problem solving theory international relations

• Request Info

Key Theories of International Relations

International relations theories can help us understand the way the international systems work, as well as how nations engage with each other and view the world. Varying from liberal, equality-centric strategies to straightforward realist concepts, international relations theories are often used by diplomats and international relations experts to dictate the direction that a government may take in regards to an international political issue or concern. By studying the following key international theories, professionals in the field can better discern the motivations and goals driving policy decisions worldwide.

Realism in International Relations

Realism is a straightforward approach to international relations, stating that all nations are working to increase their own power, and those countries that manage to horde power most efficiently will thrive, as they can easily eclipse the achievements of less powerful nations. The theory further states that a nation’s foremost interest should be self-preservation and that continually gaining power should always be a social, economic, and political imperative.

The nature of realism implies that seeking a moral high ground is a goal that governments cannot always achieve and that deceit and violence can be highly effective tools for advancing national interests. With homeland defense elevated to the highest priority, remaining morally righteous in the eyes of international organizations can take a backseat to enforcing foreign policy that will improve the nation’s global stature. In modern times, realism is evident in the foreign policies of China and Russia. The relationship between Russia and Syria is one that has raised eyebrows in Europe and around the world; despite the bloody civil war in Syria—and the international community’s pleas for intervention—Russia has maintained strategic relations with the government of Bashar Al-Assad in order to protect Russian interests in the region. Similarly, China continues its diplomatic and economic association with North Korea in spite of the latter’s abysmal human rights record and aggressive nuclear testing. Chinese encroachment into the South China Sea and Russia’s incursions into Ukraine also highlight the two countries’ aggressive—and at times violent—realist political approach to international affairs.

Also called “liberal internationalism,” liberalism is based on the belief that the current global system is capable of engendering a peaceful world order. Rather than relying on direct force, such as military action, liberalism places an emphasis on international cooperation as a means of furthering each nation’s respective interests. Liberalists believe that the negative consequences of force—such as economic losses and civilian casualties—far exceed its potential benefits. Therefore, liberal politicians generally prefer the use of economic and social power in achieving their national goals (for instance, obtaining the agreement of a neighboring country to help secure a border). In today’s globalized society, using economic tactics—such as bilateral trade agreements and international diplomacy—can be more effective in advancing political interests than threatening force. As liberalism has become more rooted in international cooperation through the establishment of organizations like the United Nations, realism has started to wane as a viable political strategy. It can be argued that the liberalist tradition, perpetuated by the United States, has become the dominant system in international relations, with established values and international institutions in place to regulate this order.

Constructivism

Constructivism rests on the notion that rather than the outright pursuit of material interests, it is a nation’s belief systems—historical, cultural and social —that explain its foreign policy efforts and behavior. For example, since German aggression served as the primary catalyst for the Second World War, Germany deploys its armed forces outside of German borders only when its government is certain of the need to intervene in instances of genocide or conflict that threatens to spill over into other nations. This has been demonstrated by the country’s foreign policy following the first and second Gulf War (the latter of which Germany refused to participate), as well as its reluctant participation in United Nations-led operations in Somalia and Yugoslavia.

Constructivists also argue that states are not the most important actors in international relations, but that international institutions and other non-state actors are valuable in influencing behavior through lobbying and acts of persuasion. For this reason, constructivism has become a popular and important theory in recent decades as non-state actors like international organizations such as Amnesty International, OXFAM, and Greenpeace gain political influence. International organizations play a role in promoting human rights and making them an international standard to which countries are expected to conform.

Karl Marx was a Prussian philosopher and economist whose works posited that societies could escape the self-destructive nature of capitalist socioeconomic systems by implementing socialist theory into their policies, both locally and abroad. Marxism, a theory that closely analyzes social classes, aims to dismantle the capitalist structure of the international system, as it states that capitalism is no longer practically sustainable in the modern world. Marx believed that private property should be replaced by cooperative ownership, with the emphasis placed entirely on satisfying human needs for consumption, rather than creating private profit. Under an ideal socialist international regime, societies would work together to ensure that basic human needs were met on a global scale. Marxism was a dominant political ideology during the Cold War and inspired socialist revolutions in countries such as China, Vietnam and Cuba. Marxism’s influence can still be felt today, with Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung encouraging students to study Marxism in exchange for free tuition. The Marxist revival is not exclusive to current and former communist nations; The 2017 Marxism Festival was hosted by the Socialist Workers Party in London and attracted thousands of activists from across the world. As the global population continues to grow and sustainability becomes increasingly precarious, Marxism remains a relevant topic of discussion for those who advocate the prioritization of human needs over private profit.

