyunnoticed
as politically
suspectwhenread.The theoretical
contributions
of theFrenchSchool,represented
byStanleyHoffmann's
writings
andthoseofRaymond
Aron,especiallyinthe1950s
and 1960s,andof theBritishSchool,clustering
in the1970sand 1980saroundthe
of HedleyBull and MartinWight,remaineduninterested
in the debates
writings
betweenthegeneraltheoretical
orientations
thatdominated
Americanscholarship,
suchas realismand liberalism.103
These schoolsof thought
wereat odds withthe
emphasisin Americaninternational
relationsscholarship
on clearlystatedcausal
propositions
andtheirsystematic
exploration
inmethodologically
rigorous
ways.
In theUnitedStatesRuggiepublisheda seriesofpapersdemonstrating
thevalue
of a sociologicalorientation.
He arguedthatthepostwarinternational
economicrewhathe termed
gimereflected
embeddedliberalism,
identified
bya sharedintersubthatopeninternational
markets
wouldbe tempered
jectiveunderstanding
bytheneed
to maintainsocial stability.
He criticized
Waltz'stheoryforitslack of sociological
withFriedrich
contentand forfailingto explainsystemicchange.'04
And,together
he pointedoutthatanalystshad failedto investigate
thesharedunderKratochwil,
thatled to theconvergence
of actorexpectations
on which,by someacstandings
ofprinciples
counts,regimestability
depended.Theyarguedalso thatthetreatment
andnormsas "independent"
or "intervening"
variables,linkingmaterialstructures
to outcomes,was noteasilyaccommodated
foundations
withintheepistemological
ofinstitutional
andnormative
Kratochwil
andNicholasOnuf
analysis.Subsequently,
101. See GoldsteinandKeohane1993b;andGarrett
andWeingast1993.
102. Goldstein1993,1996.See also Hall 1989b;andSikkink1991,1993a,b.
103. Raymond
Aron'smassivesociologicalstudyofwarandpeacedidnotplaya majorroleingraduate
in theUnitedStates,andHedleyBull's majorbookon intemational
training
societyhadlittleimpactuntil
abouta decadeafteritspublication.
See Aron1966;Bull 1977;andHoffmann
1986,1987.
104. Ruggie1983a,b,1998.
The StudyofWorldPolitics 675
putforward
a conception
ofrulesinformed
by,amongothers,
philosophy,
linguistics,
105And in severalpapersWendtsuggested
and sociology.
a social theory
ofinternationalrelations
thatengagedtheclaimsofneorealism
headon.106
This sociologicalturnwas intellectually
deeplyindebtedto fieldsof scholarship
well beyondtheconfinesof IPE. Philosophy,
structural
linguistics,
criticaltheory,
geography,
scienceand technology
studies,postmodern
politicaltheory,
anthropolall had,in different
ogy,mediastudies,andliterary
criticism,
amongothers,
though
relatedways,grappledwiththeprojectof modernity
gone awryin thetwentieth
Thereis a growing
relations
andin security
century.'07
bodyofworkin intemational
studiesbut,significantly,
notyetinIPE thatis self-conscious
inconducting
empirical
researchfroma constructivist
perspective.
Sociologicalworkfallsintothreebroad
108
clusters:conventional,
critical,
andpostmodern.
Conventional
constructivists
insistthatsociologicalperspectives
offera general
thatcan rivalor complement
theoretical
orientation
and specificresearchprograms
In thisviewa fullunderstanding
rationalism.
ofpreferences
requiresan analysisof
areconstituted.
thesocialprocessesbywhichnormsevolveandidentities
Sincethey
constitute
structures
emphasizehow ideationalor normative
agentsand theirinterfromrationalists
on questionsofonests,conventional
constructivists
differ
sharply
aremutually
conconstructivists
insistthatagentsandstructure
tology.Furthermore,
stitutive
andthushopeto givesocial sciencea moredynamicconception
ofchange
no great
ofsystemstructures.
On issuesofepistemology
andmethodology,
however,
differences
divideconventional
constructivists
fromrationalists.
is theresearchprogramof the
Outstanding
amongconstructivist
contributions
sociologistJohnMeyerand his colleagues.Informed
by a cognitiveapproachto
an astonishing
worldculture,
thisresearchprogram
demonstrated
degreeofsimilarto issuesas diverseas censuses,socialsecuityin formalnationalpractices
relating
in nationalsocioeconomicand
rity,education,and sciencedespitegreatvariations
For Meyerand his associates,thekeyto understanding
ideologicalcharacteristics.
thisstoryis thescriptof modernity,
oftenpresented
by international
organizations,
whichsuggested
tonationalleaderswhatpoliciestheyoughttoadoptiftheywanted
toappear,tothemselves
tobe modernandprogressive.'09
andothers,
a numSociologicallyinclinedscholarshaveinrecentyearsanalyzedempirically
berof cases to bolsterthisresearchprogram
in international
relationsand security
as acceptstudies.Slaveryandchildlabor,forexample,wereacceptedformillennia
ablesocialpractices;
inthecourseofbarelya century
with
theybecameincompatible
105. See Kratochwil
andRuggie1986;Onuf1989;andKratochwil
1989,especiallychap.4.
