Theoretical Foundations Nvard V. Manasian [email protected]

Theoretical Foundations

Nvard V. Manasian [email protected]

Among the multitude of theories explaining GG we will concentrate on the 4 main theories that discuss the nature and role of individuals, state, sovereignty and the interactions of those:

LIBERALISMFunctionalism,

International Regimes, collective goodsREALISM CONSTRUCTIVISMRational Choice,Hegemonic Stability

MARXISMDependency theory


It stems from the principle of human nature being GOOD

Instead it is the inadequate social institutions and misunderstanding of leaders that created INJUSTICE, AGRESSION and WAR

Being inevitable these vices could be minimized through multilateral action and institutional reform

And that is where democracy and market capitalism become pillars of HUMAN FREEDOM


Enlightenment: Humans are rational and they can continuously improve their conditions by just societies

19th century L: Modernize via scientific and industrial revolutions to come to a democratic society and free trade

20th century L: collective security, self-determination, no power politics and prevention of war

This has shaped the LIBERAL thought dwelling on the belief that cooperation is possible, peace could be achieved through interdependence, knowledge, democratic values and international organizations do work.


Hugo Grotius worked as a jurist in the Dutch Republic. He is one of the founding father of international law (where the subjects are states) based on natural law.

The aftermath of WWII was characterized by realism

1970s increased interdependence of states revived the liberal thought

Prisoner’s dilemma was used to justify that states are bound to cooperate in a long run


Prisoner B Stays Silent

Prisoner B Betrays

Prisoner A Stays Silent

Each serves 6 months

Prisoner A: 10 yearsPrisoner B: goes free

Prisoner A Betrays

Prisoner A: goes freePrisoner B: 10 years

Each serves 5 years

The fundamental principle of F is that states and individuals have basic or functional needs

Fs see economic and social international cooperation as prerequisites for peace and security, in this context the special agencies of UN are explained (exp. WB, UNICEF, etc.)

Promotes a web of activities that would bring to more interconnectedness and thus, interdependence

Key role of experts and their identity loss, loyalty vs. trust F stands behind the drive of IGOs and not surprisingly most

of them sprung after WWII, both regional and global F fails to explain why the wars remain? How to separate

technical and political issues?


1970s legal thought dwelled not only on the formal arrangements, but also on informal rules and norms that could be standardized and codified (think of Bologna process as an example)

Here hegemonic states play a role and realism counts as much as liberalism

IGOs playing a major role in creating and legitimizing the rules (exp. Convention on Crimes against Humanity)


Common grazing are for herdsCollective Goods tangible and intangible such as

peace, environment, financial stability, Internet, quality, etc.

Collective goods asks for interwoven action and interdependent activity, here market fails to provide mechanisms for CG, so other arrangements are needed

Mutual trust developed and built via monitoring (exp. ENQA)

CG theory is used when explaining the Ozone layer and high seas cooperation and arrangements and justify the need for UN and other multilaterals


Individuals seek to maximize their power and pursue their interests

R centers the action around the state which acts through balance of power

International Organizations are tools to be used by states for their own interest, so the tools cannot transform the actors as R believes

R does not rule out the IR, but has doubt about the NGOs and MNCs, much less the independence of IGOs


Unlike Rs NRs emphasize the international structures and explain the GG by the absence of global authority and the power of states

Structural constraints over agent’s motivationsSecurity Dilemma , i. e. two or more states

conflict even though none wants itBalance of power drives states to forge alliances

with othersAnarchy (caused by international system) leads to

insecurity and warIGOs roles are exaggerated and they are not apt

to promote stability


States have objective and material conditionsState’s action is a function of utility, which

explains its engagement in any multilateral activity

States don’t rely solely on their powerStates use the international system to advance

their national interestsWhat RC theorists fail to understand is that

state’s action is not only a function of utility but of INFORMATION, which is not always there…


H is a hybrid of liberal, public goods and realist theories

Hegemonic states use their power in certain ways

HS believes that open market is a public good that needs a strong state to be the guardian

It is the propagator and hence the driver behind the free trade and democratic values as tenets of piece and security

Examples of Great Britain and the US after WWII


Fairly new concept that explains the role of normsIt is a behaviouralist approach, in which all the

players of IR have certain beliefs, socially constructed rules and cultural practices

C core is embedded with identity and interests that form behaviors locally and globally

For Cs state interest is socially constructedSovereignty and its evolution redefines the

identityExamples of “poverty” agenda of the WB and

humanitarian rules of ICRC


Resulting from an uneven economic developmentCOLONIALISM NEOCOLONIALISM

Sought to maximize material Sought to maximize the dependence

gain through power control of ex-colonies on the surplus of domestic goods

GG is based on power, process of production and class relations

For Ms the IGOs are dominated by a group of powerful states that drive the agenda and have higher gains, WB and IMF are seen as vices that perpetuate this International System


Unequal trade between developed and developing states

IGOs and MNCs based in developed nations help to perpetuate this inequality

1970s (mostly in Latin America and Africa) witnessed un upsurge of import substitution, which collapsed in 1990s and asked for structural adjustments

The inequalities of power and wealth should be redistributed via new global order



IGOs are but tools to a status quo of imbalance

Widening gap between the poor and rich states and people has fueled the interest in WST

So far the discourse and theory was more centered around the states, but the organizations have their roles and influence as well, which is being studied:

Organizational Culture-bureaucracies shaping state policy, IGOs shaping?

Organizational Adaptation and Learning- how the change occurs?

Inter - organizational Relations- how the cooperation evolves? Exp. WB from sole

player to a partner like institutionNetworks

- what are they, how they get formed? Universities as gate keepers?


Documents

Theoretical Foundations Nvard V. Manasian [email protected]