Gender issues are a significant concern within global politics, and feminism as an international relations theory seeks to regulate the power derived from (or denied on the basis of) an individual’s gender. Feminists are mostly interested in tracking political and social developments that inhibit success in female populations. When systems of power subtly or overtly tell women they can only fulfill certain roles, those limitations become social norms and perpetuate the cycle. The significance of feminism in international relations is evidenced by the role women play in promoting more just and fair international relations policies. Women like Hillary Clinton and Condoleezza Rice have both made important contributions to the advancement of women worldwide. As a senator representing the state of New York, Clinton co-sponsored the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, which was aimed at combatting gender-based pay discrimination. Rice was instrumental in starting the One Woman Initiative, which provides access to legal rights, political participation, and economic development to women living in countries with a large Muslim population.

Outside of the U.S., the adoption of feminist policies has propelled women to political achievement. Iceland has maintained women’s rights as integral to their political policy since 1850, when the nation granted unconditional inheritance rights to men and women. The nation, which also granted women suffrage five years before the United States in 1915, has also seen women in the highest levels of government: former President Vigdís Finnbogadóttir and current Prime Minister Jóhanna Sigurdardóttir were the first women to be elected to these positions in 1980 and 2009, respectively. The National Committee for the United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM) in Iceland was established in 1989 and focused on improving the social status of women across the globe. The contributions of nations such as Iceland have been financially and socially impactful, addressing the need for true gender equality and demonstrating the positive effects of feminism in domestic and foreign policy.

With the rapid changes taking place in the current geopolitical landscape, discerning why governments act as they do and understanding the implications of those actions has never been more crucial. When leveraged properly, these theories can be used to accomplish a broad array of objectives; therefore, international relations professionals must possess a keen understanding of the specific impact each theoretical approach to international relations can have on global diplomatic efforts. Obtaining a master’s degree in international relations—such as the Master of Arts in International Relations degree offer by Norwich University—can help individuals deepen their knowledge and understanding of these theories and prepare them for the rigors of a career in international diplomacy.

As the nation’s oldest private military college, Norwich University has been a leader in innovative education since 1819. Through its online programs, Norwich delivers relevant and applicable curricula that allow its students to make a positive impact on their places of work and their communities.

Our online Master of Arts in International Relations program offers a curriculum which evolves with current events to help you face the future of international affairs. The program covers many subjects to give you a look at the internal workings of international players, examine the role of state and non-state actors on the global stage, and explore different schools of thought. You can further strengthen your knowledge by choosing one of five concentrations in International Security, National Security, International Development, Cyber Diplomacy, or Regions of the World.

Recommended Readings: 4 Trends Involving International Security 6 Insights on International Economic Development Career Outlook: Foreign Service Specialist

Fifty Key Thinkers in International Relations , Google Books Handbook of International Relations , Google Books The Globalization of World Politics , Google Books Realism in International Relations , E-International Relations How China, The World’s Oldest Marxist State, Proves Marx Wrong , The Atlantic Vietnam Seeks to Lure Students to Study Marxism with Free Tuition , The New York Times IR Theory: Problem Solving Theory vs. Critical Theory , E-International Relations Marxism Festival , Marxism Festival.org Women’s Rights and Opportunities , The Office of Hillary Rodham Clinton One Woman Initiative Fund for Women's Empowerment , U.S. Department of State Feminism’s Influence on Iceland’s Foreign Policy , E-International Relations

ROBERT COX: CRITICAL THEORY AND PROBLEM-SOLVING | İlim ve Medeniyet

• ANTONİO GRAMSCİ
• CRITICAL THEORY
• INTERNATIONAL ORDER
• INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
• KURDISH ISSUE
• NATURAL CONSEQUENCE
• POST-POSITIVISM
• POST-POSİTİVİZM
• PROBLEM-SOLVING
• ROBERT COX KİMDİR
• THEORY IS ALWAYS FOR SOMEONE AND FOR SOME PURPOSE
• WHO IS ROBERT COX

Critical theory is the way of thinking that does not accept the prevailing order as a natural consequence. The theory had predicted some subjects like identity, domestic policy and foreign policy etc., but I had drawn interest entry coverage about international relations. The most important delegate of the theory and also the father of critical theory is Robert W. Cox who had influenced Marx and Gramsci. Cox discoursed approach of problem-solving in International Relations. According to him, the purpose of critical theory had changed established order. The advocates of critical theory look international relations over the power, and they put the power to foundation of ınternational relations. He said that as it always should be conflict for an international order, and while he was mentioning these subjects, he said an important sentence for international relations: ‘theory is always for someone and for some purpose.’

First of all, critical theory just like post-positivism, they express theory differently from traditional approach. We need to look the theory definition of Robert W. Cox at this point. According to Cox, ‘theory is always for someone and for some purpose.’ Even if the sentence appear like to does not express something, clannishness it expresses a certain disengagement from definition of traditional approach that see theory as cleaned environment completely from values and norms. In response to this, Cox claims that, people of theory have historical and social aspects that are impossible to be independent from values and norms.

