Testing neoliberal institutionalism in Southeast Asia
In: International journal / Canadian Institute of International Affairs, Band 50, Heft 4, S. 779-804
ISSN: 0020-7020
In: International journal / Canadian Institute of International Affairs, Band 50, Heft 4, S. 779-804
ISSN: 0020-7020
World Affairs Online
In: International journal / Canadian Institute of International Affairs, Band 50, Heft 4, S. 779-804
ISSN: 2052-465X
In: Security studies, Band 3, Heft 1, S. 3-43
ISSN: 0963-6412
World Affairs Online
In: Security studies, Band 3, Heft 1, S. 3-43
ISSN: 1556-1852
In: Security studies, Band 7 (1997/98), Heft 4, S. 44-87
ISSN: 0963-6412
World Affairs Online
In: Global governance: a review of multilateralism and international organizations, Band 2, Heft 1, S. 119
ISSN: 2468-0958, 1075-2846
In: Politics & policy, Band 25, Heft 1, S. 111-132
ISSN: 1747-1346
Neorealism and neoliberal institutionalism are unable to account for the variability states exhibit when it comes to the subject of collective security systems because neither approach controls for the impact domestic politics can have on a state's ability to participate in this type of multilateral institution. A domestic structures perspective can address this shortcoming by highlighting the influence domestic political norms and institutions can exert in regard to a state's ability to make international security commitments and its ability to contribute to multilateral enforcement efforts. This essay provides evidence in support of these claims and outlines a research agenda for investigating the consequences domestic politics may hold for the viability and efficacy of collective security institutions.
In: New directions in world politics
Neoliberalism, neorealism, and world politics / D.A. Baldwin -- Coordination and collaboration: regimes in an anarchic world / A. Stein -- International cooperation in economic and security affairs / C. Lipson -- Achieving cooperation under anarchy: strategies and institutions / R. Axelrod and R.O. Keohane -- Anarchy and the limits of cooperation: a realist critique of the newest liberal institutionalism / J.M. Grieco -- The assumption of anarchy in international relations theory: a critique / H. Milner -- Relative gains and the pattern of international cooperation / D. Snidal -- Absolute and relative gains in international relations theory / R. Powell -- Global communications and national power: life on the Pareto frontier / S.D. Krasner -- Do relative gains matter? American's response to Japanese industrial policy / M. Mastanduno -- Institutional theory and the realist challenge after the Cold War -- R.O. Keohane -- Understanding the problem of international cooperation: the limits of neoliberal institutionalism and the future of realist theory / J.M. Grieco
World Affairs Online
In: International organization, Band 52, Heft 4, S. 855-885
ISSN: 1531-5088
Social constructivism in international relations has come into its own during the past decade, not only as a metatheoretical critique of currently dominant neo-utilitarian approaches (neo-realism and neoliberal institutionalism) but increasingly in the form of detailed empirical findings and theoretical insights. Constructivism addresses many of the same issues addressed by neo-utilitarianism, though from a different vantage and, therefore, with different effect. It also concerns itself with issues that neo-utilitarianism treats by assumption, discounts, ignores, or simply cannot apprehend within its characteristic ontology and/or epistemology. The constructivist project has sought to open up the relatively narrow theoretical confines of conventional approaches—by pushing them back to problematize the interests and identities of actors; deeper to incorporate the intersubjective bases of social action and social order; and into the dimensions of space and time to establish international structure as contingent practice, constraining social action but also being (re)created and, therefore, potentially transformed by it.
In: American political science review, Band 91, Heft 3, S. 515-529
ISSN: 1537-5943
Although the role of reciprocity in international cooperation is central to neoliberal institutionalism, empirical understanding of the concept remains weak. We analyze strategic response patterns—the use of reciprocity or inverse response (bullying)—in the Bosnia conflict from 1992 to 1995. We construct weekly time series of conflict and cooperation among the parties to the Bosnia war, using machine-coded events data. Time-series statistical analysis identifies several important patterns of strategic response, both reciprocal and inverse. These include bilateral responses, which are central to the concepts of reciprocity and evolution of cooperation, and triangular responses, which are central to the debates on containment versus accommodation in regional conflicts. Specifically, Serb forces displayed inverse triangular response, cooperating toward Bosnia after being punished by NATO. Outside powers displayed triangular reciprocity, increasing hostility toward Serb forces after Serbian attacks on the Bosnian government.
In: The journal of conflict resolution: journal of the Peace Science Society (International), Band 41, Heft 1, S. 91-116
ISSN: 1552-8766
Alliances are promises of cooperation, but allies typically have to bargain over what policy should be adopted when a given contingency arises. Whether this bargaining leads to collaborative outcomes and what form cooperation by allies takes have important implications for the effectiveness of an alliance. Neorealism and neoliberal institutionalism, the author argues, do not provide adequate explanations for this problem because they mischaracterize, or fail to come to grips with, the bargaining process at work. To redress such shortcomings, the author turns to game theory, providing a general model of intra-alliance bargaining. The model's insights are then used to interpret the historical record on U.S. Bosnia policy from 1991 until the fall of 1995. The author shows how domestic and international considerations affected the preferences and beliefs of the Bush and Clinton administrations. These led, as suggested by the model, to the U.S. tendency to avoid bargaining hard with the NATO allies and to pursue compromise strategies with them in the Bosnian crisis.
