Peter Katzenstein
- Главная
- Разное
- Дизайн
- Бизнес и предпринимательство
- Аналитика
- Образование
- Развлечения
- Красота и здоровье
- Финансы
- Государство
- Путешествия
- Спорт
- Недвижимость
- Армия
- Графика
- Культурология
- Еда и кулинария
- Лингвистика
- Английский язык
- Астрономия
- Алгебра
- Биология
- География
- Детские презентации
- Информатика
- История
- Литература
- Маркетинг
- Математика
- Медицина
- Менеджмент
- Музыка
- МХК
- Немецкий язык
- ОБЖ
- Обществознание
- Окружающий мир
- Педагогика
- Русский язык
- Технология
- Физика
- Философия
- Химия
- Шаблоны, картинки для презентаций
- Экология
- Экономика
- Юриспруденция
Constructivist Approaches to International Politics презентация
Содержание
- 1. Constructivist Approaches to International Politics
- 2. Lec 6: Constructivist Approaches The Discipline of
- 3. Lec 6: Constructivist Approaches The Discipline of
- 4. Before we grapple with the “constructivist” approach
- 5. Different disciplines define and organize themselves in different ways.
- 6. Historians define themselves as those who adhere to a particular methodology: the construction of narrative.
- 7. As chroniclers, they may simply hope to
- 8. Within the discipline, they arrange themselves based
- 9. Historians are meant to be competent to
- 10. Economists define themselves according to a specific approach—a specific framework and methodology.
- 11. In general, economists attempt to explain how individuals maximize their preferences given environmental constraints.
- 12. As Barry Eichengreen (an economist) put it…
- 13. The discipline of political science, by contrast,
- 14. Political science is a discipline defined by its substantive concern—politics—rather than its approach or methodology.
- 15. To be a political scientist, one must
- 16. In terms of approach, however, political science is quite pluralistic.
- 17. These substantive issues of politics are studied
- 18. Thus, there is no distinctive “political scientific”
- 19. A critic would say that this makes
- 20. This way political scientists get a range
- 21. Constructivism, in fact, was the product of this kind of intellectual cross-fertilization.
- 22. The Discipline of Political Science Rationalism Constructivism
- 23. While Waltz, Mearsheimer, Keohane, Axelrod, Russett, et
- 24. They all assume: Autonomous actors (states, policymakers)
- 25. These theorists all think about states in
- 26. They all employ (often explicitly) the economists’
- 27. These rationalists explain how actors maximize their
- 28. The Discipline of Political Science Rationalism Constructivism
- 29. Constructivists utilize a different approach and pursue different questions.
- 30. Constructivists want to ask: how are these actors’ all-important preferences formed in the first place?
- 31. These constructivists want to endogenize several of the elements that rationalists treat as exogneously determined.
- 32. Or, as Katzenstein and Wendt put it…
- 33. “[T]his book makes problematic the state interests
- 34. How, then, do constructivists study and understand where identities and interests come from?
- 35. While economists may best explain how actors
- 36. Constructivists understand identities and interests to be the product of process rather than structure…
- 37. “It is through reciprocal interaction, in other
- 38. The Discipline of Political Science Rationalism Constructivism
- 39. According to constructivists, constructivism is not a
- 40. Constructivists also see “rationalism” as an approach
- 41. But the two approaches differ significantly along several dimensions…
- 42. THE RATIONALIST APPROACH The Rationalist Ontology
- 43. The Rationalist Ontology States’ Interests International Environment
- 44. The Rationalist Ontology States’ Interests International Environment
- 45. The Rationalist Epistemology States are assumed to
- 46. Here is where some of these rationalist theories differ from one another...
- 47. Some Differences between Rationalists States’ Interests Interstate
- 48. THE CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH The Constructivist Ontology
- 49. The Constructivist Ontology States’ Interests International Environment
- 50. The Constructivist Ontology States’ Interests International Environment
- 51. The Constructivist Epistemology Structure (interests, environment, and
- 52. How do the constructivists differ between one another?
- 53. Constructivists may see process doing more or
- 54. Constructivism “Lite” States’ Interests International Environment Strategies
- 55. Constructivism “Heavy” States’ Interests International Environment Interstate
- 56. This can be used to organize IP
- 57. Approach to IP Rationalism: Structure Independent of
- 58. The key issue: to what extent does
- 59. The Discipline of Political Science Rationalism Constructivism
- 60. Alexander Wendt wants to do more than
- 61. Nowhere is this more apparent than in
- 62. Rationalists say that, without me and my
- 63. Well, actually, Mr. Leviathan, Mr. Hobbes, that’s precisely where I want to go.