Secondly, Robert Cox’s ideas on the purpose of theory in International Relations, is not a search to find the truth but it is a tool to understand the world as it is, and to change it through the power of critique. According to Robert Cox, theory has two purposes: one of them is the problem-solving purpose that is synchronic which deals with the givens and tries to manage the smooth functioning of the system. The other kind of theory is the critical theory, and the purpose is to become aware of the situations not chosen by one, and to establish an emancipator perspective. Once looked from the Coxian lens, it is clear that the discipline of international relations were from the very beginning loyal to this kind of purpose in theorizing ,i.e., the smooth working of the system. As Robert Cox articulates, ‘Theory is always for someone and for some purpose’; this statement reflects the context in which the theory is being analyzed. Cox had made a certain distinction between problem-solving and critical theory because of this. A deprived theory from perspective cannot be something else from ideology. Perspectives show changes with same time and place, and they created a unresolved dialogue between theoretician and social reality, and consequently problem-solving was appeared. Cox terms problem-solving; conservative and traditionalist. They accept prevailing order as a natural consequence and take something as it comes, and purpose of them had improved the order. In case, critical theory do not accept prevailing order like a natural consequence ,and they reveal problematical social and historical process ,so they do not have overextending purposes to prevailing order. We clearly saw that, while Robert Cox was explaining the statement, he mentioned a distinction between critical theory and problem-solving. According to me, the best example for statement of Cox is Kurdish debate because this statement can brighten people about Kurdish issue. The explanations and definitions regarding the Kurdish debate to be normative, prevents the analysis concerning the resolution to be objective. At this juncture, the theory definition of Robert W. Cox will lend assistance in the definition and naming of the Kurdish issue. According to Robert W. Cox; theory is always for someone and for some purpose, therefore divorced from a stand point in time and space. In other words, theory always serves a purpose and works for the resolution of problem of a certain group.

Finally, Robert Cox had found a solution to continuous issues for many years, and had given knowledge people about the issues with distinction between problem-solving and critical theory and his articles. This statement somewhere for someone, ıf even as it should be unnecessary, I think, it is important to understand discipline of international relations because the statement is expressed as a disengagement from traditional approach. Robert Cox is thinker that had beard extant issues with his studies and his thoughts. Maybe, some people recognize Robert W. Cox with this statement ‘theory is always for someone and for some purpose.’

Yusuf Taner KILAVUZ

Istanbul Medeniyet University, Faculty of Political Science, Department of International Relations. [email protected]

previous 2016 G20 ZİRVESİ VE TÜRKİYE'NİN BEKLENTİLERİ

Next 2016 yds sonbahar dönemi̇ sinav sonuç ekrani (ösym).

14 Aralık 2016 at 20:47

eyvallah yusuf bey tesekur ederim))

11 Ocak 2017 at 01:41

“…Robert W. Cox who had influenced Marx and Gramsci.”

11 Ocak 2017 at 01:44

Geribildirim Cancel Reply

Mail adresiniz gizli kalacaktır.

Gayemiz, asırlardır mirasçısı olduğumuz medeniyetin gelişimine katkı sağlamak adına kurduğumuz ilim halkasındaki ilmî faaliyetleri geniş kitlelere ulaştırmaktır.

Cemiyetimizde, genç ve hareketli yazar kadromuz ile Siyaset, Hukuk, Ekonomi, Sosyoloji, Edebiyat ve Tarih gibi ilmî alanlarda gerek akademik gerekse de gündeme ilişkin yazılar kaleme alınmaktadır.

[email protected]

Küçük Çamlıca Mahallesi, Filiz Sokak, No:3 Üsküdar/İstanbul

• YAZARLARIMIZ
• MAKALE GÖNDER
• BİZE ULAŞIN

© Bütün hakları saklıdır. 2016-2023 ilimvemedeniyet.com 

© Copyright by BoldThemes 2017. All rights reserved.

Services on Demand

Related links, print version  issn 0124-4035.

JIMENEZ-PENA, GABRIEL . 'Problem-solving' and Critical Theory Distinction: A Reflection from the International Relations. Desafíos [online]. 2020, vol.32, n.2, pp.69-89.  Epub Jan 14, 2021. ISSN 0124-4035.  https://doi.org/10.12804/revistas.urosario.edu.co/desafios/a.7861 .

This paper attempts to determine what points of view of certain IR authors have been associated with the category 'critical', and for what reasons. Second, it seeks to show that there are not just nuanced, but substantial differences between different 'critical' approaches, and within them. Finally, it concludes exploring plausible reasons for this classification of theories, currently useful in IR, arguing that there is a sense in which this comprehensive concept is of utility, but that it may also cause confusion and spurious generalizations.