106. Wendt1992andforthcoming.
107. For a brilliant
discussionof theconstructivist
perspective
froma philosophicalstandpoint,
see
Searle1995.
108. We choosethethreecategorieshereforheuristic
purposesand in fullawarenessof thefactthat
considerabledifferences
existwithineach of theseclusters,bordersbetweenclustersare porous,and
scholarsmaychangepositionsin different
publications.
Ourdiscussionis influenced
byPriceandReusSmit1998;andHopf1998.
109. See Meyer1980;Thomas,Meyer,Ramirez,andBoli 1987;Strang1991;andFinnemore
1996a,b.
676 International
Organization
civilizedsociety.110
International
warmaypossiblybe relegated
toa similarstatus.111
Halfa century
ago it was normaland appropriate
forJapaneseand Germanyoung
mentovolunteer
todie foremperor
andfatherland.
By the1990stheinstitutionalizationof identities
and normsthathave markedJapaneseand Germanpoliticssince
1945 makesuchindividualchoicesand social practicesa rareexception.112In nationalsecurity
studiesa growingnumberofmostlyyounger
scholarsaddressedconventionaltopics-such as thespreadof weaponsof mass destruction,
deterrence,
armsraces,strategic
or alliancepolitics-withunconventional
culture,
sociological
and culturalapproaches.113And duringthelast two decades feminists
have been
successfully
redefining
themeaningof humanrightsto encompassgenderidentities.'14
Conventional
constructivist
studieshavefocusedbothon criticalhistorical
juncturesfromwhichnew structural
arrangements
emergeand on interactions
between
existingstructures
and agents.Ruggie'shistorical
arguments
aboutthereplacement
offeudalism
bythemodernstatesystemhavemadea majorimpacton international
relations
theory.115
Recentanalysesof how actorsand structures
are reproduced
in
contemporary
worldpoliticsincludestudieson Japanesenormsindicating
thatdrasticchangesinJapan'ssecurity
andstudieson changesin
policiesarehighlyunlikely
normsaboutweaponsindicating
thatsomeclassesofweaponsmaybe seenas illegitimate,regardless
oftheirstrategic
usefulness.116
As a generaltheoretical
orientation
constructivist
researchilluminates
thesources
forexample,has formulated
ofbothconflict
and cooperation.
lain Johnston,
a constructivist
militant
thatseeksto accountforChina'sconsistently
argument
security
The balanceof materialcapabilitiesin theinternational
strategy.
systemchanged
overthelastdecadesandcenturies;
China'sparabellum
culturedid
greatly
strategic
a compellingexplanation
of security
not.Hence it is thelatterthatoffers
policy.117
in hiswriting
andrealistinsights
Similarly,
HenryNau has combinedconstructivist
toaddresscentralelements
inU.S. foreign
policy.118
ofhumannature,
criticalconstructivists
In rejecting
rationalist
conceptions
agree
conon theissue of ontology.
Like conventional
withconventional
constructivists
in how actorsand systemsare constituted
and costructivists,
theyare interested
issuesthatinclude,besidesnationevolve.Theirresearch
focusesonidentity
program
andsexuality.
Criticalconstructivists
alism,subjectssuchas race,ethnicity,
religion,
ofsocialscientific
basedonempirical
research.
also acceptthepossibility
knowledge
offormulating
Theyare,however,
deeplyskepticalofthepossibility
generalcoveraboutappropriate
researchmethodologies.
Instituinglaws,andtheyarepluralistic
110. KeckandSikkink1998.
111. Mueller1989.
112. See Katzenstein
1996a;andBerger1996.
in Katzenstein
1996b.See also Kier1997.
113. See thecontributions
114. See Tickner1992;andKeckandSikkink1998.
115. Ruggie1983a.
116. See Katzenstein
1996a;andPrice1997.
117. Johnston
1995a.
