Search

In the last twenty years, many regional intergovernmental organizations have adopted rules requiring that all member-states be democracies, and specifying certain penalties that are to be imposed on any state that undergoes a democratic reversal. These rules - occasionally called democracy clauses - have recently received increased attention from political scientists. In keeping with this year's theme of "Political Authority in Transition," this paper asks whether rules that transfer some authority over domestic politics to international organizations, like the Inter-American Democratic Charter, are in fact constraining the ability of domestic political actors to overthrow or undermine unconsolidated democratic regimes. Building on models predicting coup risk, this paper shows that from 1991- 2008 democracy clauses were correlated with a decrease of almost 25% in the likelihood that a state would experience a coup in any given coup-year, holding other factors constant. This finding contributes to our understanding of the international influences on democratic consolidation, and on the efficacy of international law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

the implications for the constructivist research agenda of the fact that IR scholars do not exist outside of the world they study, but form an essential part of it? This challenge is posed by constructivism itself: if the world is 'of our making,' as first generation constructivist Nicholas Onuf noted, then the social location and personal investments of scholars themselves must be included in constructivist accounts of world politics. The challenge is also posed by the nascent 'practice turn' in IR, which, drawing on the sociology of Pierre Bourdieu, offers a conceptual language to explain the wider role and positioning of IR scholars in the 'field' of academic production. The issue this paper addresses, therefore, is whether this language is antithetical or complimentary to constructivism in its 'third generation' guise. The paper's aim is to lay out the challenge of reflexivity as it is posed to constructivism, and explore the interplay between these two responses: are they mutually complementary? Or does the challenge represent a potentially fatal one to constructivism?. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that IR has tended to mischaracterise the 'social' basis of international society. States and other actors orient their behaviour towards shared understandings of cooperation not because of a prior common identity but because the provision of public goods provides a high value pay-off in terms of status. In the early part of the paper, we draw on Wittgenstein's ideas on rule indeterminacy to critique the idea of the causal power of norms, a view which animates a great deal of mainstream constructivism. Working with an alternative sociology of norms, it becomes possible to view the international social system as being produced through 'recognition games' played on many different boards. The goal of international social action is recognition of rightful membership of institutions and alliances, an argument familiar to English school writings in IR. China's struggle for status in contemporary international society provides an illustrative case study, one which avoids the stark choice between managing China's imminent threat (realism) or liberal socialization (constructivism). ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper investigates the impact of 9/11 on the media access of Danish CSOs working on distant issues. Theoretically it argues that the media is the central element in the public opportunity structure of CSOs. The concept of a public opportunity structure refers to the possibilities of CSOs to gain access to the media and be able to offer alternative and critical interpretations of political events and situations. This kind of access is important because the main source of CSO influence is their participation in public debate. It is argued that major global events, such as 9/11, can have a significant impact on public opportunities as they change the media's agenda and demand for CSO information and interpretation. The paper tests four hypotheses related to public opportunities: contraction, expansion, non-impact and mixed-effects. The data consists of newspaper articles from two Danish newspapers (Politiken and Jyllands-Posten) on three Danish CSOs (Ibis, Folkekirkens Nødhjælp, and Amnesty International). The data is drawn from the two three-year periods before and after 11 September 2001. The analysis concludes that opportunities vary considerable between newspapers and CSOs. One of the newspapers, Politiken, thus expanded opportunities for CSOs, while Jyllands-Posten slightly contracted them. The expanded opportunities in Politiken were, furthermore, unequally distributed, with Folkekirkens Nødhjælp and Amnesty International accounting for the increase. The results consequently primarily support the mixed-effects hypothesis. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper explores the impact of social capital on economic performance in the context of post-communist transition. Social capital is a concept that has been introduced to examine the potential benefits of norms, networks, and trust as the “missing link” that, together with physical and human capital, could explain the inequality in economic growth. The concept was widely adopted by transition scholars who wished to understand the relationship between markets and states and to explain why the accepted set of economic and political reforms achieved extremely diverse results across Eastern Europe. While the concept has been gaining wide popularity in transition and development scholarship, empirical studies of social capital have been missing. Also, the scholarship has not examined the relationship between social capital and performance despite suggestions of a symbiotic relationship. This study attempts to fill this void through an investigation of the impact of social capital on the security of property rights and capital reinvestment in transition economies. Original evidence collected through surveys of managers and owners of SMEs in Serbia and Montenegro is employed in a rare quantitative analysis of the role of social capital in the provision of informal means of contract enforcement. This alternative strategy for enhancing the security of one’s property rights is important in environments where formal property rights are not enforced because institutions lack legitimacy or where institutions are inefficient in implementing formal rules and regulations. This paper examines the impact of such strategies on the overall prospects for economic growth. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the adoption of the National Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction in December 2002 a radical overhaul of US and international preventive nuclear non-proliferation policy has occurred. This paper argues that policy measures have yielded the legalization of the nuclear non-proliferation regime. Under US leadership, the UN Security Council has been endowed with the role of a legislating and adjudicating third-party mechanism sanctioning non-compliance with core norms of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). An operational law-enforcement and policing mechanism to interdict suspicious trade was created and international law amended to criminalize proliferation-related trading or smuggling. On this background, the paper conceptually discusses legitimation strategies ideal-typically predominant in hegemonic versus imperial social orders and evaluates what strategies have predominated with the Bush administration during the adoption and implementation of two policy innovations addressing the supply-side of proliferation: the Proliferation Security Initiative of 2003 and UN Security Council Resolution 1540 (2004). ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper focuses on the use of different forms of power by a (leader/patron/hegemonic) state to get the other (non-leader/client) states cooperate with its policies: the use of different forms of power in obtaining cooperation from other states in exercising economic sanctions against a target state. Most of the literature on cooperation operate on the level of bargaining power where the policy changes are directly visible to or observable by the researcher. In this paper, I attempt to show how bargaining power model is not adequate in capturing the complete picture of the relationship between Turkey (a non-leader/client state) and the US (leader/patron state) in their cooperation and non-cooperation with regard to Iraq during the Gulf Crisis and the US War Against Iraq, respectively. In that regard, I attempt to show that the three levels of power (Krause 1991) is a much better and more comprehensive framework in understanding and explaining the power relationship between Turkey and the US. There are three main objectives of this study: (1) to shed more light on the cooperation process, (2) to challenge the conventional wisdom in the area of cooperation that states? cooperative or non-cooperative behaviors are best understood or explained on the bargaining level, and (3) to challenge the utility of paradigms, in this case the rational choice, in the discipline. This study attempts to show why a client state cooperates with a patron state even when this does not look as the best interest to that state, i.e., that state?s first preference is not to cooperate or that state does not have a dominant strategy to cooperate. Similarly, this study also aims at showing why a client state does not cooperate with a patron state even though cooperation seems to be the best interest to the client state. My working hypothesis is that Turkey?s cooperation (or non-cooperation) with the US with regard to the Iraq issue can not be fully understood or explained by using solely a bargaining model which focuses on directly observable (visible) results of a policy or an observable policy change that, for example, could be utilized by either empirical non-quantifiable, or empirical quantifiable data. Lisa Martin?s (1992) game theoretical model is a good framework to look at the relationship between the two states on the bargaining level. But it does not take into consideration the two other levels of power, i.e., it focuses on bargaining power, and omits structural power and hegemonic power. A comprehensive framework of different forms of power relationship between a patron state and a client state is needed to explain the cooperative/non-cooperative behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past decades constructivism has moved from the margins to the centre of IR/IPE. Therefore the contentious issue is no longer whether or not one can use constructivism in IPE. Rather, the question is how to make the best possible use of constructivism in IR/IPE. This paper makes an argument in favour of a sociological version of constructivism (drawing heavily on the work of Pierre Bourdieu) which is particularly well suited to develop questions and answers for empirical studies in IR/IPE. The reason is that, although this approach cannot overcome and resolve the central dichotomies in social theory, it suggests ways which make it possible to argue in parallel and to keep both sides of the dichotomies within the analysis. The paper provides three illustrations of this. The first is that the approach focuses both on power entailed by the social construction of meaning both at the level of the level of the ideas expressed by policy maker and/or observer in the public realm and at the level of the private, material action. The second is that it suggests a way of keeping an explicit link between the instrumental use of ideas and the taken for granted dimension of social reality. The third is that the approach stresses the significance of reflexivity both for critical knowledge and for the reproduction of social hierarchies. The focus on power, agency and reflexivity is not fortuitous. It is around these issues that the critique of constructivists, from outsiders and insiders alike, tends to focus and therefore when discussing how to make the best possible use of constructivism, it is from these issues that one has to depart. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Karl Deutsch and those who have taken up his work on security communities universally acknowledge the relevance of increased transnational interactions as a necessary condition for integration. Yet despite an international system increasingly characterized by globalization, in most cases of increased interaction among states dependable expectations of peaceful change, the defining characteristic of a security community, have not followed. Why has increased transnational interaction led to the emergence of security communities in certain cases but not others? This paper attempts to answer this question by positing a multi-level theory of integration, which asserts that integration is contingent on the mutual identification of self-signifying practices common to intersubjectively differentiated groups, which in turn allows for enhancements in social communication and the development of a higher-order level of collective identity. By focusing on concomitant processes of integration at the regional, state and subnational levels, this theory pushes forward the discourse on security communities by explaining the emergence of new social tensions resulting from changes in the meanings of practices associated with integration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Relational repair is a key concept to understand the maintenance and evolution of close allies' relationships. Close allies - such as some of the founding members of the Atlantic alliance - sometimes go through disputes that are serious enough to endanger their relationships. Because they attach great value to these ties, they have to find a way to overcome their deterioration, i.e., to achieve relational repair. Yet, little scholarly work has been done on the concept of relational repair among close allies after a serious dispute. This paper contributes to filling this gap by showing how relational repair processes are initiated - from the very start of the disputes - through the actions and interactions of the countries concerned. Applying some of the findings of research in sociology and social-psychology on relational repair among individuals, I show how certain actions or communications can be effective in facilitating relational repair processes among close allies during serious disputes. I illustrate these claims through the analysis and comparison of two cases of serious dispute: the Suez crisis of 1956 and the NATO crisis of 1966. Both crises opposed two close allies, France and the United States, and eventually led to relational repair between them, but they differed as to some of the actions that were undertaken by both countries during the dispute. This in turn led to differences in the evolution of the relational repair processes that took place between them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper has two purposes. First, it investigates in theory how the societal security literature (the Copenhagen School) relates to the principal explanations of intergroup hostility in sociology (status/power threat and labor market competition), socia ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the nature and politics of civilization as a category of identity. Using a critical constructivist framework based on a distinction between identity and identity labels, I examine how and when the concept of civilization has been used ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that a political reading of mobility is instrumental for understanding the role of democracy within globalised structures of power. Relegated to a socio-economic background that prompts new engagements with democracy, mobility has been neglected as a condition of possibility and as a form of democratic practice. Drawing on Georg Simmel's sociology of money, we show that practices of transversal mobility constitute democratic moments in relation to structures of power that are constituted across the territorial circumscription of national states. Mobility works directly upon structures of power through universal rights and the politics of the 'mob'. As democratic practices, both rights and mass politics rely on the principle of equality. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Is there a distinct sociology of international relations? What are the innovative contributions of such a sub-discipline to our understanding of world politics? This paper will discuss contemporary, interdisciplinary thinking on the borders between sociol ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we do not enter the internal IR debates, e.g. by indulging in Realism-bashing, rehashing the "neo-neo debate" on absolute vs. relative gains (Keohane 1986) or by commenting on the contest between "middle-ground" and "radical" constructivism (Adler 1997). Instead, we intend to use the disciplinary space created by these debates by trying to tap the potential of genuinely sociological approaches. In the following, we use Pierre Bourdieu's work to elaborate a conflict typology, which we term "habitus-structure conflicts." We argue that this analytical framework is capable of yielding second and third order obser-vations (on this distinction, see Luhmann 1984). For example, it can be used to analyze con-flicts in world society as well as IR approaches to these conflicts with a view to uncovering their inherent symbolic violence and ideological implications. This analytical heuristic aims at overcoming conventional epistemological dichotomies - such as structure and agency, micro and macro, or structure and culture - and reconnecting analyses of social inequality and manifest conflict. Our framework assumes a connection between, on the one hand, power asymmetries in world society and the camouflage of these discrepancies, and, on the other hand, manifest conflicts, which we term "habitus-structure conflicts." Habitus-structure con-flicts are clashes between cultural patterns, which actors have internalized (habitus) and their environment, broadly defined as social constructs of all types, including social hierarchies, institutions, or the habitus of other actors. We proceed in three steps: we first provide some background to our typology of habi-tus-structure conflicts by introducing relevant parts of the sociology of Pierre Bourdieu, in-cluding its epistemological base, methodological implications and terminology. We then elaborate the analytical heuristic of symbolic violence and habitus-structure conflicts. The concluding part attempts to present some tentative thoughts on how this heuristic can be applied to conflict constellations in contemporary world society. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Great power status is an essentially contested concept, despite the commentaries of some IR theorists. In this paper I examine materialist definitions of great power status and find them lacking. Also, an intersubjective understanding approach to great power status fails at least insofar as no one can agree who a great power is, in at least some of the cases out there. After examining the literature I discuss how narratives influence foreign policy decision making and how a state's identity leads it to adopt certain policies - in this case, the pursuit of great power status. I extend this from a relational-identity perspective to a relational-power perspective, and seek to bring ideational studies and realism closer together. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

By drawing from some texts on the political situation during the Cold War, the paper assesses the special perspective Parsons takes on this classical IR theme. As will be shown, Parsons approaches this issue from two perspectives. On the one hand, he refe ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

British foreign and domestic security policy towards Islamist extremism since 2001 has been shaped a kind of "secular ambivalence" within the policy process. This ideological phenomena is a by-product of domestic forces, in particular the evolution of British Christo-secularism since the 1960s. This is not confined to the United Kingdom, but is the response of a Christo-secular state to "religious violence" in the late modern period. This paper will lay out the defining characteristics of secular ambivalence as an unofficial ideological position. It will then explore the British encounter with the Mehdi Army in Iraq between 2003 and 2004 as an illustrative example of secular ambivalence in action. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper will examine the structure and agency debate within IR from two points of view (a) traditionalist narrative history as practised by historians and theorised by philosophers and (b) Weberian individualist sociology. It will argue that narrative as practiced by historians and theorised by philosophers and sociologists can help resolve the dichotomy of the two concepts and facilitate a unified conception of the different components of the human, social and material dimensions of international relations. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper distinguishes between social capital that supports violence and social capital that supports peacebuilding with a focus on the long-term exclusivity of networks that support violence and the dynamic inclusivity of networks that support peacebuilding. The analysis identifies the characteristics of exclusive and inclusive networks. Exclusive and inclusive networks are examined specifically in terms of how their social capital serves to satisfy basic human needs. Constructive conflict leads to increased satisfaction of basic human needs, whereas unconstructive conflict leads to continued frustration of basic human needs. Finally, the conclusions explore ways we might more broadly satisfy human needs by building more social capital fueling nonviolent peacebuilding and redirecting that social capital currently directed towards violent conflict. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper discusses how the presence of "common others" can contribute to accelerating processes of collective identity formation within initially anarchical structures. Using the TV-series "Lost" (2004-present) as a test-case, it suggests that popular culture can be used as "playpens" for increasing our understanding of these issues. "Lost", it is argued, illustrates how identity differences within multifaceted populations often diminish when faced with "common others". This, in turn, may contribute to constructing more concord social collectives that actively define themselves as different from these others. In "Lost", seemingly radical social differences between the individuals in the group of plane crash survivors become less relevant when the group is faced with the "merciless" Others. Not only do the survivors shift their survival strategy from self-help to cooperation, but they also seem to develop a stronger sense of "we-ness". At the same time, collective identities in "Lost" appear to be socially constructed rather than innate, meaning that the sets of meanings that the actors attribute to themselves must be expected to change, as must the criteria for inclusion and exclusion. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The focus on institutions and their role in "successful" nation-building outcomes is a topic of intense interest for both researchers and policymakers. While much attention has been paid to the idea that institution building mattters in such cases, less attention is focused on how and why it matters. This paper reviews the concept of nation-building and the role of institutions therein and proposes looking at the role of institution building through the lens of the sociology of organizations. This approach specifically considers the nature of imposed institutions on a given group. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