Keywords : International Relations Theory; Critic Theory; Problem-solving Theory.

To What Extent is the Realist School of IR Theory Useful for Policymakers?

World politics has been studied and commented upon extensively through the last couple of centuries, with International Relations (IR) theory evolving into a distinct field in the 20 th century (Haas, 2016). As Haas explores, IR theories flourished in late 20 th and early 21 st century, becoming increasingly holistic and nuanced in their understanding of world politics. However, advancement in academic rigor of a discipline does not automatically translate into their inclusion in practice. The utility of IR theories for practitioners in policy making decisions has been a contentious issue (Nitze, 1993).

International Relations theory is only modestly useful for policymakers and practitioners of world politics. I will discuss the main theoretical frameworks and briefly outline the realist school of thought as it relates to the discussion of IR theory and its utility in world politics, paying special attention to neorealism. The contribution of IR theory in the policymaking field will be explored further, particularly about providing a language and framework to understand the events unfolding, and by providing tools to predict and evaluate actions, behaviours and consequences. Although the contribution of theory to practice is undeniable, it is limited by their inherently different and conflicting natures. The distinct and often contradictory objectives of IR theory and policy building are discussed in reference to neorealist theories. Because of the contrasting aims of theory and practice, the processes associated with them drastically differ as well. These processes further increase the gap between theory and decision making and limits the extent to which theory can be applied to practicing world politics.

Realism in International Relations Theory

International Relations has witnessed a rapid theoretical growth in the last couple of decades, resulting in what is termed ‘theoretical pluralism’ (Schieder & Spindler, 2014). Realist and Liberal schools of thought (often referred to as rationalist theories) shared similar ontologies and core units of study – the state – and gained eminence in the field of IR. Neorealism, or structural realism, developed through the Cold War and has stood as one of the main paradigms when discussing world politics and has prompted a great deal of subsequent research. Theory of International Politics outlines the basic tenets of neorealism (Waltz, 1979). Characterising the international system as anarchic, Kenneth Waltz proposes that states engage in self-help in order to ensure their survival. This is achieved by increasing their internal power and fostering alliances to strengthen their position. Unlike liberalism, neorealism believes that states chase relative gains and not absolute gains. While embracing the basic tenants of Waltz’s defensive realism, thinkers like John Mearsheimer advanced what is now known as offensive realism (Mearsheimer, 2001). He believes a rational state is a power maximiser and will seek hegemony to ensure its survival.

Rationalist theories like realism and liberalism – and neorealism and neoliberalism – have remained dominant in IR despite being challenged in numerous debates (Wæver, 1996). Realists like Hans Morgenthau had tremendous influence over both IR theory and, to an extent, American policy (Gellman, 1988; Morgenthau, 1960). President Trump’s public policy was shaped on the basis of realism, according to the national security advisor H.R. McMaster (McIntyre & Tritten, 2018). Regardless of whether policymakers were aware that they prescribed to realist beliefs, their conceptualisation of the world itself can be traced back directly to realism. Keeping this in mind, this essay will primarily focus on realism in discussing the usefulness of IR theory for policymakers.

Contribution of Theory to World Politics

Language and Framework

Although Morgenthau’s contribution to foreign policy was direct and visible, much of theory’s application in practice is inconspicuous at first thought. Most importantly, academic study provides the language and framework through which policymakers view and understand the otherwise complex events in world politics (Walt, 2005). Theoretical underpinnings influence what problem and information is paid attention and the prioritisation of policy decisions to make. Through a realist lens, threats to survival of the state and national interest will take priority over other concerns in a foreign policy discussion (Krasner, 1978).

Prominent theories often provide the language and lens through with policymakers view the world. Neorealism, for instance, popularised terms like anarchy and national interest. Framing issues based on realist understanding of the world limits and guides policy decisions made. Bureaucrats and leaders may not explicitly refer to the theories behind their decisions, or even be aware of their influence themselves. However, major events in history – like the Cuban missile crisis – and their analysis suggest strong neorealist influence over key decisions made by multiple practitioners over the globe (Smith, Hadfield & Dunne 2012).

Neoliberal critics claim institutions counter states’ pursuit for power and hegemony, instead encouraging them to cooperate for mutual benefit under certain conditions (Keohane, 1984). On the other hand, constructivists emphasise the role of immaterial factors – like norms, ideas and identity – on world politics (Wendt, 1999). Nevertheless, recent developments in politics indicate that idealist and normative policies like the responsibility to protect (R2P) are implemented to suit state interests (Doyle, 2011). Just as the realist school of thought remains fundamental in IR theory, its main tenets continue to influence world politics well into the 21 st century.