118. Nau 1990,1997.
The StudyofWorldPolitics 677
contionalarrangements,
norms,and identities
are embeddedin specifichistorical
an
textsthatcan varyso dramatically
thattheycan onlybe investigated
through
ideographic
ratherthana nomothetic
approach.Emphasisis placedon thedetailed
studyof textsto understand
thesymbolicsystemsthatgovernactors'discourses,
rather
thanon an analysisofa largenumber
ofcases.119
Criticalconstructivists
insistthatscholars'workhas normative
consequences.A
scientist
strainof
maytrytofinda cureforcancerorinsteaddevelopa morevirulent
anthrax.
This choice,however,does notalterthemechanisms
thatcause canceror
anthrax.
Criticalconstructivists,
however,
understand
theirprojectnotsimplyas rethatexistindependent
oftheinvestigator,
butalso as havingthe
vealingrelationships
to altertheserelationships
themselves.
potential
are developinga researchprogram
thatis generating
Criticalconstructivists
new
and significant
issuesin worldpoliticsforwhichrationalist
insightson important
answers.Forexample,constructivists
offer
analysishas lackedcompelling
analyses
ofthetransformative
shiftfromthemedievaltothemodemstatesystem;oftheend
on the
oftheCold Waras a recent,
thatsystem;andeffects
significant
changewithin
in themoralpurposesof statesand different
international
systemof variations
sysfromthe
temsofprocedural
aboutissuesranging
justice.120Constructivist
arguments
roleofnormsinsanctions
againstSouthAfricatowhychemicalweaponsareviewed
as "weaponsofmassdestruction"
evenwhentheirdestructive
powermaybe smaller
thanthatof "conventional"
andchallengerationalist
acweaponsbothcomplement
121
counts.
Thisresearchprogram
is opento rationalist
critiqueson theuse of evidenceand
thelimitsofinterpretation,
thepossibility
andthestatusofgeneralizations,
theuse of
andproblemsofvariability
altemative
andcomparability.
Rationalists
explanations,
This
mayviewcriticalconstructivists
working
closelywithtextsas postmodernists.
is a mistaken
impression.
Whatseparatescriticalconstructivism
andpostmodernism
is notthesharedfocuson discourse,
buttheacknowledgment
bycriticalconstructivistsofthepossibility
ofa socialscienceanda willingness
toengageopenlyin scholarlydebatewithrationalism.
On bothscorespostmodemists
differ
whom
sharplyfromcriticalconstructivists,
andpositivism
inrationalism
thebackpostmodernists
chargewithbringing
through
foranyknowledge.
door.122
Postmodernists
insistthatthereis no firmfoundation
orethicaljudgments,
Sincethereis nopositionfromwhichtopassscientific
postmodernistanalysisis restricted
to thetaskof unmasking
thepowerrelationsthatare
concealedinall knowledge
theirown,andall formsofcommunicaclaims,including
tiverationality.
Througha close analysisof language,postmodernism
pointsour
totheinherent
ofall symbolicandpoliticalorders.Sincesubjects
attention
instability
theworldthrough
onlyunderstand
language,andcontroloflanguageimpliespower,
119. See Risse 1997;andAdlerandBamett1998.
120. See Ruggie1983a,1992,1998;KoslowskiandKratochwil
1994;Risse-Kappen1994;andReusSmitforthcoming.
121. See Klotz 1995c;andPrice1997.
122. George1994.
678 International
Organization
linguistic
presentations
arealwaysopentocognitive
andpoliticalprocessesofdestabilization.
Postmodernist
instability.
Itis
analysisseeksoutthesesourcesofpotential
in decentering
interested
establisheddiscourse,includingitsown,by payingattentiontowhatis marginal
orsilent.
bothinside
Sincethemid-1980s,postmodernist
analysishas grownsubstantially
in thehumanities.
RichardAshandoutsideoftheUnitedStates,although
primarily
ley was one of thefirstin international
relationswho suggestedthatneorealism's
visiondetermined
notonlyinternational
relations
researchbutalso diplototalizing
macy.Thus,it obscuredissues of humanagencyto whichrealismhad remained
oftheanalytical
andideologiresponsive.123
Forpostmodernism,
reality
is a creation
cal categoriesthrough
whichthattheoryperceivestheworldand in thenameof
ofcommunicative
whichitexercisesa coercivepowerthatprecludestheemergence
rationality.
to an
Littleof thisdebatewas publishedin IO, since IO has been committed
thatpostmodernism
denies:theuse of evidenceto adjudicatebetween
enterprise
truth
claims.In contrast
to conventional
andcriticalconstructivism,
postmodernism
relations
fallsclearlyoutsideof thesocial scienceenterprise,
and in intemational
to
research
itrisksbecomingself-referential
anddisengaged
fromtheworld,protests
thecontrary
notwithstanding.
ofthis
influence
Yetitis easyto underestimate
thedirectimportance
andindirect
intellectual
cuiTent.