SOCIETY STRONGLY DIVIDED IN THE PAST WITH THE NEW DEVELOPMENT IN THE EUROPE IS HAVING A CHANCE FOR A NEW OPTION. THE PAPER WILL LOOK FOR THE OPPORTUNITIES AND NEW ACTORS IN THE PROCESS. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Latin American countries do not define their security agenda. In fact the regional presence of the United States conditions the security agendas of the countries in the region and their capacity to establish autonomous national policies on the global , regional and sub regional spheres. Nevertheless the regional integration process in the southern cone and the international role that Brazil has been signaling it would like to play since the transition to democracy have allowed the governments of Brazil and Argentina to define some strategic orientations. During the last fifteen years the civil authorities have established some defense and security policies in the absence of direct intervention on the part of the armed forces, in contrast to previous periods. In this paper we shall analyze the conceptual sources incorporated by the political elite in both Argentina and Brazil and the means and resources available for decision making in the security sphere in these countries . We shall investigate the process of securitization in the regional context taking into account the interaction between endogenous and exogenous variables. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Studying the nature of trauma and how it affects individuals, societies, and groups is a complex and challenging undertaking. The majority of research on trauma comes from a psychological approach, although scholars in sociology, social psychology, and anthropology have also begun to explore the issue. In the this paper the author briefly explores the sources and dynamics of trauma as according to several social science disciplines. Then he focuses on the need for conflict resolution theorists and practitioners to address trauma related issues in their work. All too often, conflict resolvers working in deep-rooted conflicts, fail to recognize the severity of trauma that many parties have suffered in the hopes of negotiating a solution to a conflict or rushing to undertake reconciliation. This failure to adequately acknowledge the suffering that parties experience and the effect it has on populations can lead to future conflicts and continued suffering. Moreover the author examines how conflict resolution practitioners can be affected by burnout and secondary trauma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper, based upon interview and survey research, describes and analyzes the history of the European disability movement, how the movement’s history and ideology has influenced the structure and tactics of disability organizations today. The current challenge of the Europeanization of social policy is described and the response of disability organiozations, particularly in northern and western Europe is analyzed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past several years, there has been much debate within the International Relations community about whether or not security studies should be expanded to include threats to the state originating from non-military sectors. I argue that whether we, as students of security studies, should expand the definition of security or not is a moot point; state leaders already are articulating a broader definition. In this paper, I first outline a theory of security as an institution defined by the discourse of state officials. I then bring in insights from sociology?s new institutionalism to identify mechanisms for the adoption and diffusion of innovations to the institution of security. Finally, using logistic and negative binomial regression analysis, I examine the case of HIV/AIDS and security, identifying states that are most likely to articulate HIV/AIDS as a security issue and those states least likely to adopt this innovation to the definition of security. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The three hegemonies of the modern world-system have been the Dutch in the seventeenth century, the British in the nineteenth century and the hegemony of the United States in the twentieth century. Sociologists and political scientists have carefully studied the process of hegemonic rise and decline. Recent research by Rennstich (2001) retools Arrighi’s (1994) formulation of the organizational evolutions that have accompanied the emergence of larger and larger hegemons over the last six centuries. Modelski and Thompson (1996) argued that the British successfully managed to enjoy two power cycles, one in the eighteenth and another in the nineteenth centuries. With this precedent in mind Rennstich considers the possibility that the US might succeed itself in the twenty-first century. Rennstich’s analysis of the organizational, cultural and political requisites of the contemporary new lead industries ? information technology and biotechnology ? imply that the United States has a large comparative advantage that will most probably lead to another round of U.S. pre-eminence in the world-system. But important resistance to genetically engineered products has arisen as consumers and environmentalists worry about the unintended consequences of introducing radically new organisms into the biosphere. This paper will examine the agricultural biotechnology industry as a new lead industry and will consider its possible future impact on the distribution of power in the world-system. This will entail an examination of the loci and timing of private and publicly funded research and development, biotechnology firms that are developing and selling products, and the emergence of national and global policies that are intended to regulate and test genetically engineered products. The recent history of environmental impacts of genetically engineered products will be reviewed, as well as the contentious literature about the supposed risks of agricultural biotechnology. Several scenarios regarding the timing of the onset of biotech profitability and their potential impact on US economic centrality will be developed, and data on both the business history and the emergence of resistance will be employed to examine the likelihood of these possible scenarios. Draft (v. 5-51-03) 4026 words Proposed for presentation at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, March 17-20, Montreal. An earlier version was presented at the Division of Social Science Seminar, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Debates in security studies in the U.S. and Europe have drifted almost completely apart. In Europe it is common to present the theoretical landscape in terms of, say, critical security studies, the Copenhagen School, traditionalism and feminism. In the U.S. it is more common to see the major debate within security studies as being the one between offensive realism and defensive realism! Previously, almost all theoretical inventions in IR were made in the U.S. Currently, distinct theories are widely associated with places like Aberystwyth (Critical Security Studies), Paris (Bigo’s Bourdieu-inspired work) and Copenhagen (securitization). The new European approaches differ not only from security studies in the US, they also stand apart from most work done in other parts of the world. Are these theories peculiarly ‘European’ and if so, why? The paper aims at explaining the emergence of these European security theories. The explanation draws partly on the political context in the different regions, and partly on features of the intellectual fields, International Relations and Security Studies. The theories are also assessed briefly as to their relevance and usefulness. To what extent are they bound to local, European problems or relevant to the issues that are addressed elsewhere and vice-versa for the theories that flourish in the U.S. and the periphery respectively? Can they travel to the other parts of the world in a helpful role? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Michel Foucault’s analysis of biopower and its new technologies centred on life and the living lack a clear definition of the concept of life. While Giorgio Agamben’s reformulation of biopower has differentiated between two concepts of life, zoe and bios, bare life and politically qualified life, Agamben’s notion of zoe has often been equated with the Foucauldian understanding of life. This paper will show that the conflation of life and bare life, the zone of indistinction they enter erases the space for political action, for processes of re-subjectivation. To this end it draws on a Deleuzian understanding of life and confronts it with Foucault’s and Agamben’s. Deleuze introduces a different notion from both Agamben’s zoe and Foucault’s life, that of a life or ‘impersonal life’, life which cannot be attributed to a subject, which only exists in a matrix of desubjectivation. The challenge of abject life is that of its status as excluded, downcast life and therefore cannot be based on a biopolitics of impersonal life. In this understanding of life, biopolitics needs to be exposed as desubjectivating, as erasing political differences and short-circuiting political claims on the status of the subject. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper seeks to show how the rational-choice tenets of principal-agent theory may be integrated with constructivist applications of sociological organizational theory to explain the process of IO change, using the case study of the World Bank. Employing principal-agency theory alone provides a fairly convincing explanation for the exogenous causes of change in IOs, particularly in establishing the systemic circumstances under which IOs may be able to escape (through agency slippage or breakdown in consensus among principals) pressures for reform stemming from shifts in member state interests. Yet this framework explains only the conditions for, rather than the content of, IO agency ? a critical variable in understanding how the IO responds to external pressure. Borrowing from recent constructivist applications of organizational theory, an examination of bureaucratic culture provides a plausible account of the agent’s (IO’s) preferences, normally taken as a given within principal-agency theory. Inserting the variable of bureaucratic culture into the principal-agent model can explain why IOs often tend to change (or resist change) in ways unpredicted or undesired by the member state creators. This hybrid approach appears particularly fruitful in light of the current frustration that member states have expressed in attempting to reform the World Bank. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines how secondary states experience unipolarity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is the first step in a multi-year project to investigate the concept and dimensions of the purported “crisis” of global governance, the existence of which is commonly asserted but less commonly examined in detail. The purpose of this paper is ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines what geography, sociology and political economy contribute to our understanding of one key concept in IR, the state. The paper makes use of recent literature that seeks to conceptualize and theorize state transformation in Europe. In p ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper takes within its scope the broad disciplines of Development Studies and International Relations both of which, I argue are predicated upon an implicit narrative of history that takes the state form as the locus of enunciation. That is within both broad realms of study, a narrative of history as the history of the state form, history as the history of the nation state, informs and motivates the methodologies, assumptions and categories of analysis of both disciplines. However, utilizing the arguments made within the field of postcolonial studies, this paper argues that both disciplines within the broader human sciences are also predicated upon an elision or writing out of European colonial history. Thus, from this perspective, it is the writing out of colonial history that makes each discipline and their implicit narrative of history organised around the state form possible. Recent developments within politics and sociology around the incidence of globalisation and the recent flurry of academic and popular writing around the existence of a ‘new’ form of imperialism have produced a discursive tug of war over the relevance and viability of the state form under neo-liberal globalisation. This paper argues that the confused nature of these debates stems in part from the absence of colonial history and an absence of theorisation about empire as a form of politics within the discipline of politics and IR (Hardt and NEgri notwithstanding). Subsequently, I argue that in order to yoke together within the same analytical field both European colonialism and the practice and politics of development in the Twentieth Century, a new theory of history is required, one that places colonial history and the form of empire squarely in the centre of our consideration of global politics, one that explores the connections between empire and the state form, one that theorises the history of capital together with the history of the European colonial project, one that teases out the axes of continuity between the 20th Century trajectory of development and the 19th Century colonial project. Yoking development together with colonialism in the same analytic field needs to be fore grounded by a methodology of inquiry that theorises historical continuity rather than narrative rupture. [364 words] ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper develops and tests a general framework for explaining variations in the extent of postwar reconstruction. Existing studies point to the importance of economic resources and a coherent state apparatus in promoting effective reconstruction. This paper argues that because reconstruction inherently requires coordination between numerous societal actors as well as between state and society, a full explanation for the extent of reconstruction must examine the linkages among those actors, especially civil society. By generating greater amounts of information, a more vibrant civil society leads to a)better identification of needs, b)more efficient implementation, as well as c)more effective monitoring. The paper tests this proposition using newly assembled data from 46 Japanese prefectures. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper deploys Walter Benjamin’s critical approach to history in order to trace the genealogy of the international political economy of marketing. The nineteenth century poster (i.e. Lautrec, Cheret) is presented here as the site in which the commodity acquired a visual dimension that went on to transform the cityscape and our daily experience. This work proposes to study the nineteenth century poster as the origin of visual marketing.The research stems from the observation that everyday life is characterized by the pervasiveness of advertising images. These images constitute a backdrop within which our identities and notions of the real are negotiated. By tracing the origin of visual marketing back to the nineteenth century poster, this paper seeks to expose the mechanisms and practices of marketing that mediate between common people and the global economy.To date the colour lithographic poster of the nineteenth century has remained almost exclusively a specialized topic within the history of art hence; it has been predominantly treated as a work of art and rarely as an emerging form of mass-advertising. Furthermore, it is striking that the poster has been virtually unnoticed within the rich field of nineteenth century history that looks at the emergence of industrial capitalism, mass society and modern consumption. This research fills this vacuum by bringing the analysis of the fin de siècle poster to the intersection between the thriving fields of visual history and international political economy.Stepping on Benjamin’s reflections on the Arcades Project and in particular his analysis of the phantasmagoria of modernity, the essay uncovers the transformations of experience brought about by the irruption of the colourful images of marketing in the public space. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper critiques power transition theory through gendered lenses, contending that it is gendered in its language and conceptual framework. It presents a feminist reformulation of power transition hypotheses. It then compares a power transition approach with a feminist approach to the United States’ interpretation of and options regarding the “rise of China”.The first section of this paper asks how power transition theory contains, reflects, reproduces, and reflects certain assumptions about gender in global politics and scholarship about it. It applies general feminist critiques of security studies to power transition theory, then evaluates some gender-based issues with the language and structure of power transition theory specifically. It critiques the statist approach to security thinking within the power transitions research program and those scholars’ assignment of moral value to hierarchy. Instead, it proposes, gendered lenses can add tools to deal with the question of power transition to make the theory both more representative and more aware of its gendered implications. These tools include searching for silences, disrupting dominant discourses, employing empathy and discourse ethics, analyzing the competition between masculine and feminine values, critiquing us/them dichotomies, and critiquing the sexualization of relationships. The second section of the paper applies these insights to power transition theory’s observations about the rise of China, interrogating which people and states are included in that theory, which needs are neglected by a narrow interpretation of what “security” and “satisfaction” mean, the role of gendered militarized culture, and the social construction of gendered states and their contributions. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The literature on security privatization is overwhelmingly critical of any use of private security companies (PSCs) by western governments in post-conflict reconstruction environments (see for example Singer 2003). Due to their organizational form as private, profit-making entities, PSCs have greater motivation and more opportunity to make financial profit at the expense of their contractual partners and with possibly dire consequences for the success of the wider mission context in which they operate. Elsewhere, I have shown that this model of PSC behaviour is problematic, both theoretically and, probably more importantly, empirically (Drutschmann 2007). Contrary to the widespread consensus in the literature on security privatization, the large scale use of PSCs in, to a large extent, mission critical roles did not end in the predicted fiasco. Instead, the available evidence indicates that PSCs conducted themselves much more reliable than expected. In an effort to explain why the prevalent conceptualization of PSC behaviour is not supported by the empirical evidence, this paper will take a look at its theoretical foundation, specifically on the way in which agency theory is used to understand the relationship between the contracting state (principal) and PSCs (agent). In its first part, the paper will show that the current application of agency theory is not only overly simplistic, but that, as a result, important aspects of the theory are neglected and misunderstood. In its second part, the paper will take a look at how economic theory, from which agency theory is derived, discusses and deals with principal-agent relationships and the problems associated with them. The aim of this second part will be twofold. On the one hand, it will attempt to show that agency theory, despite its flawed current application, holds the potential of making a significant contribution to the understanding of the contractual relationship between states and PSCs. On the other hand, it will determine how and to what extent theoretical concepts that economists use to understand and solve principal agent problems are applicable to the private security industry. Theoretically, a focus will be on the field of economic sociology, which has greatly improved the understanding of economic processes in general and of agency related problems in particular in the last two decades. In its third and final part, the paper provides a broader outlook on the influence and contribution economic theory can make to the study of security privatization. Firstly, it will provide a brief overview of the few occasions when economic theory has been contributed to the discussion on security privatization. Secondly, it will address the question why economic theory, despite its obvious applicability, so far has only played a minor role in the study of private security companies and, finally, it will provide an outlook as to how economic concepts can be usefully integrated into the existing discussion on security privatization. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Migration is a topic which has gained support and legitimacy in the agenda of international development and one that has been studied from different angles. The economic impact of remittances and migrant workforce in particular has received a lot of attention. However there are some aspects which have close connections to economic and political aspects of migration that have not been studied in depth. One of those aspects refers to the impact that migration has on gender relations which in many cases crosscuts with ethnicity. There is ample evidence that proves that gender and ethnic inequality hinders development and how better opportunities for women have a positive impact on development outcomes. This paper attempts to look at the positive changes in gender and ethnic relations and its impact on development outcomes. Many studies have focused on the difficulties experienced by migrant workers and the violations to their human rights. However this paper gives a different glance to the phenomena. It argues that migration across the borders can have positive changes in gender and ethnic relations which in turn have positive effect on rights, resources and voice with it respective positive impact on economic performance and good governance. Thus this paper looks at those gender and ethnic relations (and changes) that allow or limit capabilities and functionings during migration in Mexico and the States. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In any small group, members occasionally disagree with each other and then find some way of moving past that episode: e.g., forgiving each other, agreeing to put the problem behind them, or bracketing the dispute until later. These types of ?repair processes?, as they are called in micro-sociology, are typical not only of groups of individuals but of groups of states, notably alliances. In this regard, it is striking that although disputes have often been studied in particular alliances (especially NATO), very little work has been done on alliance repair processes. My argument in this paper is that these processes cannot adequately be described solely by reference to instrumental or strategic considerations; instead, they are distinguished from each other, and triggered, by group norms about permissible and impermissible interaction sequences. To this end, I develop several stylized repair processes and model the branching relations between them. The model is illustrated by two specific cases of serious disputes, and their repair, involving members of the Atlantic alliance: the Suez crisis of late 1956 and the Iraq crisis of early 2003. The paper concludes with reflections on whether the repair processes could have existed in earlier eras marked by different norms of great power interaction. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Thinking from the margins or the peripheries (be they geographical, epistemological, cultural, or political) of International Relations has traditionally been discouraged by disciplinary discourses that have sought to take command of what it means to be true, objective, normal, valid, just, or simply topical. This control of meaning at the center of the discipline has been done on allegedly scientifically verifiable, or empirically manifest, or theoretically relevant methodological and ontological grounds. As Michel Foucault has argued, beyond so-called scientific, normative, or intellectual reasons advanced to impose a dominant voice at the center of a discipline (any discipline), what is at stake in the control of the center?and the corollary silencing of the margins?is a disciplinary decision over what can be said or pronounced and how it can be said or pronounced. More than producing truths, disciplines and those who position themselves at their centers are interested in the production, management and perpetuation of the ?true,? that is to say, of that discursive domain where certain linguistic, rhetorical, and narrative criteria established as normatively essential by some voices in the discipline must be used and reproduced in all sorts of explanations. Moving beyond Foucault, and bringing in the supplementary figures of thinkers like Louis Althusser and Antonio Gramsci, one could say that ideology and hegemony are never far behind such discursive controls often found at the center of disciplines. One also would have to recognize that such hegemonic controls also require ideological exclusions. In other words, the formation of a periphery or margin on ideological bases is a necessary part of enterprises interested in imposing dominant or hegemonic languages and accompanying regimes of truth. This paper argues that the current practice and theory of IR at the