Predicting and Evaluating Policy

By providing the framework for understanding issues in world politics, IR theory sets the parameters for policymakers to predict the actions and behaviour of other actors, along with the likely outcome(s) of their own policies. This is especially true for positivist theories like neorealism that rely on observable behaviour to make predictions. Defensive realism argues that rational states will act in ways to ensure their survival and maintain the balance of power and status quo, while offensive realism predicts that states will pursue hegemony. Unlike the peaceful predictions of neoliberals, neorealists have been successful in predicting the turmoil characterising world politics (Kaplan, 1994). Stephen Walt, a prominent neorealist, makes a strong case to explain why a realist perspective is crucial to understand some of the most challenging and complex scenarios and states (Walt, 2018). While conceding that other theories might be more inclusive of variables, neorealism’s sharp distinctions helps simplify overwhelming matters to help policymakers make sense of the world. This clarity, in turn, is useful to analyze and evaluate foreign policy.

This is not to claim that neorealism or any other theory in IR helps mirror every detail and nuance of world politics. The framework and language provided by neorealism remains limited in its scope and objects of analysis, because the theory sets ontological boundaries on itself. For example, neorealism largely ignores the domestic politics and the changes that accompany a new administration in a democratic country. It also assumes all states are rational actors – but we know that a considerable number of states are autocracies, ruled by leaders who are perhaps more concerned with their personal wealth and lineage than national interest. This is a valid criticism and must be acknowledged when analyzing the use of theory in unravelling politics.

However, the utility of realist theories (like any other IR theory) for policymakers is limited because of the inherent differences between theory and policy practice. Because of these differences, theories often don’t lend themselves to be useful in policymaking. While there are larger, structural reasons that widen the gap between academia and practitioners, this essay will focus on the innate distinctions between the objective and processes of theory and practice of international relations.

Objective of Theory and Practice

The divide between IR theory and practice has always existed, but seems to have become more pronounced in the recent years (Nye, 2008). Joseph Nye points out differences in the nature and culture of theory and policy making that curb interaction between the two. Although academics participated in policy practice in the 20 th century, modern trends separate the academics from practice. One reason for the growing gap and the restricted use of IR theory in policy making decisions is the difference in objectives of theory and practice.

Defining the term ‘theory’ in international relations has been another debate entirely. In Theory of International Politics , Waltz differentiates between laws and theories – namely that theories are not merely sets of laws but that theories seek to explain the laws that are derived from observation (Waltz, 1979). The effectiveness of theories in IR, therefore, is not measured by how accurately they represent the reality or their contribution to policy. Theories are meant to be ‘a picture, mentally formed, of a bounded realm or domain of activity.’ (Waltz, 1979, p.9).

Neorealism is conscious of its exclusion of certain factors and its simplification of international politics – in fact, that is the very objective. Theories also devise and define certain terms in International Relations. Neorealism clearly defines what it means by power, anarchy, self-help, hegemony and other widely used terms. By setting boundaries on otherwise vague terms, theories further aid to precisely demarcate and account for the events in politics. It must be noted, however, that the tendency to break down the international system in a precise manner and use structural analysis to explain it is not a universal trend. Academics in the realist school of thought have introduced unit analysis and domestic factors (Snyder, 1991; Zakaria, 1992).

Additionally, neorealism relies on explaining generalised regularities in the international system and not specific events/ outliers (Waltz, 1990). By relying on assumptions and using a reductionist approach, a theory aims to be merely a tool to perceive the external world. It does not claim to be particularly useful for policy making. While academics like Morgenthau applied realist convictions to practice, he did not solely rely on the principles of theory to assess American foreign policy. He was a strong critic of the Vietnam war, and while he used realist arguments in part of his commentary, the main convictions remained grounded in the morality and ethics of the policy (Morgenthau, 1968). Despite being a prominent classical realist, Morgethau understood the limits of theory in world politics, making a strong case against applying academic understanding in practical pursuits. Following the same logic, neorealism is restricted in determining policies pertaining events and actors outside its scope of analysis. Non-state actors, climate change, civil unrest, refugee crisis and other forces in world politics are given limited attention in the realist school of thought (if that).

Going beyond the realist school of thought, it is evident that different paradigms subscribe to different types of theories. Robert Cox, for example, explores two different types of theories – namely ‘problem solving theories’ and ‘critical theories’ (Cox, 1981). While problem-solving theories might lend some use to practitioners, critical theories do not. Instead, they question the very assumptions and boundaries that the former rely on. While critical theories may have a broader scope and mechanisms to evaluate factors in world politics, its objective of problematising the world severely limits its contribution to policy making.

