1. Constructivism & International Society Approach
aka The English School

2. Background British Committee for the Theory of International Politics
Supported by the American Rockerfeller Foundation (1958)
Meets at Peterhouse, Cambridge
Members:
Herbert Butterfield, Professor of History, Cambridge
Martin Wight, LSE and Chatham House (later Sussex)
Desmond Williams, an Irish diplomatic historian, Catholic University College, Dublin;
Donald Mackinnon, a Scottish moral Philosopher
Michael Howard, a military historian.
Adam Watson, FCO
Hedley Bull – Aussie Scholar

3. International Society Approach
Diplomatic Investigations, (1966)
Collection of essays. Major ideas are published.
International relations are anarchic, but they are not chaotic.
There are patterns and regularities in the international system
States recognize these, take them in account

4. Anarchical Society Hedley Bull, Anarchical Society (1977)
Five Institutions of International Society
International Law
Diplomacy
War
Balance of Power
Great Powers

5. Anarchical Society System of states: two or more states
sufficient contact between them
sufficient impact on one another’s decisions
behaviour of each factors into calculations of the other.
Society of states (or international society):
conscious of certain common interests
conscious of certain common values
conceive of themselves to be bound common rules in relations with one another
share in the working of common institutions.

6. Anarchical Society
Members of international society will work to uphold the rules
Recognition they will benefit from rules, order that is produced
But how far will states go in upholding the rules?
Will get back to this in a moment!
Answer depends on theory

7. Martin Wight: Three Traditions
Realist/Machiavelli
Rationalism/Grotian tradition
institutions, international politics as rule goverened
Revolutionism/Kant
human beings over states, changing current international order
IR Theory addresses certain questions

8. Order vs. Justice
Order: a pattern or disposition of international activity that sustains those goals of the society of states that are elementary, primary or universal
preserving international society
maintaining peace
upholding the independence of member states
Maintaining order is the responsibilities of the great powers via:
balance of power
War

9. Order vs. Justice Justice - two kinds:
Communicative: procedural justice
going to courts
international law
Distributive: about who has what and who gets what
What do the international poor deserve?
What do the rich owe the poor?

10. Order vs. Justice Which is more important?
Addressing justice may be distruptive to the international order
Distribution of power, prestige, resources
Humanitarian intervention
Realists: Order
Revolutionaries: Justice
Rationalists: two camps
Pluralists
Solidarists

11. Pluralism vs. Solidarism
Solidarists
States will work to uphold the international order
Also norms and values of international society
May include interventions
Emphasis on individuals

12. Pluralism vs. Solidarism
Tolerance as a norm of international society
tolerance for different ways of life (live and let live)
States should not intervene
allow states to develop independently,
Intervention only if a state poses a threat to the international system.
emphasis on state sovereignty as a norm of international politics

13. International Society Approach
Current agenda
Humanitarian Intervention (Wheeler)
Environment (Hurrell, Kingsbury)
Human Rights (Vincent, Dunne and Wheeler)

14. Constructivism: Core Ideas
Anarchy is what states make of it.
Distinction between “brute” and “social” facts.
Brute Facts
Social Facts
Facts which exist independent of human action.
- There is snow on Mount Everest.
Facts recognized by society
You are students
We are at a university

15. Constructivism: Core Ideas
Socially constructed facts depend on humans to recognize them as true.
Big mistake to confuse social facts and brute facts.
ie: Realism recognizes anarchy as a “brute” fact rather than a socially constructed one.
Confusion between the two suggests that we believe that somethings are natural when they have really been constructed.

16. Constructivism: Core Ideas
But anarchy is what states make of it
Does not dictate any particular course of action.
Onuf (1989) – We live in a “world of our making”
World is not pre-determined in advance by non-human forces.

17. Constructivism: Approaches
Constructivism as a label
Essentially, positivists who didn’t change their methods.
Constructivism explains the “structure” of the international system.
Talk of bridging the rationalist-constructivist divide.

18. Constructivism: Approaches
Wendt’s approach
Structure is the product of human nature
“structures” form because of our behaviour
This doesn’t mean that it will be easy for human agents to change the international system.

19. Constructivism: Approaches
Rules of the Game approach (Critical)
“game” – not as in game theory
“game” of international politics is not pre-determined
we can see how the “rules of the game” are constituted.
Represents the “critical” aspect of the theory
increasingly lost as theory becomes more mainstream.

20. Constructivism & Normative Theory
Positivist theories:
little attention paid to the “make up” of states.
States are rational choice actors
Doesn’t matter if it is democracy or a totalitarian state
norms promoting cooperation will not work because international relations is an ends-means calculation.

21. Constructivism & Normative Theory
Constructivists
identity does matter and is very important
Ie: relations between Australia and New Zealand are different from relations between Australia and Indonesia.
Common, shared identity that is important
John Ruggie: important that the United states became post 1945 hegemon rather than USSR.
This cannot be explained by positivist methods.

22. Constructivism & Normative Theory
Equally important, how states view one another
If states see each other as threatening, may have a security dilemma.
If states see each other as allies, relations are different.
An action may be interpreted differently depending on where you stand.
If US buys military planes, Canada will interpret this differently than China.

23. Constructivism & Normative Theory
Similarity with English school:
just because there is anarchy, it doesn’t mean there are chaos.
within a system of anarchy, norms may emerge.
Potential for an “anarchical society”
Other ways to study the world than rational choice.

24. Popularity of Constructivism
Moves beyond critique and to analysis of international relations.
“Selling out”?
Positivist methods shown to be problematic.
ability to explain, predict was not as good as they claimed it to be.

25. Popularity of Constructivism
New scholars want to use critical IR theory, but want to do something with it.
Innovative theory, but also use empirical data.
introduction of new questions in IR: actors, human rights, control of WMD
Constructivism showed new potential for theorists frustrated with limitations of their own theory.

26. Mainstream & Critical Three things in common:
Normative or ideational structures are just as important as material structure
ideas about identity, ideology and what it means to be a friend or an enemy play a role in how states treat one another.

27. Mainstream & Critical
2. How non-material structures condition identities is important because identities inform interests and therefore actions.
“Identities are the basis of interests”.
Priests, politicians and students have certain sense of interest that depends on their “roll”.

28. Mainstream & Critical
3. Agents (actors) and structures are mutually-constituted.
Structures influence actors, but structures wouldn’t exists without them and their knowledge.

29. Mainstream & Critical Constructivists as “structurationists”
Emphasize the impact of ideas (structures) on identities
Actors maintain and ultimately transform those structures.
reciprocal interaction: creates a relatively stable social structure
States act in a particular way because there are rules. But those rules must be upheld by the practices of states.