- 64. Wendt contends that the structure of the
- 65. “I argue that self-help and power politics
- 66. Here’s an example…
- 67. In the late 1980s, Mikhail Gorbachev deliberately
- 68. As Wendt would argue, structural features like
- 69. Wendt proposes that actors might “construct” several
- 70. To Do… Keep thinking about your papers
Lec 6: Constructivist Approaches The Discipline of Political Science Rationalism Constructivism Rationalism & Constructivism Compared “Anarchy is what states make of it”
Слайд 1Constructivist Approaches to International Politics
J A Morrison
Lecture 6
Thursday, 24 February 2011
Alexander
Wendt
Слайд 2Lec 6: Constructivist Approaches
The Discipline of Political Science
Rationalism
Constructivism
Rationalism & Constructivism Compared
“Anarchy
is what states make of it”
Слайд 3Lec 6: Constructivist Approaches
The Discipline of Political Science
Rationalism
Constructivism
Rationalism & Constructivism Compared
“Anarchy
is what states make of it”
Слайд 4Before we grapple with the “constructivist” approach to IP, it is
worth noting something distinctive about the discipline of political science.
Слайд 6Historians define themselves as those who adhere to a particular methodology:
the construction of narrative.
Слайд 7As chroniclers, they may simply hope to document the progression of
events and lower the barriers to understanding that progression.
As social scientists, they may attempt to uncover causal relationships within their narratives.
Their goals may be more or less ambitious…
Слайд 8Within the discipline, they arrange themselves based on distinctions of geographic
and temporal space…
“I’m a 19th Century Americanist.”
“I study medieval France.”
“I’m a scholar of Imperial Japan.”
And so on.
Слайд 9Historians are meant to be competent to discuss all the big
issues within the context of their chosen time and space.
Politics
They are meant to know the state of…
in their particular historical spot.
Society
Gender
Ethnicity
Culture
Science
Слайд 10Economists define themselves according to a specific approach—a specific framework and
methodology.
Слайд 11In general, economists attempt to explain how individuals maximize their preferences
given environmental constraints.
Слайд 12As Barry Eichengreen (an economist) put it…
Economists utilize their same “kit
of tools to [explain] everything from dental hygiene to nuclear war.”
And “[e]conomists are notorious for their intellectual imperialism,” for their attempts to export their methodology to other disciplines.
Eichengreen, Barry J. "Dental Hygeine and Nuclear War: How International Relations Looks from Economics." In Exploration and Contestation in the Study of World Politics, edited by P. J. Katzenstein, R. O. Keohane and Stephen D. Krasner, 353-72. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1999. See p 353.
Слайд 13The discipline of political science, by contrast, is defined rather differently
from the disciplines of history and economics.
Слайд 14Political science is a discipline defined by its substantive concern—politics—rather than
its approach or methodology.
Слайд 15To be a political scientist, one must study any of the
many facets of politics…
Political Economy
Political Conflict
Political Organization
Political Culture
Political Theory (positive & normative)
Political Process
Political Behavior
(There are more, of course.)
Слайд 17These substantive issues of politics are studied in any number of
ways, using…
Game Theory
Historical Narrative
Statistics
Case Studies
Rational Choice Materialism
Interviews
Surveys
Structurationist and Symbolic Interactionist Sociology
Слайд 18Thus, there is no distinctive “political scientific” approach.
And political scientists generally
import the approaches and methodologies developed in other fields: statistics, history, economics, psychology, and sociology.
Слайд 19A critic would say that this makes political science schizophrenic and
deeply fractured.
But while this diversity does inspire constant conflict, it also brings the benefits of intellectual cross-fertilization.
Слайд 20This way political scientists get a range of perspectives on a
narrow set of what we think are very important issues.
Слайд 22The Discipline of Political Science
Rationalism
Constructivism
Rationalism & Constructivism Compared
“Anarchy is what states
make of it”
Lec 6: Constructivist Approaches
Слайд 23While Waltz, Mearsheimer, Keohane, Axelrod, Russett, et al, come to different
conclusions about IP, their approach to studying IP is essentially the same.
