This article deals with the issue of the environment in international politics & makes a case that the environment as a subject matter is fundamentally different from other political issues. To this effect, the concept of eco-holistic analysis is put forward whereby environmental issues are incorporated into the analysis rather than the structural & systemic forces & constraints within which actors operate. The concept of eco-holistic analysis is based on three pillars (the historical dimension of environment-society relations, the concept of consumption, & equity) which offer new dimensions of analysis highlighting why traditional institutionalist approaches to the study of international environmental politics are lacking in offering suggestions for effective environmental improvement. 41 References. Adapted from the source document.
The newest liberal institutionalism asserts that, although it accepts a major realist proposition that international anarchy impedes cooperation among states, it can nevertheless affirm the central tenets of the liberal institutionalist tradition that states can achieve cooperation and that international institutions can help them work together. However, this essay's principal argument is that neoliberal institutionalism misconstrues the realist analysis of international anarchy and therefore it misunderstands realism's analysis of the inhibiting effects of anarchy on the willingness of states to cooperate. This essay highlights the profound divergences between realism and the newest liberal institutionalism. It also argues that the former is likely to be proven analytically superior to the latter.
Neoliberal institutionalism, developed by Robert Keohane, & liberal theory of international relations elaborated by Andrew Moravcsik, nowadays represent two grand International Relations (IR) theories drawing on liberalism as one of the main theoretical approaches in this discipline. However, Keohane conceived of neoliberal institutionalism as a synthesis of realism & liberalism & Moravcsik proceeds from a specific understanding of liberalism & defines liberalism by the criteria of empirical social science. This essay examines, therefore, whether neoliberal institutionalism & liberal theory indeed involve & assemble together the main ideas of liberalism. The perspective applied in the essay is based on the intellectual history of liberalism and, in this way, regards the assumptions about the most fundamental actor in international relations & about the evolution of international relations as the intellectual core of liberalism. According to liberalism, individuals & collective social actors constituted by individuals (social & bureaucratic groups) are the most fundamental actors in international relations & international relations undergo transformation, in the course of which cooperation gradually prevails over conflict. Neoliberal institutionalism considers the state to be the most fundamental actor in international relations & assumes that the nature of international relations transforms & they acquire a more cooperative character. Liberal theory claims that individuals & social groups are the most fundamental actors & that international relations undergo transformation that is marked by the growth of cooperation. Consequently, whereas neoliberal institutionalism involves the intellectual core of liberalism only to some extent, liberal theory implies that there is a grand theory that subsumes the main ideas of liberalism. Adapted from the source document.
Much of the contemporary literature in the field of international studies deals with the concept of authority. Scholars concerned with global policymaking often suggest that the increasing importance of transnational actors, such as subnational networks, nonprofit organizatons, and business associations, leads to a loss of authority at the expense of state-based forms of governance. This perspective is closely linked to the concept of global governance and challenges classical approaches to international politics and conventional concepts of authority in world politics. However, other scholars take a different view and contend that the development of transnational governance initiatives does not imply a one-sided shift of authority from national governments and international institutions to sub- and nonstate actors. While these authors recognize the emergence of novel forms of authority in global policymaking, they stress the persistent authority of nation-states and underline the centrality of established modes of interstate cooperation. In terms of a theoretical middle ground between these two perspectives, one can argue that we observe a reconfiguration of authority across various actors and levels of decision making. This development does not automatically question the prevailing position of national governments and their institutions. Instead, state power seems to be expressed and rearticulated in new ways within a changing global environment. This ongoing debate pertaining to the changing patterns of authority is key to our understanding of the role and function of state and sub- and nonstate actors as well as their interactions in contemporary global politics.
Despite the increased attention to religion in international relations, questions remain about the role of religion in the foreign policies of states. Extrapolating from theories in the fields of international relations and comparative politics is a fruitful strategy to explore religion's potential avenues of influence on foreign policy. There are also potential methodological tools of analysis in these fields, which can be fruitfully applied to understand the role of religion in foreign policy. Contributions from the field of religion and politics may be used to frame applications of such theories as realism, constructivism, liberalism, and bounded rationality to specify further hypotheses about religion and foreign policy. The potential of these theoretical approaches from international relations to the analysis of religion has not yet been exploited fully although it is clear that there are promising signs of progress.