A bureaucrat or practitioner in world politics is required to deliver in a time-constrained environment (Nye, 2008). This is especially true in the modern world, with the pace of information sharing and communication increasing exponentially. Academics and scholars devote months or even years to research, develop and polish their theories and perspectives on international relations. However, policymakers primarily rely on historical narratives, cognitive biases and common practices to make decisions (Nau, 2008). Apart from theoretical understanding of the international system, bureaucrats are required to be invested in the cost-benefit analysis of context specific policy decisions (George, 1993). As Alexander George points out, theoretical approaches in international relations are inadequate to provide policy makers vital input. Prominent neorealists are not only aware of incompatibility between theory and practice, they respect the differences and encourage their separation (Waltz, 1996).

Processes in Theory and Practice

Because the objectives of academia and policymakers in international relations are drastically different, the processes they use to achieve these goals also vary. Theory in International Relations is not developed to be predictive, but as a reaction to events that have already unfolded in world politics. Liberal institutionalism took centre stage in IR theory when Woodrow Wilson advocated the establishment of the League of Nations post World War I (Van De Haar, 2009). After the collapse of the League of Nations and World War II, the United Nations took into account the power dynamics of the world. The Security Council explicitly gives the Permanent 5 – USA, Russia, United Kingdom, France and China – the power to veto resolutions, thereby maintaining the balance of power between strong and weak states (United Nations, 1945). Soon after, classical realism gained prominence over liberalism (Carr & Cox 2016).

Waltz’s Theory of International Politics introduced structural realism or neorealism to the world during the Cold War, when the effects of an anarchic international system were most obvious (Waltz, 1979). Another process by which theories develop is by interacting with each other in attempts to understand the events that unfold. While Waltz introduced neorealism to the world, Robert Keohane responded with neoliberalism by employing the same rationalist terms, assumptions and methodology (Keohane, 1984). Theories continue to grow and evolve through this criticism and discussion within academia – scholars (ideally) either explain or modify their theories (Waltz, 1986). Even constructivists who vehemently opposed rationalist theories interacted with neorealism in their language. The titles of Alexander Wendt’s works are telling. ‘Social theory of international politics’ and ‘Anarchy is what states make of it’ are two examples where theories develop by interacting with each other and sharing similar language and examples (Wendt, 1992, 1999).

The interactions between theories and processes is often narrated by dividing the interactions into The Great Debates (Lake, 2013). While the first great debate between realism and liberalism focused on two statist theories, the second debate between traditionalists (advocating for interpretive techniques) and behaviourists (preferring objective methods of hard sciences) was concerned with the methodology of theories in IR. The third great debate was epistemological in nature, questions the foundations of knowledge that shape theories in the first place (Houghton, 2008). The development of IR suggests that the discipline has grown by responding to events and competing theories, and has largely ignored the predictive strength of different theories. The nature of academic work actively discourages theorists from being preoccupied with policy-relevance, and instead demands that scholars strive for peer-acceptance within their ‘ivory towers’ (Walt, 2005, p. 40).

On the other hand, practitioners of policymaking work under certain administrations and governments and are concerned with meeting demands of multiple stakeholders. However, unlike academia, the scope for debate and interaction is limited due to centralised decision making and cognitive rigidity and bias of employees and institutions themselves (Renshon & Renshon, 2008). Scholars are able to engage and interact for years to achieve the theoretical excellence and recognition. Practitioners, however, are expected to make trade-offs between a multitude of factors like time, cost and benefits, norms, objectives of the government or regime in power (Renshon, 2008, p. 516). As IR theory contributes to become more abstract and prosper in its own bubble, think tanks are better able to provide the expert advice and consultation for policy makers (Nye, 2008).

Theories of IR are not designed to allow for context-specific variables to be factored into consideration. Neorealism, for example, may at best provide a framework to understand politics in a generalised manner, but its use of structural analysis will be of little help in the policy process and its many requirements and restrictions. Decisions in politics are made by analysing and anticipating the future and consequences involved for the state. However, neorealism (and other a number of other theories in IR) is more retrospective and not predictive in nature. They tend to respond to events than guide them.

In conclusion, international theory has become a rigorous academic discipline in the social and political sciences. Despite the evolution in IR theory, its use in practice remains modest at best. In this essay, I focused on the realist school of thought – and particularly neorealism – for its relevance and prominence in both scholarly and political world. Neorealism did provide the language and framework for policymakers to conceive the world in. Without the boundaries, definitions and simplification that theory provides, events in politics are likely to seem overwhelming and chaotic. In other words, neorealism provides heuristics for practitioners to analyse the behaviour of actors and evaluate their own actions. While multiple theories might claim credit for influencing different policies and behaviours, the impact of neorealism has been consistent and visible over the decades.

However, the impact of theory on policy making remains limited not only because of structural factors but inherent differences between the two. As both Nye and Walt emphasise, theories have different objectives than practitioners of world politics. Theories like neorealism are aimed towards simplifying and drawing precise lines and explain generalised and observable regularities. Prominent theorists like Waltz and Morgenthau understood the limitations of theories they developed, and were skeptical about using them in policy making. Other academics have proposed different types of theories, like problem solving and critical theories. Because of their nature, objectives of each paradigm remain different. The process involved in developing theories is another inherent factor that limits its contribution to policy making. IR theory has developed by reacting to the events in world politics, and interacting with each other – often sharing terms and languages. Scholars are encouraged to polish their theories over years and gain prominence within the abstract world of academia over focusing on policy.