Postmodernism
has foundmanyadherents
bothin thebroader
international
studiesfieldin theUnitedStatesand in Europewheremajorjoumals
andbookseriesarededicatedtopublishing
theresultsofthiswork.Especiallyyounnotso mucha "turn"but
haveexperienced
gerscholarsofconstructivist
persuasion
an evolutionofviewsthatwas rootedin thepostmodernist
challenge.The powerof
ofsocial scienceresearchin theUnitedStates
therationalist
andempiricist
currents
makescriticalengagement
withrationalism
morecompelling
thanisolation.Hence,
indifferent
andcriticalconstructivists
havepositioned
themwaysbothconventional
such as
selves quite self-consciously
betweenrationalist
theoretical
orientations,
orientations.124
realismorliberalism,
andpostmodernist
andResearchComplementarities
Terminological
Differences
andrationalism
Boththedifferences
andcomplementarities
betweenconstructivism
orientations
a producbetweenthesetwotheoretical
promisetomaketheinteraction
Bothare concernedwithwhatin ordinary
tivepointof contestation.
languageare
thisconceptin different
calledbeliefs,buttheyunderstand
waysand use different
arepreferences,
termsin theiranalyses.The keytermsforrationalists
information,
areidentities,
The keytermsforconstructivists
andcommonknowledge.
strategies,
a waytounderandinterests.
Rationalist
orientations
do notoffer
norms,
knowledge,
do notprovidea waytoanalyze
standcommonknowledge.
Constructivist
arguments
123. Ashley1984.
124. See Katzenstein
1996a,b;andAdler1997.
The StudyofWorldPolitics 679
strategies.
Yetbothstrategy
andcommonknowledgeareusuallynecessary
tounderstandpoliticaloutcomes.We first
discussterminology,
thenturnto somedifferences
and complementarities
in how rationalists
and constructivists
analyzetherole of
beliefs.
Terminology. All rationalists
relyon theassumption
ofinstrumental
rationality
to
providethecruciallinkbetweentheenvironment
and actorbehavior.Gametheory
providesa usefullanguageforrationalist
analysismoregenerally.
Forgametheory
to
offer
a tractable
analyticframework
itmustassumethatactorshavecommonknowledge. Theyall sharethesame view of thegame,includingthepayoffmatrix,
the
choicepoints,thetypesofactorstheyareplayingagainst,andtheprobabilstrategic
ityof each type.Playersknowtheoptionsfromwhichtheycan choose.If theyare
uncertain
aboutthenatureoftheiropponent,
theymayhavetheopportunity
toupdate
theirprobability
assessments
as thegameprogresses
becauseof information
thatis
revealedbythemovestakeninthegame.Givenpreferences,
probabilities,
andchoice
points,itis possibleto derivea completesetof strategies,
choicesthatplayerswill
makeat everynodein thegame,and equilibrium
outcomes,of whichtheremaybe
many.
All rationalists
use theassumption
of rationality
to providethecruciallinkbetweenfeaturesof theenvironment-power,
and institutional
interests,
rules-and
actorbehavior.Buton theissueoftheimportance
ofinformation,
theyaredivided.
Rationalists
who subscribeto a materialist
view of how to studytheinternational
politicaleconomy,
suchas RogowskiandFrieden,
assumepreferences
formorewealth
and inferstrategies
fromstructure,
especiallythecompetitive
positionsof factors,
sectors,or firmsin theworldpoliticaleconomy.125Variationsin information
are
in theiranalysis.These authorsexpectactorsto understand
unimportant
theworld
and theydo notconceptualizeactors'choicesin termsof gametheory
accurately,
involving
interdependent
decisions.
In contrast,
rationalists
whosethinking
is moreindebtedto gametheoryemphasize theimportance
of imperfect
information
and strategic
interaction.
Theystress
howchangesininformation
can accountforvariations
in strategies,
evenifthepreferencesof actorsremainunchanged.
Smallchangesin information
can have a profoundimpacton equilibrium
outcomes.Institutions
or rulescan be consequential
becausetheycan alterinformation
and empowerplayersto set theagenda,make
andacceptorrejectthefinalpackage.126
amendments,
Constructivists
insiston theprimacyof intersubjective
structures
thatgive the
materialworldmeaning.127These structures
havedifferent
components
thathelpin
theinterests
specifying
thatmotivate
action:norms,
identity,
andculture.
knowledge,
Normstypicallydescribecollectiveexpectations
with"regulative"effectson the
125. See Rogowski1989;andFrieden1991.
126. See Shepsle 1986; Morrow1994b; and Fearon1995. It shouldbe noted,however,thatgametheoretic
rationalism
typically
showsthatmultipleequilibriaexist,whichundermines
anydeterministic
predictions
ofbehavior.