La lucha contra las drogas ha sido un tema fundamental para los intereses de Colombia, ya que este constituye un factor determinante para la extinción de uno de los recursos que alimentan el conflicto armado. A pesar de los esfuerzos institucionales realizados a lo largo de más de cincuenta años en diferentes campos como la administración de justicia, la política económica, la salud pública y las relaciones internacionales, el narcotráfico no ha desaparecido, principalmente porque persiste una estructura de incentivos que promueven la relación de la población campesina con el superávit del producto ilícito. ; The drugs war has been an essential topic for Colombia´s interests, since this is a determining factor for the extinction of one of the resources that fuel the armed conflict. Despite institutional efforts made over more than fifty years in different fields such as justice, economic policy, public health and international relations, drug trafficking has not disappeared, mainly because an incentive structure that promote the relationship between the rural population and the surplus of the illicit proceeds remains.
As an emerging geopolitical hotspot, will the future of the Arctic be dominated by conflict or cooperation among states? With the potential for vast natural resources and the promise of transpolar shipping, the opening Arctic may be the new frontier for global competition. This thesis uses two theories of international relations, neorealism and neoliberal institutionalism, to evaluate the geopolitical landscape of an opening Arctic. This thesis argues that the characterization of the Arctic as a zone of either competition or cooperation is overly simplistic. While structural neorealist theory can accurately account for some of the Arctic countries' behavior, it is unable to explain forms of cooperation existing and emerging among them. In addition to laying out the overall state of cooperation and conflict among the Arctic countries, this thesis also examines two cases in detail: conflicts between Russia and Norway over the Barents Sea, and the United States and Canada over the Northwest Passage. Neorealism fails to account fully for the emergence of cooperation in the form of an equitable treaty on the maritime delimitation line between Russian and Norway. The international regimes were enablers of inter-state cooperation in the U.S.-Canadian case, and were a contributing factor in dispute settlement.
The concept of international political economy (IPE) encompasses the intersection of politics and economics as goods, services, money, people, and ideas move across borders. The term "international political economy" began to draw the attention of scholars in the mid-1960s amid problems of the world economy and lagging development in the third world. IPE was later replaced by the term "global political economy" (GPE) in recognition of the fact that what happens in the world is not only about interactions between states, and that the global political economy includes many different kinds of actors. In general, GPE better suits the reality of a globalizing world. Early works that explored the relationship between economic activities and state interests originated long before the term "political economy" was coined. Examples are those by Aristotle, Kautilya, Ibn Khaldun, and Niccolò Machiavelli. Adam Smith used the word "mercantilism" to describe the various theories and policies on how states should intervene in markets in order to increase wealth and power. "Mercantilism" was supplanted by "economic nationalism" in the twentieth century, followed by classical liberalism, neoliberal institutionalism, and neoclassical liberalism. Whereas both mercantilism and economic nationalism emphasize state power and state interests, liberal writers such as John Locke and Immanuel Kant argue that possessive individualism and the individual are the bearer of rights. Other major schools of thought that have conceptualized important concepts, relationships, and causal understandings in IPE include Marxism and its variants, feminist approaches, and communitarianism.
La presente investigación busca analizar cómo se ha constituido la política exterior colombiana hacia China en el siglo XXI. Para el análisis se examinará la forma como los intereses de los tomadores de decisión de Bogotá, por medio de sus ideas y roles, han influido en el diseño de la política exterior. De igual forma, las instituciones internacionales (analizadas desde un enfoque institucional neoliberal) formaran parte del objeto de estudio, por que si bien no constituyen el sistema interno del Estado, hacen parte de su regulación y control a nivel internacional. A partir de esto, se buscará responder a la pregunta: ¿De qué manera las ideas y los roles de los tomadores de decisión han influenciado la política exterior colombiana en su relacionamiento hacia China, privilegiando lo económico sobre lo político en el siglo XXI? ; This research seeks to analyze how it was constituted the Colombian foreign policy toward China in the twenty-first century. For the analysis, this research will examine how the interests of the decision-makers of Bogota, through their ideas and roles, have influenced the design of the foreign policy. Similarly, international institutions (analyzed from a neoliberal institutional approach) formed part of the object of study, as a regulator of the state. The investigation will respond to the question: how do the ideas and the roles of decision-makers have influenced the Colombian foreign policy in its relationship to China, privileging the economic over political matters in the twenty-first century?