Policy makers, however, have drastically different objectives. They are required to take into consideration all factors and the context and actor specific aspects of politics. Therefore, they are likely to use cognitive bias, cost benefit analysis and have trade-offs between multiple factors. Making policy decisions requires bureaucrats to predict future events and the possible consequences. Theories like neorealism, therefore, are therefore of limited use for policy makers. Although theories in International Relations are only moderately useful in policy scenarios, their worth is not exclusively linked to their practical utility. Theoretical concepts remain valuable for their insights and critique of world politics, regardless of the gap between academia and practice of world politics.

Carr, E. H. and Cox, M. (2016). The twenty years’ crisis, 1919-1939: Reissued with a new preface from michael cox . London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.

Cox, R. (1981). Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory. Millennium, 10 (2), 126-155.

Doyle, M. (2011). International Ethics and the Responsibility to Protect. International Studies Review, 13 (1), 72–84.

Gellman, P. (1988). Hans J. Morgenthau and the Legacy of Political Realism. Review of International Studies, 14 (4), 247-266.

George, A. L. (1993). Bridging the gap : theory and practice in foreign policy . Washington, D.C: United States Institute of Peace Press.

Haas, M. (2016). International relations theory : competing empirical paradigms . In (pp. 307 ).

Houghton, D. P. (2008). Positivism ‘vs’ Postmodernism: Does Epistemology Make a Difference? International Politics, 45 (2), 115-128. doi:DOI:10.1057/palgrave.ip.8800222

Kaplan, R. (1994). The Coming Anarchy: Shattering the Dreams of the Post Cold War. New York Times .

Keohane, R. O. (1984). After hegemony : cooperation and discord in the world political economy . Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

Krasner, S. D. (1978). Defending the national interest: raw materials investments and U.S. foreign policy . Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press.

Lake, D. A. (2013). Theory is dead, long live theory: The end of the Great Debates and the rise of eclecticism in International Relations            . European Journal of International Relations, 19 (3), 567 – 587.

McIntyre, J. and Tritten, T. J. (2018). H.R. McMaster: Trump national security strategy to be based on ‘principled realism’. Washington Examiner .

Mearsheimer, J. J. (2001). The tragedy of great power politics : WW Norton & Company.

Morgenthau, H. J. (1960). Politics among nations; the struggle for power and peace (3d ed.). New York,: Knopf.

Morgenthau, H. J. (1968). U.S. Misadventure in Vietnam. Current History (Pre-1986), 54 (000317), 29-34.

Nau, H. R. (2008). Scholarship and Policy‐Making: Who Speaks Truth to Whom? In C. S. Reus-Smit, Duncan (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of International Relations: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199219322.003.0036

Nitze, P. H. (1993). Tension between opposites: reflections on the practice and theory of politics (illustrated ed.): Scribner.

Nye, J. (2008). International Relations: The Relevance of Theory to Practice. In The Oxford Handbook of International Relations: Oxford University Press.

Renshon, J. and Renshon, S. (2008). The Theory and Practice of Foreign Policy Decision Making. Political Psychology, 29 (4), 509-536.

Schieder, S., & Spindler, M. (2014). Theories of international relations . In (pp. 357). Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/usyd/detail.action?docID=1694670

Smith, S., Hadfield, A. and Dunne, T. (2012). Foreign policy: theories, actors, cases (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Snyder, J. (1991). Myths of Empire: Domestic Politics and International Ambition (revised ed.): Cornell University Press.

United Nations. (1945). United Nations Charter San Francisco United Nations.

Van De Haar, E. (2009). Classical liberalism and international relations. Policy: A Journal of Public Policy and Ideas, 25 (1), 35-38.

Wæver, O. (1996). The rise and fall of the inter-paradigm debate. In K. Booth, M. Zalewski, & S. Smith (Eds.), International Theory: Positivism and Beyond (pp. 149-185). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Walt, S. M. (2005). The Relatiionship Between Theory and Policy in International Relations. Annual Review of Political Science, 8 (1), 23-48.

Walt, S. M. (2018). The World Wants You to Think Like a Realist. Foreign Policy . Retrieved from https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/05/30/the-world-wants-you-to-think-like-a-realist/

Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of international politics . Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.

Waltz, K. N. (1986). Reflections on Theory of International Politics: A Response to My Critics. In R. O. Keohane (Ed.), Neorealism and its critics: Columbia University Press.

Waltz, K. N. (1990). Realist thought and neorealist theory Journal of International Affairs, 44 (1), 21–37.

