International Order
PLIR 824 – Fall 2008
http://toolkit.itc.virginia.edu/2008_Fall_PLIR824-1
Professor Jeffrey W. Legro
232 Cabell Hall
924-3958
Office Hours: Email for
appointment. TH 2-3
legro@virginia.edu
International relations are characterized as being “anarchic” – that is the world lacks a single
legitimate government with a monopoly on power. Nonetheless, the international realm is also described as
a society, or an order, or a system. That is, even if it is anarchic, there also seem to regular processes, rules,
and structures that allow a certain amount of stability and functionality in terms of managing issues of
common interest and concern. This course aims to examine the sources and evolution of order in its
theoretical, historical, and contemporary forms.
The curriculum does not attempt to cover the waterfront of the masive literature on international
organization and governance. Instead the aim will be threefold. The first is to consider the meaning of order
and how it and similar concepts have been studied. The second is to consider major theoretical traditions
and explanations that address the question “what causes order?” The third section considers a number of
major monographs that speak to the general question of the sources of order. These works in particular pay
attention to the link between power, leadership, and order.
What you should get out of this course is some sens for the literature on international organization,
how to think about the central question of anarchy and order in the international system, and a feel for how
at least some recent work on the international system has been done and how you might do it yourself.
Class sessions will consist of overviews and summaries by me, concise presentations of the
readings by students, and mostly of discussion. The success of this seminar hinges on participation -- it is
expected that all will take part. It is essential that you do the required readings by the start of class. Most
of the reading material will available on the class web page and in books for purchase at the bookstore.
There may be a few addditional items, which dues to copyright laws, will be available only on reserve in
the library and possibly also in the graduate lounge
The course requirements (with a nod to a Jana von Stein syllabus) are:
(1) 1. Participation -- (25%)
Each week a set of required readings will be assigned that range anywhere from 150- many pages.
Seminar members will be expected to have a firm grasp of required material and be ready to discuss it
critically (see handout on how to read the material). This will necessarily involve active participation and
failure to participate will be taken as a sign of inadequate preparation. I highly encourage that you keep
a notebook in the course with 1) summaries of the readings and 2) a list of ideas you have for possible
research projects/designs.
1
(2) Short Papers (40%)
You are required to write two short papers (each about 5 pages, double-spaced) and do two short
presentations (about 5 minutes) on two of the weekly readings (hence, you cover the same readings in
your paper and your presentation). Each paper/presentation combination is worth 20% of your grade. The
paper (and related presentation) should do two things: concisely summarize the analytical
argument/causal logic of the readings, pointing out commonalities and/or disagreements between the
authors; critique the readings, and provide ideas on ways the theories or research could be improved. The
deadlines will vary depending on which readings you select; your summary paper is due by e-mail by
5pm the night before class.
(3) Research Design (35%)
You will write a research design paper (approximately 10 pages, doublespaced)
in which you identify a puzzle pertaining to the subject matter of this course, propose a potential
explanation (or explanations), explicate a plausible alternative explanation, and discuss how one might
go about testing those explanations empirically. I do not expect you to have the statistical analyses, case
studies, or experiments done. However, if you think it would be a better use of your time to write a
research paper (rather than a research design paper), that is fine. If so please discuss this with me. A
rough draft of the paper is due by Sunday night before the 12th class. The paper is due by e-mail by the
first day of exams, and is worth 35% of your grade.
READING SCHEDULE
I. Concepts and Literature
1. International Relations, The Course, and You
2. What Is Order? (What is its Opposite?)
Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics, Chapter 6, 102-128.
Bull, The Anarchical Society, Chapter 1 (skim Chapter 2 if you have it).
Helen Milner, “The Assumption of Anarchy in International Relations: A Critique,” Review of International
Studies 17 (January 1991): 67-85.
Joseph M. Parent and Emily Erikson, “Anarchy and Order,” ms (Aug 2007), pp 1-13 (skim rest for next
week).
Nicholas Onuf and Frank Klink, “Anarchy, Authority, and Rule,” ISQ 33:2 (1989): 149-73.
Jack Donnelly, “Sovereign Inequalities and Hierarchy in Anarchy,” EJIR (2006): 138-170.
2
Murphy, Craig (2000) – “Global Governance: Poorly Done and Poorly Understood,” International
Affairs, 76, 789-803.
Douglas C. North, William Summerhill, and Barry R. Weingast, “Order Disorder and Economic Change:
Latin America vs. North America,” in Bruce Bueno de Mesquita and Hilton Root, eds., Governing for
Prosperity (New Haven: Yale University Press 2000), pp. 1-17.
http://www.stanford.edu/~weingast/north.summerhill.weingast.8.05p.pdf
3. How Has it Been Studied?
Hedley Bull. The Anarchical Society. New York: Columbia University Press. Chap 3, 51-73.
Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics, Chap 8, 161-93.
Mancur Olson. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups.Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press, 1965. “Chapter 1: A Theory of Groups and Organizations,” pp. 5-52.
John Gerard Ruggie. 1998. “What Makes the World Hang Together? Neo-Utilitarianism and the
Social Constructivist Challenge,” IO, 855-85.