127. Katzenstein
1996b.
680 International
Organization
properbehaviorofactorswitha givenidentity.
In somesituations
normsoperatelike
rulesthatdefinetheidentity
of actors;theyhave "constitutive"
effects
thatspecify
theactionsthatwillcauserelevant
otherstorecognizea particular
identity.
Epistemic
knowledgeis also partof a social processby whichthematerialworldacquires
meaning.Finally,cultureis a broadlabelthatdenotescollectivemodelsofauthority
or identity,
cairiedby customor law. Culturerefersto bothevaluativestandards
(suchas normsand values)and cognitivestandards
(suchas rulesandmodels)that
definethesocialactorsthatexistin a system,
howtheyoperate,andhowtheyrelate
tooneanother.
Constructivist
researchis notcutfromone cloth,as Finnemore
andSikkinkargue
in thisissue.Conventional
andcriticalconstructivist
analysesoftenfocuson different componentsof a commonconstructivist
researchprogram-norms,
identity,
andculture-and,inempirical
accorddifferent
knowledge,
research,
weightstoeach
ofthem.Andtheyaredividedonwhether
therelationship
betweenthesecomponents
is definitional,
are reflected
conceptual,
causal,or empirical.These disagreements
also intheinevitable
tensions
thataccompany
their
toengagerationalism,
jointeffort
in theapproacheach takesto issuesof epistemology
and
despitesomedifferences
methodology.
Commonknowledge:A pointofcomplementarity.Rationalism
andconstructivismaregenerictheoretical
thatarecomplementary
onsomecrucialpoints.
orientations
Game-theoretic
rationalists
assumetheexistenceofactors,whohavepreextypically
and who sharecommonknowledgeof thegame,whichenables
istingpreferences
themtoengageinstrategic
Constructivist
research
focusesonthesources
bargaining.
ofactors'identities-ingame-theoretic
theirpreferences-and
terms,
oftheirinterofthecontext
oftheiraction:commonknowledge.
pretations
Hence,rationalism
and
constructivism
sharean interest
inbeliefsorknowledge.
Game theoryprovidesa vocabularyand a visualimagethathighlight
notonly
whererationalist
andconstructivist
arguments
partwaysbutalso wheretheymight
cometogether.
thenatureoftheactorsin the
Anyrationalist
analysismuststipulate
theirpreferences
senseof specifying
and theircapabilities.Whatdo actorsdesire?
Whatmovescan theymake?Moreover,foranyformalgametheoretic
analysisto
work,it is necessaryto assumecommonknowledge.The playershaveto sharethe
sameknowledge
aboutthegame.Theymustknowwhattheydo notknowbecauseof
andtheymustsharethesameviewofthepayoff
matrixand
imperfect
information,
theavailablesetof strategies.
Rationalist
accountsmakeverylimitedclaimsabout
theinsights
intotheoriginsofsuchcommonknowledge.
theycan offer
accountssuggestthatnormative
structures
canbe generated
from
Somerationalist
that
been
material
interests.
institutions have
createdto promote
David Kreps,for
has arguedthatwhathe termscorporate
cultureis developedbecauseitis
instance,
The
impossibletofullyspecifythedutiesofemployeesinanycomplexenvironment.
to be written.
worldis too complicatedforcompletecontracts
Corporateculture
notcovprovidesa setofnormsor guidelinesthatcan guidebehaviorin situations
The StudyofWorldPolitics 681
eredby formalarrangements.'28
FollowingDavid Humeand Blaise Pascal,Robert
Sugdenpointsoutthatpracticesinitially
developedtopromotespecificinterests
can
acquirea normative
elementif theyare widelyunderstood
and practicedwithina
givensocial setting.'29
An actorwhoviolatesexistingpracticeswillbe normatively
Thisis a lineof analysisthatputs
sanctioned
by othermembersof thecommunity.
rationalists
at theborderof constructivism.
Normsare based on materialinterests,
buttheycan takeon an auraofauthority
thattranscends
theirinitialpurpose.
