Coordination and collaboration: regimes in an anarchic world

1982 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 299-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur A. Stein

The study of regimes can contribute to our understanding of international politics only if regimes represent more than international organizations and less than all international relations. The conceptualization of regimes developed here accepts the realist image of international politics, in which autonomous self-interested states interact in an anarchic environment. Yet there are situations in which rational actors have an incentive to eschew unconstrained independent decision making, situations in which individualistic self-interested calculation leads them to prefer joint decision making (regimes) because independent self-interested behavior can result in undesirable or suboptimal outcomes. These situations are labeled dilemmas of common interests and dilemmas of common aversions. To deal with these, states must collaborate with one another or coordinate their behavior, respectively. Thus there are different bases for regimes, which give rise to regimes with different characteristics. Coordination is self-enforcing and can be reached through the use of conventions. Collaboration is more formalized and requires mechanisms both to monitor potential cheating and to insure compliance with the regime. The article elucidates the assumptions of such an interest-based approach to regimes, assimilates alternative explanations into this framework, and develops the implications for regime maintenance and change.

Author(s):  
Valerie M. Hudson

This chapter traces the history and evolution of foreign policy analysis (FPA) as a subfield of international relations (IR) from its beginnings in the 1950s through its classical period until 1993. It begins with a discussion of three paradigmatic works that laid the foundation of FPA: Decision Making as an Approach to the Study of International Politics (1954), by Richard C. Snyder, H. W. Bruck, and Burton Sapin; ‘Pre-theories and Theories of Foreign Policy’ (1966), by James N. Rosenau; and Man–Milieu Relationship Hypotheses in the Context of International Politics (1956), by Harold and Margaret Sprout. These three works created three main threads of research in FPA: focusing on the decision making of small/large groups, comparative foreign policy, and psychological/sociological explanations of foreign policy. The chapter also reviews classic FPA scholarship during the period 1954–1993 and concludes with an assessment of contemporary FPA’s research agenda.


Author(s):  
Nina Hall ◽  
Hans Peter Schmitz ◽  
J Michael Dedmon

AbstractInternational relations (IR) scholars have recognized the importance of technology in enabling nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to build transnational networks and enhance their influence. However, IR scholars have typically focused on elite networks across NGOs, states, and international organizations. This article considers how digital technologies generate new types of networked power between NGOs and their members. Digital tools allow for fast feedback from supporters, rapid surges in mobilization, and more decentralized campaigns. Importantly, in the digital era, NGOs must decide not only which digital platforms to use, but also whether to devolve decision-making to their supporters. Two questions arise: First, do NGO staff or supporters primarily define and produce advocacy content? Second, is the goal of digital activism to broaden or intensify participation? Answers to these questions generate four digital strategies: proselytizing, testing, conversing, and facilitating. These strategies change advocacy practices, but only facilitating strategies open up new forms of networked power based on supporter-to-supporter connections. Digital strategies have profound ramifications for individual organizations, the nature of the advocacy sector, and its power in relation to states, corporations, and other nonstate actors. Digital adoption patterns shape how NGOs choose campaigns, how they legitimate their claims, and what strategies they rely on.


Author(s):  
Niels Blokker

This chapter discusses developments in operations authorized by the UN Security Council in the context of the rules governing use of force in international relations. It considers three elements surrounding criticism of the carte blanche nature of Resolution 678 authorizing the use of ‘all necessary means’ against Iraq following its invasion of Kuwait. First, the authorization has no time limit; secondly, it has an extremely broad mandate; thirdly, coalition forces were asked ‘to keep the Security Council regularly informed’. The chapter examines whether the trend towards more Security Council control of authorized operations has persisted. It analyses elements of the authorization resolutions adopted by the Council between 2000 and 2012 and their implications for potential UN responsibility. It argues that operational decision-making is outsourced to implementing states or international organizations but that there are cases when the UN may be held responsible for wrongful acts committed by the authorized operation.


Author(s):  
Jonathan Renshon

This book has examined the importance of status in world politics. It has introduced the status dissatisfaction theory and applied it directly to the realm of international relations. It has tested the theory using a variety of approaches, including network analysis, by investigating the relationship between status dissatisfaction and war, if and how status concerns motivated German decision making during the Weltpolitik era, and the link between heightened status concerns and the escalation of commitment. The book concludes by discussing four broad lessons that can be drawn from the findings as well as the open questions that remain: status is local; there are many paths to status; status concerns are what count and not status itself; and status dissatisfaction leads to escalation and conflict. It also considers the policy implications of the theories of international politics.