center (in the geographic West?and the United States above all?but also through the supposedly pressing contemporary empirical and conceptual issues that the discipline is said to have to deal with) provides yet another obvious instance of hegemonic discursivity put to the service of ideological distancing and silencing. What I call tabloid geopolitics is a dominant discursive formation, increasingly adopted by so-called mainstream IR scholars in the West mostly, that claims to be able to make sense of?and perhaps provide solutions to?the problems faced by the world of IR in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks and the US war in Iraq. Adopted by scholars of all theoretical stripes (from classical realists to die-hard idealists), tabloid geopolitics is particularly aggressive in its discursive exclusion of the margins of the discipline as it urges, sometimes openly, at other times more softly, but in all cases ideologically, scholars, students, and even lay people concerned with the fate of the ?free world? in an age of global terror to only focus on a few, essential, supposedly vital issues, such as the preservation of democracy, the destruction of terrorism, and the propagation of Western style neoliberal freedoms. The hegemony over discourse (what can be said or not said after 9/11, for example) emphasized by tabloid geopolitics not only occludes marginal voices but, moreover, sometimes integrates some of those voices or alternate possibilities into that which must be abjected, attacked, or even annihilated in the context of the global war on terror. Thus, this paper argues, critical thinking/voicing in IR coming from so-called margins?whatever they may be?must be involved in practices that seek to redefine what the margins or peripheries can mean or look like (and what they can say too) so that distancing, silencing, or even destruction by the tabloid geopolitical center can be challenged... ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although there have been efforts to conceptualise institutional change in international relations theory - above all with regard to regime formation and demise - (e.g. Aggarwal 1983, Finnemore/Sikkink 1998, Gehring 1990, E. Haas 1975, P. Haas 1993, Keohane 1982/1984, Young 1982/1991, Young/Osherenko 1993), these efforts lack in richness and systematics. There are at least two reasons for this: first, the very concept of 'regime' or 'institution' implies a certain stability and stasis, so that the analysis of change and dynamics tends to be neglected, especially in view of a widespread preoccupation with 'equilibria'. Second, 'institution' at international level is still often equated with 'cooperation', and development of the regulative and normative content of the institutions is considered of secondary importance.The paper will therefore integrate insights from the comparative politics, economic and sociological literature dealing with domestic institutional change into international relations theory. Three distinct approaches to institutional change will be elaborated (Powell/DiMaggio 1990, Hall/Taylor 1996, Thelen 2002): a) a functionalist / utilitarian approach which traces institutional change to changes in the demand for problem solutions (neoliberal institutionalism, rationalist regime theory); b) a power-distributional approach that attributes institutional change to shifts in the balance of power or to changes in preferences of the most powerful actors (neo realism); and c) a cultural-sociological approach which highlights the role of transformations in wider cultural scripts defining legitimacy and appropriateness for institutional change (cognitive regime theory, constructivism). Beyond these three distinct approaches, there is a body of literature that bridges these approaches and sees institutions change as result of functional, power-distributional, and cultural processes, and which particularly deals with path dependence.The paper adopts this latter view and conceptualises the analysis of regime change in three steps. First, students of institutional/ regime change need to inquire about the results of change (What aspects of the institution changed?) and hence need to identify phases of institutional change with regard to a ?baseline' and dimensions of change (scope/ depth). Second, the process of institutional change (How did the institution change?) needs to be looked at, identifying the paths, critical junctures, and sequencing of institutional change. While the first two steps are largely descriptive-analytic ones, the third one tackles the causation of institutional change (Why did the institution change?). A framework of independent (and highly interdependent) variables is developed that includes as drivers of institutional change: functional advantages; legitimacy patterns; (exogenous) knowledge and ideas; (endogenous) institutional learning; institutional 'nesting' und interaction; co-evolution with the non-institutional environment. Power is seen as an intervening variable that impacts on many of the other variables; external shocks are assumed to be occasions rather than genuine causes of change. This conceptual framework of institutional/ regime change is illustrated by examples from the realm of international biodiversity politics. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper aspires to bring everyday life and social repetition under the spotlight of political theorising, and examine their emancipatory potential. To do so it engages with two competing understandings of hegemony in radical political theory; one based on transcendence and social antagonisms and the other based on immanence and everyday life. The main thesis of the paper is that in order to understand the ontological foundations of hegemony we need to shift our focus from social antagonisms and hegemonic representations onto social repetition. The paper starts with an exposition of Laclau's radical theory of hegemony and its limitations. It then develops a counter ontological reading, an 'ontology of social repetition', based on the work of Maurice Blanchot and Gilles Deleuze. The paper concludes by examining what kinds of agency are present in social repetition, and how these can be translated in social action and strategies for social change. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyses from a modern systems theoretical perspective political discourses of conflict and cooperation in the Middle East. The specific regional focus of the paper are the Mashreq countries (Jordan, Palestine, Syria, Lebanon) and Israel in the period 1991-2005. The paper argues that the constructivist perspective of modern systems theory is particularly well suited to study both conflict and cooperation structures in the Middle East, thereby overcoming some of the shortcomings of more rationalist approaches which tend to conceptualise the Middle East as a regional ?container of conflict?. In contrast to such arguments, the paper argues that in spite of the prominence of political conflicts on the interstate and intrastate levels, the Middle Eastern region is also characterised by formal and informal structures of cooperation that limit the overall societal reach of conflict. By combining IR-approaches on ?regional security complexes? with insights from modern systems theory, the paper looks in particular at the relationship between collective identity constructions in the Middle East, on the one hand, and regional conflict and cooperation structures, on the other. The first part of the paper takes a closer look at the processes of collective identity constructions in the aforementioned countries. On this basis, it proposes a model of Self/Other distinctions that allows to conceptualise both conflictive and cooperative identity relations in the region. The second part of the paper then relates these discourses of identity to the regional structures of conflict and cooperation. Here, the paper is particularly interested in how these patterns of identity relations shape concrete political structures in the Middle East. It hence addresses in particular the role of political, military, religious, media and economic structures. The paper argues that the ubiquitous structures of conflict in the Middle East are balanced by manifold, but often more informal structures of cooperation that limit the overall societal reach of conflict. Such an argument questions the usefulness of conceptualising the Middle East primarily in terms of ?conflict? without an adequate analysis of discourses and structures of cooperation. Moreover, these arguments challenge all those approaches that assume a distinct conflict-inclination of societies and cultures in the Middle East. Rejecting these approaches, the final section of this paper hence puts the study of conflict and cooperation patterns in the Middle East into a world societal perspective. It argues that such a focus on structural developments in world society ? such as functional differentiation, inclusion/exclusion, (de-)bordering ? is better suited to describe patterns of conflict and cooperation in the Middle East, than rationalist, actor-centred or area-specific foci on this region. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Economic relations are socially constructed: we need to believe in their legitimacy for them to persist, or to know how the economy should change in accordance with value-oriented goals. This paper investigates how the concept of legitimacy is treated within political economy and institutional change literature. It focuses on how institutional and social change is explained in rationalist institutionalism, historical institutionalism, and economic constructivism before providing a Weberian alternative. Rationalist institutionalism is criticized for seeing ‘norms as error terms’, historical institutionalism is viewed as relying too heavily on ‘national trajectories’, and economic constructivism is assessed as being too elite centric and producing a view of ‘legitimacy by proclamation’. Special emphasis is placed on economic constructivism for producing the notion that ideas or norms can autonomously provide the key explanatory variable in explaining change, and that moments of uncertainty provide the best environment for such explanations. This view can lead to severe case selection bias and an ideational punctuated equilibrium model of institutional and social change centered on the role of ‘ideational entrepreneurs’. The paper then proceeds to augment economic constructivism with Weberian economic sociology. Max Weber’s work provides a solid foundation for studying legitimacy by seeing it as a temporal dynamic that emerges from contestation between the state and various social groups through their belief-oriented actions. Following Weber I argue that the everyday grind of economic activity is more important to understand than moments of uncertainty, and that studying ‘social mechanisms’ provides a rigorous account of why legitimacy matters to institutional and social change. Importantly, the Weberian view of legitimacy and institutional change requires us to have a strong conception of society that is separate from the institutions being investigated. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Various theorists of international relations have engaged in the process of de-naturalizing nearly every epistemological concept within the discipline. The concept of time, however?the temporality that informs IR?s theorizing of international politics?remains outside the boundaries of analysis. This paper analyzes the temporal conceptions that inform and orient IR analysis in an attempt to demonstrate how IR?s particular conception of temporality privileges those forms of analysis that attempt to make time-less claims that apply across history. This paper will utilize the insights of those who have already engaged in this process in sociology?William Sewell and Andrew Abbott?and extend this critique to the particulars of IR theory, demonstrating how IR theory is informed by a linear notion of time that shapes and constrains our epistemological commitments. In the end, this paper will offer possible alternative formulations that would more effectively take into account the multiplicity of temporal experience that exists in practice, rather than rely on the a-temporal, backward view of the analyst. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A broad array of approaches emerging out of the Third Debate in international relations could be broadly understood to be constructivist. They share a critique of social scientific methods that assume a fixed and objective world, as well as an assumption that international relations is constructed, and thus changeable. Despite the initial ?celebration of difference,? constructivism has since acquired a more narrow meaning, accompanied by debates that more clearly demarcate constructivism, post-structuralism, Critical Theory, etc. This paper will explore the emergence of the demarcations and the ideas that distinguish various constructivisms, including that between construction and performativity, construction and deconstruction, conventional and critical constructivism, and the influence of the philosophers or social theorists such as Wittgenstein, Habermas, Foucault and Derrida. The paper will analyse what is at stake, both positively and negatively, in these acts of boundary construction. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As constructivists and other advocates of constitutive theories have often noted, the natural world is very different from the social one. Our ideas about the social world not only reflect that world, but help shape and create it; we are part of the reality we try to describe and explain, not external to it, and we therefore have the potential to alter the reality a theory is merely intended to describe or explain. Our theories about the social world may thus become self-fulfilling prophecies or autogenetic in character. And yet while constructivists often make this point in epistemological debate, there have been relatively few attempts so far to address its empirical implications. With that objective in mind, this paper examines three prominent IR theories – the democratic peace theory, the interdependence equals peace thesis and the ‘clash of civilizations’ thesis – arguing that each has a self-fulfilling character rather than being true or false in any objective or timeless sense; each is, to paraphrase the now time-honored expression, what the relevant actors make of it. The paper also probes the processes by which theories become self-generating, stressing the role of opinion entrepreneurs in fashioning explanatory and predictive theories which become popularized – usually because they seem to fit the nature of the times in some way - so that people begin to believe that a theory explains reality in a naturalistic sense and that its predictions are therefore bound to hold. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that metageographical distinctions (Lewis and Wigen 1997) ? whether they are taken to refer to something actually existing, or are taken to be ideologically laden power tools ? serve as nodes in relational conceptual networks that form, allow, or authorize certain types of knowledge. Thus, North-South, the West, or the Orient, tie a range of other concepts such as civilization, globalization, universalism, and particularism together in a relational network of meaning. In other words, these concepts derive their meaning from their position in this network, and cannot stand alone. More concretely, why and how do social scientists and historians have the idea that the social world contains something called the West? I argue that it is because several domains of knowledge production ? in this paper I examine IR and anthropology ? cannot do without it. This is not a functionalist argument ? ?the West? does not exist because IR and anthropology needs it. Instead, these disciplines could develop precisely because the concept of the West was formed ? it became a node to which other concepts could be connected and given meaning. IR and anthropology have since been involved in reproducing the concept of the West as a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for knowledge production in their respective fields. The knowledge that the concept of the West has thus allowed, or helped form, feeds into another conceptual network, formed around the metageographical distinction North-South. Using a historical sociology of concept formation, this paper seeks to critically understand the metageographical logic of knowledge production in IR and anthropology. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]