Normscan also be consequential,
becausetheycan providefocalpointsin situationsof multipleequilibria;thatis, wherethereare manypossiblesolutionsto the
are verycommonin gamesof
game.Game theoryhas shownthatsuchsituations
A rationalist
incompleteinformation.
analysiscan stipulatethatone of theseoutcomescan be chosen,butit does nottellus whichone it will be. Sharedcultural
normsoffer
onewayofselectingwhichequilibrium
willbe salientfortheplayers.'30
In thelate1950sThomasSchelling,
thenteachingatYale,askedaboutforty
acquaintanceswhereandwhentheywouldmeeta friendin New YorkCity;morethanhalf
on theinformation
coordinated
boothat GrandCentralStation(wherethetrains
fromNew Haven)atnoon.'3'Forprofessors
in 1959,
arrived
atColumbiaUniversity
thetimemighthave been thesame,butGrandCentralStationwouldhardlyhave
been as salient.Commonknowledgeis contextualized
withina specificsocial setting.
Not all commonknowledgecan be explainedby practicesand institutions
deforexample,by resolvingproblemsof mulsignedto maximizematerialinterests,
tipleequilibria.Normsthatdefinetheoptionsavailableto players,and thatshape
theirpreferences,
areoftenpriorto theseinstrumental
For
practicesandinstitutions.
thelaborofconqueredlands
example,slaverywas a conventional
optionforsecuring
in earlierperiods;it is notan optionforcontemporary
states.Capturing
slaves as
of
spoilsof war is no longeran availablemove.The medievalguilds,theholders.
theburghersof Amsterdam,
Englishcapitalin the late seventeenth
century,
and
MichaelMilkenwereall concernedaboutenhancing
theirmaterialwealth,butthe
optionsavailabletothem(themovestheycouldmake)werehardlythesame.
seekto understand
areformedandknowledgeis
Constructivists
howpreferences
Constructivism
generated,
priorto theexerciseof instrumental
rationality.
analyzes
referto as comdiscoursesandpracticesthatcontinuously
recreatewhatrationalists
monknowledge.
Constructivists
do notemphasizemisperception:
cognitiveoremotionalbiasesthatdistort
andcanbe corrected
theanalysisofnew
rationality
through
information.'32
in thecollectiveprocessesthatstudents
of
Theyaremoreinterested
socialpsychology
have identified.'33
Constructivists
focuson discursiveand social
128. Kreps1990a.
129. Sugden1989.Sugdenmentions
Hume'sargument
intheeighteenth
Pascalmadea similar
century.
a century
argument
earlier;see N. Keohane1980,278-81.
130. Ferejohn1991.
131. Schelling1960,55-56.
132. Jervis1976.
133. Janis1983.
682 International
Organization
practicesthatdefinetheidentity
ofactorsandthenormative
orderwithinwhichthey
maketheirmoves.We can thinkoftheseprocessesintwodifferent
ways:intermsof
ideas aboutcause-effect
relationsand regulatory
norms'34
or as moreor less con135
testedprocessesofidentity
formation.
The differences
and complementarities
betweenrationalism
and constructivism
are illustrated
ofpersuasion.136Rationalists
by theirtreatments
interpret
persuasion
inthelanguageofincentives,
strategic
bargaining,
andinformation.
Theyanalyzethe
provisionof new information,
sometimesthrough
costlysignaling,
and appealsto
audiences.Fora consistent
rationalist,
itwouldbe anomalousto thinkofpersuasion
in termsofchangingothers'deepestpreferences.
Constructivists,
by contrast,
insist
on theimportance
of social processesthatgeneratechangesin normative
beliefs,
suchas thoseprompted
of thenineteenth
the
bytheantislavery
movement
century,
or nationalist
contemporary
campaignforwomen'srightsas humanrights,
propainvolveschanging
ganda.Forconstructivists,
persuasion
preferences
byappealingto
moralobligations,
and normsconceivedof as standardsof appropriate
identities,
behavior.
Thedifferent
stylesofanalysis-"thin"information
forrationalists
versus"thick"
normsandidentities
forconstructivists-to
someextent
contestin
reflect
thefamiliar
social sciencebetweeneconomicand sociologicaltraditions.137
is
Constructivism
is nomothetic.
is adequateto
ideographic,
whereasrationalism
Neitherperspective
coverall aspectsof social reality.But at one criticalpointtheyare joined. Both
as a backrecognize-constructivism
as a centralresearchprojectand rationalism
groundcondition-that
humanbeingsoperateina sociallyconstructed
environment,
whichchangesovertime.Hence,bothanalyticalperspectives
focusin one way or
another
on commonknowledge-constructivism
onhowitis created,
rationalism
on
howit affects
strategic
decisionmaking.The coreof theconstructivist
projectis to
inpreferences,
availablestrategies,
explicatevariations
andthenatureoftheplayers,
acrossspace and time.The core of therationalist
projectis to explainstrategies,
andcommonknowledge.