2020 ◽  
Vol 75 (4) ◽  
pp. 629-651
Author(s):  
Diana Panke

States address many of today’s global problems in international organizations (IOs). At the same time, regional international organizations (RIOs) play important roles in IOs, as a series of case studies suggests. RIO member states can speak on behalf of an RIO in IO negotiations. This paper explores under what conditions states voice RIO positions instead of national ones in IOs and thereby turn into agents of regionalization. Based on a novel dataset of more than 500 international negotiations and a quantitative analysis of theory-guided International Relations hypotheses, this paper shows that states are increasingly likely to negotiate on behalf of an RIO, when they regard grouping positions into regional blocs in IO negotiations as more effective, when they have a formal role as RIO chair, and when they possess financial and staff capacities needed in order to voice a regional position in international negotiations.


1963 ◽  
Vol 57 (2) ◽  
pp. 406-419 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chadwick F. Alger

The study of international relations has been considerably advanced in recent years by the application of findings from other areas of the social sciences. These have included decision-making, game theory, conflict, bargaining, communication, negotiation, systems, geography, attitudes, and simulation. International relations scholars such as Morton Kaplan, Charles McClelland, Richard C. Snyder, and Harold Sprout have built important bridges between international relations and other disciplines. It has been fortunate that such innovators have often found men from other disciplines, such as Kenneth Boulding, Harold Guetzkow, Charles Osgood, and Anatol Rapoport, in the middle of the bridge. The volumes of the Journal of Conflict Resolution offer one example of how far this remarkable effort at cross-fertilization has gone.


2008 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 161-189
Author(s):  
Dusko Prelevic

The Cosmopolitan idea of the World Government is quite rarely proposed in theory of international relations. Kant already claimed that this idea oscillates between anarchy and brute despotism. This is the reason why he described this standpoint as naive. The author tries to show that alternative theories, such as realism, Kantian and Rawlsian versions of statism and the conception of multilayered scheme of sovereignty, lead to more serious problems. The first one is rejected for the reason of the 'prisoner's dilemma' it implies. It is also argued that the Kantian version of statism is either inconsistent, or allows for totalitarian states if they have peaceful international politics. Many liberals reject Rawls's position because of his tolerant attitude towards 'decent peoples'. On the other hand, the conception of multilayered scheme of sovereignty is dismissed because of the non-existence of a unified decision-making procedure in global politics. At the end of the paper, the author defends Classical Cosmopolitanism theory from Kant's objections and indicates the main obstacles to its realization.


Author(s):  
P. Saikia

The present study was undertaken to study the decision making pattern of  farm Women in different farm and non-farm activities with following objectives i) to study the selected personal and socio personal and socio-economic characteristic of rural women and ii) to analyze the decision making pattern of rural women in different farm and non farm activities The study was conducted in Six Districts of Assam. A purposive cum simple random sampling technique was adopted for selecting the respective samples for the study. Altogether 1200 farm women were selected for the present study. Data was collected personally by interview method. The findings reveals  that farm women belonged to low socio-economic status, less than fifty per cent of farm women took independent decision in maintenance of house (35.25%), followed by buying food items for family consumption (34.17%) and  crop harvesting and transporting (33.75%). majority (78.75%) of farm women took joint decision in purchase of household items, purchase of implements (73.66%) followed by selling of  crops and where to sell (72.42%), buying of clothes for family members (67.25%).


1976 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 246-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald E. Nuechterlein

The term “national interest” has been used by statesmen and scholars since the founding of nation-states to describe the aspirations and goals of sovereign entities in the international arena. Today foreign ministers, military strategists and academicians discuss the vital interests of their countries in ways suggesting that everyone understands precisely what they mean and will draw correct inferences from their use of the term. Nothing could be further from reality. In truth, the study of international politics as well as the art of diplomacy suffer from widespread ambiguity about the meaning of national interest, with the result that some scholars have proposed that the concept be abandoned and replaced by some other phrase. To my mind, this would be an abdication of the scholar's responsibility because, whether we like it or not, the term national interest is so deeply ingrained in the literature of international relations and diplomatic language that it is unlikely to be dismissed from our vocabulary simply because some scholars find it useless. Were we to attempt to substitute some new phrase, we would likely find even less consensus and could become engaged in yet another round of jargon-creation. A better alternative, I suggest, is to strive for a more precise definition of national interest and then provide a conceptual framework in which serious discussion of foreign policy and international politics can become more fruitful. That is the purpose of this paper.


1984 ◽  
Vol 40 ◽  
pp. 6-6
Author(s):  
J. Philipp Rosenberg

When I first began teaching an Introduction to International Relations course, I quickly saw that my students needed something more than just reading about and listening to lectures on the clashes of perception which are at the heart of international politics. How better to do this than to have them participate in a simulation in which those clashes of perception would surface. Although one could choose one of any number of international organizations to simulate, the U.N. Security Council is probably the best due to its size and geographic balance. Having decided to use a simulation, I was immediately faced with crucial decisions as to how the simulation would be run especially in terms of the complexity of the rules used and the choice of nations to be represented.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document