Слайд 24They all assume:
Autonomous actors (states, policymakers) possess exogenously determined interests.
These actors
attempt to maximize their preferences in a constrained environment (specifically, an anarchic environment).
IP is the sum total of actors’ attempts to maximize their preferences given these constraints.
IP is the sum total of actors’ attempts to maximize their preferences given these constraints.
Слайд 25These theorists all think about states in the international system in
the same way that economists think about actors in markets.
Слайд 26They all employ (often explicitly) the economists’ “rational choice” approach.
Thus, they
are sometimes called rationalists.
Слайд 27These rationalists explain how actors maximize their goals given various constraints.
But
they pay little attention to the source of these actors’ goals.
Instead, these preferences are treated as exogenously determined—as determined outside the political process.
Instead, these preferences are treated as exogenously determined—as determined outside the political process.
Слайд 28The Discipline of Political Science
Rationalism
Constructivism
Rationalism & Constructivism Compared
“Anarchy is what states
make of it”
Lec 6: Constructivist Approaches
Слайд 30Constructivists want to ask: how are these actors’ all-important preferences formed
in the first place?
Слайд 31These constructivists want to endogenize several of the elements that rationalists
treat as exogneously determined.
Слайд 33“[T]his book makes problematic the state interests that predominant explanations of
national security often take for granted.” (Katzenstein, 1)
“Despite important differences, cognitivists, poststructuralists, standpoint and postmodern
feminists, rule theorists, and structurationists share a concern with the basic ‘sociological’ issue bracketed by rationalists-namely, the issue of identity- and interest-formation..” (Wendt, 393)
Слайд 34How, then, do constructivists study and understand where identities and interests
come from?
Слайд 35While economists may best explain how actors maximize their preferences, sociologists
have the most to say about how actors’ preferences develop in the first place.
Слайд 36Constructivists understand identities and interests to be the product of process
rather than structure…
Слайд 37“It is through reciprocal interaction, in other words, that we create
and instantiate the relatively enduring social structures in terms of which we define our identities and interests.” (Wendt, 406)
“State interests do not exist to be ‘discovered’ by self-interested, rational actors. Interests are constructed through a process of social interaction.” (Katzenstein, 2)
“State interests and strategies thus are shaped by a never-ending political process that generates publicly understood standards for action.” (Katzenstein, 21)
Слайд 38The Discipline of Political Science
Rationalism
Constructivism
Rationalism & Constructivism Compared
“Anarchy is what states
make of it”
Lec 6: Constructivist Approaches
Слайд 39According to constructivists, constructivism is not a theory or a “school”
of theories.
It is an approach, an understanding of what there is to study (ontology) and how to study it (epistemology).
Слайд 40Constructivists also see “rationalism” as an approach rather than as an
individual theory or school of theories.
Слайд 42THE RATIONALIST APPROACH
The Rationalist Ontology
The Rationalist Epistemology
Some Differences
between Rationalists
Слайд 43The Rationalist Ontology
States’ Interests
International Environment
Strategies for Maximizing Interests
Interstate Interactions
The Building Blocks
The
Outcome
Слайд 44The Rationalist Ontology
States’ Interests
International Environment
Strategies for Maximizing Interests
Interstate Interactions
The Building Blocks
The
Outcome
Note that these building blocks are determined prior to interstate interactions. Their values are exogenous to these interactions.
Слайд 45The Rationalist Epistemology
States are assumed to enjoy (bounded) rationality
States attempt to
use strategies to maximize their preferences given their constraints
Different theories specify different values for these building blocks
Different theories specify different values for these building blocks
? This epistemology is borrowed from economics.
Слайд 47Some Differences between Rationalists
States’ Interests
Interstate Interactions
The Building Blocks
The Outcome
Jervis: O/D Balance
Keohane:
Int’l Regimes
Waltz & Mearsheimer: Disb’n of Power
International Environment
Mearsheimer: Hegemony
Waltz: Balance of Power
Strategies for Maximizing Interests
Goldstein: Incumbent Ideas
Слайд 48THE CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH
The Constructivist Ontology
The Constructivist Epistemology
Some Differences
between Constructivists
Слайд 49The Constructivist Ontology
States’ Interests
International Environment
Interstate Interactions
The Products of Process
The Determinative Process
Strategies
for Maximizing Interests
Слайд 50The Constructivist Ontology
States’ Interests
International Environment
Interstate Interactions
The Products of Process
The Determinative Process
Here,
states’ interests, their environment, and their strategies are potentially all constituted through the process of interacting with one another.