Neither
givenpreferences,
information,
projectcanbe comtheother.
pletewithout
Conclusion
Thehistory
ofIPE as a fieldwerebuilton a richintellectual
ofIO andtheemergence
tradition
thatdevelopedin the1940s,1950s,and 1960s.Manyofthemajorlinesof
thathavepreoccupiedscholarsofIPE and international
relationsforthe
arguments
134. See Goldsteinand Keohane 1993b;Haas 1993, 1997; Sikkink1993a,b;Adlerand Haas 1992;
Adler1987;andHaas 1992c.
See also Marchand Olsen 1989; Powelland DiMaggio 1991;
135. Wendt1987, 1992,forthcoming.
andJepperson,
andKatzenstein
1996.
Wendt,
136. On persuasion,
see Finnemore1996a; anda longtradition
oflegal scholarship,
including
Franck
1990;andChayesandChayes1995.
137. Swedberg1991.
The StudyofWorldPolitics 683
lastthreedecadesweredevelopedduringtheseyears.Thenas nowscholarscontinue
betweenpower,wealth,andsocialpurpose.
toanalyzetheinteraction
The history
ofIO andtheemergence
ofIPE havebeenpartof theelaboration
of
morecomplexandself-consciously
analytical
formulations
withwhichscholarshave
narrative
canreproduce
analyzedenduring
problemsofworldpolitics.No historical
thecomplexandidiosyncratic
evolutionofscholarship.
Forease ofpresentation
and
because it reflectsimportant
our
aspectsof our own intellectual
autobiographies,
storyhas followedtwodistinctive
strands:theinterplay
betweenrealistand liberal
currents
oftheory
intheevolutionoftheanalysisofIPE andtheanalysisofdomestic
politicsandIPE.
We havearguedthatinthe1990ssomeofthemajorpointsofcontestation
shifted.
Influenced
in economicsand culturalstudies,debatesbetween
by strongcurrents
rationalism
andconstructivism
arebecomingmoreimportant.
Theyoffer
contrasting
forresearchin thesocialsciencesatlargeandininternational
orientations
analytical
relations
andIPE. Thegreatest
promiseintheintellectual
debatebetweenproponents
ofrationalism
andconstructivism
does notlie in theinsistence
thatrealitycan only
be analyzedin one conceptuallanguage-theone preferred
bytheanalyst.Insisting
on one's ownlanguageis a sterileintellectual
exercise.Knowledgeandunderstandofdifferent
researchorientations
ingarepromoted
bydebatesamongtheproponents
andresearch
Butoneshouldneverforget
thatattheendofthedayorientaprograms.
tionsand programsare onlyusefulif theyare deployedto specifyintellectually
tractable
andsubstantively
important
questions.
Analyticalprogressin thestudyof IPE is possiblein researchprograms
despite
contestations
betweengeneraltheoretical
orientations.
We believethat
continuing
thefieldhas becomeincreasingly
we havebetterconceptualtoolsand
sophisticated;
richerinterpretations
thanwe had in the1970s.Our substantive
findings,
however,
remainmeager:counterintuitive,
well-documented
causal arguments
are rare.And
someanalytical
advanceshavetoldus whywe cannotmakestrong
rather
predictions
thanhowto go aboutdoingso, as is thecase fortherevelation
fromgametheory
of
of multipleequilibria.Nevertheless,
thefrequency
we knowa greatdeal morethan
we didthirty
ofprocessesthatarecentraltohowtheworld
yearsago abouta number
politicaleconomyworks,suchas howpoweris deployedundervariousconditions
of
howinternational
vulnerability,
regimesaffect
government
policies,andhowdomesticinstitutions
and worldpoliticsaffecteach otherthrough
institutional
processes.
without
theaccumulaManyofthearticlesin thisissuecouldnothavebeenwritten
research
inissuesranging
tionofsubstantive
fromtradeandindustry,
findings
money
and energy,
and financeand investment
andhuto,amongothers,theenvironment
manrights.
In international
well-established
boundpoliticsand in theworldof scholarship
ariesarebeingblurredandnewonesarebeingcreated.Worldpoliticsis witnessing
enormous
changein thewakeofthecollapseoftheBerlinWall,theendof strategic
and thepeacefuldisintegration
of theSovietUnion.We are observing
bipolarity,
different
typesof democratization
processesin different
worldregions,ethnicconflictsoverthecontrolofterritory,
andgrowingconflicts
overthespreadofweapons
684 International
Organization
ofmassdestruction
toregionalpowers.We arealso seeingfar-reaching
experiments
witheconomicintegration
in someworldregionsandcontinuing
marginalization
in
others,
expandedtradeundertheauspicesofa revamped
WorldTradeOrganization,
andtheredefinition
oftheroleoftheInternational
Monetary
Fundandothergovernancemechanisms
in thewakeofAsia's financial
crisis.At thesametime,religious
fundamentalism
is gaininggroundin muchoftheMuslimworld.Andstrongsecular
socialmovements
championing
environmentalism,
feminism,
andhumanrightsare
linksacrossdisactiveworldwide.