In: American political science review, Band 91, Heft 3, S. 515-529
ISSN: 0003-0554
Although the role of reciprocity in international cooperation is central to neoliberal institutionalism, empirical understanding of the concept remains weak. We analyze strategic response patterns - the use of reciprocity or inverse response (bullying) - in the Bosnia conflict from 1992 to 1995. We construct weekly time series of conflict and cooperation among the parties to the Bosnia war, using machine-coded events data. Time-series statistical analysis identifies several important patterns of strategic response, both reciprocal and inverse. These include bilateral responses, which are central to the concepts of reciprocity and evolution of cooperation, and triangular responses, which are central to the debates on containment versus accommodation in regional conflicts. Specifically, Serb forces displayed inverse triangular response, cooperating toward Bosnia after being punished by NATO. Outside powers displayed triangular reciprocity, increasing hostility toward Serb forces after Serbian attacks on the Bosnian government. (American Political Science Review / FUB)
World Affairs Online
In: Review of international political economy: RIPE, Band 3, Heft 1, S. 194-204
ISSN: 0969-2290
A review essay on books edited by: Stephen Gill, Gramsci, Historical Materialism and International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge U Press, 1993); & Ronen P. Palan & Barry Gills, Transcending the State-Global Divide: A Neostructuralist Agenda in International Relations (London & Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1994 [see listings in IRPS No. 87]). With the view that neither neorealism nor neoliberal institutionalism is able to provide adequate explanations of intersubjective understanding of IR/IPE (international relations/international political economy), the twenty authors represented in these volumes argue for a change in ontology & analysis & seek to engage in a theoretic discourse of postpositivism. Gill's book offers 4 chapters on key aspects of Gramscian thought & on US policy toward the Third World, global hegemonies, Soviet socialism & passive revolution, global governance, & the future of Europe. The argument is clear: a reconstructed historical materialist analysis of IR/IPE developed from Gramscian concepts provides one way forward from the contemporary crisis of neorealism/neoliberalism. Each chapter in Palan & Gills's book is broadly neostructuralist & looks at different issues & problems from different disciplinary bases. The separation of economics, politics, international relations, geography, & sociology is challenged. The message could be stronger with a discussion of the theoretical implications for neorealism/neoliberalism of the neostructural agenda & a chapter on neostructuralist views on gender & political economy. 7 References. V. Wagener
Defence date: 3 July 1998 ; Examining Board: Prof. Fulvio Attinà (University of Catania); Prof. Knud Erik Jørgensen (University of Aaarhus); Prof. Roger Morgan (Supervisor); Prof. Jan Zielonka (European University Institute) ; First made available online 04 July 2017 ; On June 26, 1991, after some 46 years without a war in Europe, violent conflict erupted in the territory of what used to be the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. It took more than four years of atrocities before a peace agreement was finally negotiated in Dayton, Ohio, in November 1995. This book provides a detailed analysis of the response of Western Europe to the disintegration of Yugoslavia. The account pays particular attention to the behaviour of the major Member States of the European Community (later Union), such as France, Britain, and Germany, in two crucial moments of debate and decision-making: the diplomatic recognition of Slovenia and Croatia in 1991, and the debate on the desirability and form of a possible military intervention in the warring country. By combining three theoretical approaches to the study of international politics - neorealism, neoliberal institutionalism, and liberal intergovernmentalism - Lucarelli provides a theoretically informed analysis of the main forces behind Western Europe's response to the Yugoslav wars. Conclusions are drawn on the major characteristics of Western Europe's management of the conflict, the interplay of international and domestic factors behind the behaviour of Western European states, the relative explanatory power of each of the three theoretical perspectives and their common research tradition, and the perspective of the Common Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union. The book's reconstruction and evaluation of conflict management in ex-Yugoslavia, its attention to the influence of the European integration process on the foreign policy of its Member States, and its use and assessment of International Relations theoretical tools, should make it of topical interest for a wide range of scholars interested in both international and European political affairs.
BASE
In: International social science journal: ISSJ, Band 45, S. 443-498
ISSN: 0020-8701
French, Swiss, & Swedish international relations scholars present critical analyses of the US-based neorealist international relations & regime theory for explaining transnationalism, multilaterlism & international organizations (IOs). Dissatisfied with regime theory's realist assumptions & methodological individualism, each advances alternative sociologically oriented approaches. US regime theorists then respond to these critiques. In Some Thoughts on International Organizations and Theories of Regulation, Marie-Claude Smouts suggests a regulation theory perspective for understanding shifts in conventional roles & objectives of the IO. The IO of the future will directly regulate social, economic, & political problems, thereby integrating domestic & international political economy. In Regime Theory and the Study of International Organizations, Pierre de Senarclens reviews a sociological framework for studying the regime that accounts fully for the IO's various functions. Noting regime theory's downplaying of coercive & conflictual power relations & the misguided explanations of hegemonic stability theory for the creation of regimes, analysis also suggests that US scholarship is biased by collaboration with political interest groups. In International Organization and Co-Operation: An Interorganizational Perspective, Christer Jonsson proposes an interorganizational theory, focusing on networks of resources, actors, & public/private ties within IOs. Based on experience with projects in international coordination of civil air transport, refugees, & atomic energy, the theory suggests redefinitions of power, bargaining, mediation, & brokerage concepts & clarifies the roles of individual leadership, international secretaries, & relations between inter- & nongovernmental organizations. In Toward a Sociology of International Institutions: Comments on the Articles by Smouts, de Senarclens & Jonsson, James A. Caporaso (U of Washington, Seattle) concedes that regime theory's preoccupation with realism, disregard for more integrative, sociological approaches, & failure to discuss the issue of conflictual power relations are problematic, but argues that the alternatives suggested here are also troublesome. In International Regimes and World Politics: Comments on the Articles by Smouts, de Senarclens & Jonsson, Helen Milner concurs that neoliberal institutionalism is marred by realist principles, but stresses that this perspective does not represent all of regime theory. These critiques argue for the primacy of the IO over that of regime. Parallels are drawn between their proposals & a branch of US international relations studies emphasizing intersubjective agreement. 5 Figures, 9 Photographs, 119 References. J. Sadler