Strategies for Maximizing Interests
Слайд 51The Constructivist Epistemology
Structure (interests, environment, and strategies) cannot be understood apart
from process (international interaction)
States construct these elements through their interaction
States construct these elements through their interaction
? This epistemology is borrowed from sociology.
Слайд 53Constructivists may see process doing more or less work in shaping
structure.
Here are the two extremes.
Here are the two extremes.
Слайд 54Constructivism “Lite”
States’ Interests
International Environment
Strategies for Maximizing Interests
Interstate Interactions
Constructivism attempts to explain
state interests
Слайд 55Constructivism “Heavy”
States’ Interests
International Environment
Interstate Interactions
Strategies for Maximizing Interests
Wendt: Interaction influences all
of the components
Слайд 56This can be used to organize IP theories along yet another
dimension, this one based on approach.
The key issue: to what extent does structure depend on process?
The key issue: to what extent does structure depend on process?
Слайд 57Approach to IP
Rationalism: Structure Independent of Process
Constructivism: Structure Dependent on Process
Constructivism
“Lite”
Wendt
Katzenstein
Keohane
Axelrod
Mearsheimer
Waltz
Jervis
Goldstein
Слайд 58The key issue: to what extent does structure depend on process?
States’
Interests
International Environment
Strategies for Maximizing Interests
Interstate Interactions
States’ Interests
International Environment
Interstate Interactions
Strategies for Maximizing Interests
States’ Interests
International Environment
Strategies for Maximizing Interests
Interstate Interactions
No Influence
Limited Influence
Extensive Influence
Слайд 59The Discipline of Political Science
Rationalism
Constructivism
Rationalism & Constructivism Compared
“Anarchy is what states
make of it”
Lec 6: Constructivist Approaches
Слайд 60Alexander Wendt wants to do more than simply address the questions
neglected by the rationalists.
He wants to challenge (head-on) the rationalists’ explanation for the outcomes they observe.
He wants to challenge (head-on) the rationalists’ explanation for the outcomes they observe.
Слайд 61Nowhere is this more apparent than in his suggestion that “anarchy
is what states make of it.”
Слайд 62Rationalists say that, without me and my sword, there would be
constant violence and war. So, let’s not go there.
Yeah. We definitely don’t want to go there.
Слайд 64Wendt contends that the structure of the international system alone is
insufficient to draw the bleak conclusions the materialists have drawn about the state of anarchy.
Слайд 65“I argue that self-help and power politics do not follow either
logically or causally from anarchy and that if today we find ourselves in a self-help world, this is due to process, not structure. There is no ‘logic’ of anarchy apart from the practices that create and instantiate one structure of identities and interests rather than another; structure has no existence or causal powers apart from process. Self-help and power politics are institutions, not essential features of anarchy. Anarchy is what states make of it.” (Wendt, 394-95)
Слайд 67In the late 1980s, Mikhail Gorbachev deliberately reshaped the rhetoric that
had defined the relationship between the US and the USSR.
He worked to transform the two states’ identities and interests from being antithetical to being compatible.
As he later put it, “We wanted a new set of international relationships that would make it possible to address global issues [like identity and globalization].”
He worked to transform the two states’ identities and interests from being antithetical to being compatible.
As he later put it, “We wanted a new set of international relationships that would make it possible to address global issues [like identity and globalization].”
Слайд 68As Wendt would argue, structural features like the distribution of power
matter less than how we interpret those circumstances.
After all, is the power going to someone we consider to be a friend or an enemy?
How do our two states usually resolve our differences? Via international regimes or through force?
After all, is the power going to someone we consider to be a friend or an enemy?
How do our two states usually resolve our differences? Via international regimes or through force?
Слайд 69Wendt proposes that actors might “construct” several different “logics” of anarchy:
Hobbesian, Lockean, and Kantian.
The mere absence of a sovereign does not inevitably lead to any of the three.
The mere absence of a sovereign does not inevitably lead to any of the three.
Слайд 70To Do…
Keep thinking about your papers
Goldstein & Keohane: Develop an Outline
of a Critical Analysis