Manyopportunities
existforbuildinginnovative
All of thesedevelopments
the
ciplinaryand subdisciplinary
boundaries.
illustrate
ofcontemporary
complexity
worldpoliticsandtheopportunity
todrawnewconnectionsacrossgenerictheoretical
orientations
andbetweenspecificresearchprograms.
The rubricforthisera of increasingtransboundary
activityis variouslycalled
"internationalization"
or "globalization."This is not an unprecedented
developat theend of theninement.International
financialmarkets
werehighlyintegrated
teenthcentury-perhaps
evenmoreso thantheyhavebeensince,at leastuntilvery
recently.
Tradeflowswerealso muchhigheratthistimethanformostofthetwentiethcentury.
New technologies
have openednewopportunities,
butit is notevident
how theywill affectthecontroland authority
structures
in stateand society.How
extensively
nationalpoliciesand practiceswill be reshapedby globalization-and
how effectively
institutions
will resistsuch pressures-remains
to be seen. Such
research
willfocusagainon issuesoftherelationships
thathavebeencentralto the
literature
of thelast thirty
years:betweenwealthand power,statesand markets,
interests
andinstitutions,
theinternational
politicaleconomyand domesticpolitics.
Constraints
andopportunities
willchangeand so maytheidentity
ofthekeyactors
andthenormstheyaccept.Butobservers
ofthisnewrealitywillstillbe abletolearn
fromtheaccomplishments,
andthemistakes,
ofpreviousgenerations
ofIPE scholars.
Thesophistication
ofworkinIPE has notmadeitdirectly
applicabletopolicy.As
notedearlier,we cannotpointto clearscientific
"findings"aboutcause and effect
ofmorerigorthatpolicymakers
canreadilyapply.Atthesametime,theapplication
ous socialscientific
forIO seemsto have discouraged
standards
by referees
policy
articleshavebecomefewandfarbetween.Hence,the
commentary:
policy-relevant
andpracticein
thegulfthathas developedbetweenscholarship
pagesofIO reflect
international
relations.
can
Yetevenifthelinksbetweenscholarship
andpolicyarenotclose,connections
in theliterature
be made.Moresignificant
thanthespecificdebatesorevenfindings
are theinterpretations
of changingrealitythathave beenputforward
by analysts:
in whichthefieldhas engaged.A numberofideas
conceptsandbroad"theorizing"
are beingtakenforgrantedin policydiscusformulated
in theliterature
originally
orsimply
oftheinternational
sions.Whether
thisreflects
an effect
relations
literature
inthepolicyandacademicworldsis notclear.Atanyrate,it
parallelunderstandings
forpoweras well
is conventional
hasimplications
wisdomnowthatinterdependence
as forwealth,thatinternational
institutions
constitute
a valuablesetof instruments
forpromoting
theinterests
of statesthrough
and thatunderstanding
cooperation,
The StudyofWorldPolitics 685
butalso
domesticinterests
domesticpoliticaleconomyrequiresnotjust examining
institutions
as wellas thestrucdomesticandinternational
takingintoconsideration
betweennonof interactions
tureof theworldpoliticaleconomy.The significance
inthepolicyworld.
understood
stateandstateactorsis also increasingly
The specificapproachthatscholarschoosetofollowin theirworkwilldependon
viewpointor to
to advancinga theoretical
committed
whether
theyare principally
theirmethpredispositions,
theirownanalytical
solvingspecificempirical
problems,
odologicaltools,thedatato whichtheyhaveaccess,theresourcesat theirdisposal,
andthevaluestheyhold.Noneofus shouldbe toosurethatourownchoiceswillbe
of
Even thoughwe buildon worksof earliergenerations
intellectually
productive.
shouldmake
socialscientists,
ourvisionis limited.Ournearsightedness
outstanding
theoretius skepticalthatthelatestturnofthescrewofa particular
methodological,
debatewill magicallybringour analyticalbinocularsinto
cal, or epistemological
debatesaboutaspectsofworldpoliticsthatchange,
sharper
focus.Yetnewintellectual
of IPE
froman increasing
integration
and thosethatdo not,pointto highreturns
for
scholarship
intobroadersocial sciencedebates.This is a welcomeopportunity
fortheeditorsandreadersofIO.
excitingprospect
anyauthorandan intellectually
Download