Alexander Thompson & Duncan Snidal. 2000. International Organization. In B. Bouckaert & G. De
Geest, eds., Encyclopedia of Law and Economics. http://encyclo.findlaw.com/9800book.pdf
Simmons and Martin, “International Organizations and Institutions,” in Carlsnae Handbook of
International Relations.
II. The Sources of Order
4. Institutions/Strategic Interaction I
Robert Keohane. 1984. After Hegemony, 85-109 (or chapters 3-6)
Stephen D. Krasner. 1982. Structural Causes and Regime Consequences: Regimes as
Intervening Variables. International Organization 36 (2): 185-205.
Kenneth Oye. 1985. Explaining Cooperation under Anarchy: Hypotheses and Strategies. World Politics
38: 1-24. (online)
Barbara Koremenos, Charles Lipson and Duncan Snidal. 2001. The Rational Design of
International Institutions. International Organization 55 (4): 761-799.
3
Koremenos, Barbara. 2005. Contracting around Uncertainty. American Political Science Review 99(4):
549-65. (skim)
5. Power
John Mearsheimer. 1994/5. The False Promise of International Institutions.
International Security 19 (3): 5-49.
Joseph Grieco. 1988. Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal
Institutionalism. IO
Stephen Krasner. 1991. Global Communications and National Power: Life on the Pareto Frontier. IO
Lloyd Gruber. 2000. Winners and Losers: The Case for a Theoretical Reorientation. Ruling the World,
chap. 3. (course packet)
Keohane, Robert O. and Lisa L. Martin. 1995. “The Promise of Institutionalist Theory.”
International Security, 20(1): 39-51./Chapter in Baldwin book
6. Ideas/Knowledge/Social Interaction
Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. “International Norm Dynamics and Political
Change.” International Organization, 52(4): 887-917.
John Meyer, “World Culture and the Nation-State” American Journal of Sociology (July 1997).
Daniel Philpott, Revolutions in Sovereignty (Princeton 2001), chptrs 1 and 4.
Christian Reus-Smit, “The Constitutional Structure of International Society and the Nature of
Fundamental Institutions” International Organization Volume 51, Number 4, 1997: 555-589
Alexander Wendt. 2003. “Why a World State is Inevitable,” European Journal of International
Relations, 9 (4): 491-542.
Alexander Wendt. 2001. Driving with the Rearview Mirror: On the Rational Science of
Institutional Design. International Organization 55 (4): 1019-1049.
J. Snyder, “Anarchy and Culture,” International Organization Vol. 56, No. 1 (winter 2002): 7-46
7. Some of the Rest
4
Cox, "Social Forces, States, and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory," in Keohane,
Neorealism and its Critics, 204-54 (skim).
Robert Cox, "Gramsci, Hegemony, and IR: An Essay in Method," Millenium (1983), 162-75.
Craig Murphy, International Organization and Industrial Change. Global Governance since 1850 (OUP:
NY, 1994), chap. 2
Margaret Keck and Kathryn Sikkink, Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks and International
Relations (Cornell 1998), chs. 1 and 2.
Hall and Bierstecker, eds., The Emergence of Private Authority in Global Governance (Cambridge
2002), Chapter 1 or Conclusion.
Andrew Moravcsik, “A New Statecraft? Supranational Entrepreneurs and International Cooperation,”
International Organization 53:2 (Spring 1999): 267-306.
Robert Gilpin, War and Change (Princeton 1981), 9-49. (lead in to next week)
III. Studies in Power, Institutions, Ideas and Order
8. Hegemony
Charles Kindleberger, The World in Depression pp. 19-30; 291-308.
Robert Gilpin, The Political Economy of International Relations (Princeton 1986), 72-80.
Arthur Stein, "The Hegemon's Dilemma: Great Britain, the United States, and the
International Economic Order," International Organization 38(2) (1984): 355-86.
G. John Ikenberry and Charles A. Kupchan, “Socialization and Hegemonic Power,” International
Organization 44/3 (summer 1990): 283-316.
Jack Levy, “Power Transition Theory and the Rise of China,” in Ross and Zhu, China’s Ascent (Cornell
2008).
Victoria Tin-bor Hui, “Toward a Dynamic Theory of Internatonal Politics: Insights from Comparing
Ancient China and Early Modern Europe,” IO 58 (Winter 2004): 175-205.
Giovanni Arrighi and Beverly Silver (1999), “Hegemonic Transitions: Past and Present,” Political Power
and Social Theory 13, 239-75
9. John Ikenberry, After Victory. Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Rebuilding of
5
Order After Major Wars. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 2001, selections.
David A. Lake, Hierarchy in International Relations, Chapters XXX (manuscript). Available
at http://dss.ucsd.edu/~dlake/HIR%20page.htm
10. William Wohlforth and Stephen Brooks, World Out of Balance: International Relations Theory
and the Challenge of American Primacy, (Princeton University Press, 2008)
11. Daniel Deudney, Bounding Power: Republican Security Theory from the Polis to the Global
Village (Princeton, 2007).
12. Dan Drezner, All Politics is Global: Explaining International Regulatory Regimes (Princeton
University Press, 2007)
13. Discussion of Preliminary Research Designs
14. Peter Katzenstein, A World of Regions (Cornell 2005)
6