Waltz, K. N. (1996). International politics is not foreign policy. Security Studies, 6 (1), 54-57. doi:10.1080/09636419608429298

Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what states make of it: the social construction of power politics. International organization, 46 (2), 391-425.

Wendt, A. (1999). Social theory of international politics . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Zakaria, F. (1992). Realism and Domestic Politics: A Review Essay. International Security, 17 (1), 177-198.

Written by: Vaishnavi Mangalvedhekar Written at: University of Sydney Written for: Dr. Ken Fraser Date written: October 2018

Further Reading on E-International Relations

• Tracing Hobbes in Realist International Relations Theory
• How Global is Security Studies? The Possibility of “Non-Western” Theory
• Outside of Critical Theory, What Has Marxism Contributed to Understanding IR?
• How, if at all, Does Hierarchy Exist Both in the Theory and Practice of IR?
• A Review of Critical Race Theory’s Critiques of Mainstream IR
• The False Dichotomy of the Material-Ideational Debate in IR Theory

Please Consider Donating

Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing.

E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team. Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view. Any amount, in any currency, is appreciated. Many thanks!

Donations are voluntary and not required to download the e-book - your link to download is below.

You're not logged in.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

manchesterhive requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals - to see content that you/your institution should have access to, please log in through your library system or with your personal username and password.

If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/extracts and download selected front and end matter. 

Institutions can purchase access to individual titles; please contact [email protected]  for pricing options.

ACCESS TOKENS

If you have an access token for this content, you can redeem this via the link below:

Redeem token

Don't have an account?

In order to clarify the use of the term critical theory, this chapter looks at some examples from mainstream International Relations. Neorealism is taken as the paradigmatic example of a problem-solving or traditional theory. The chapter will assess why that is so, and examine whether there are any grounds for challenging that view. A more hard test case would be Social Constructivism, and the chapter will assess the extent to which this approach could be considered a critical theory and on what grounds. The aim of the chapter is to indicate that a hard distinction between critical theory and problem-solving theory is hard to sustain and that perhaps all theory contains some mixture of critical and problem-solving elements – though in different combinations.

• Share on facebook Share on linkedin Share on twitter

All of MUP's digital content including Open Access books and journals is now available on manchesterhive .

Critical theory and international relations

Knowledge, power and practice.

INFORMATION

Table of contents.

• Preface and acknowledgements
• Chapter 1: Critical Theory
• Chapter 2: The critique of traditional/problem-solving theory
• Chapter 3: The limits to knowledge
• Chapter 4: The operation of power
• Chapter 5: Practice
• Chapter 6: Can Critical International Relations Theory be more than critical?
• Bibliography

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

The Existential drinker

Publication history:.

• Philosophy and Critical Theory

Drinking to excess has been a striking problem for industrial and post-industrial societies – who is responsible when a ‘free’ individual opts for a slow suicide? The causes of such drinking have often been blamed on heredity, moral weakness, ‘disease’ (addiction), hedonism, and Romantic illusion. Yet there is another reason which may be more fundamental and which has been overlooked or dismissed, and it is that the drinker may act with sincere philosophical intent. The Existential Drinker looks at the convergence of a new kind of excessive, habitual drinking, beginning in the nineteenth century, and a new way of thinking about the self which in the twentieth century comes to be labelled ‘Existential’. A substantial introduction covers questions of self, will, consciousness, authenticity, and ethics in relation to drinking, while introducing aspects of Existential thought pertinent to the discussion. The Existential-drinker canon is anchored in Jack London’s ‘alcoholic memoir’ John Barleycorn (1913), where London claims he can get at the truth of existence only through the insights afforded by excessive and repeated alcohol use. The book then covers drinker-texts such as Jean Rhys’s interwar novels, Malcolm Lowry’s Under the Volcano, Charles Jackson’s The Lost Weekend and John O’Brien’s Leaving Las Vegas, along with less well-known works such as Frederick Exley’s A Fan’s Notes, Venedikt Yerofeev’s Moscow–Petushki, and A. L. Kennedy’s Paradise. The book will appeal to anybody with an interest in drinking and literature, as well as those with more specialised concerns in drinking studies, Existentialism, twentieth-century literature, and medical humanities.

Critical theory and sociological theory

On late modernity and social statehood.

Populism, neoliberalism, and globalisation are just three of the many terms used to analyse the challenges facing democracies around the world. Critical Theory and Sociological Theory examines those challenges by investigating how the conditions of democratic statehood have been altered at several key historical intervals since 1945. The author explains why the formal mechanisms of democratic statehood, such as elections, have always been complemented by civic, cultural, educational, socio-economic, and, perhaps most importantly, constitutional institutions mediating between citizens and state authority. Critical theory is rearticulated with a contemporary focus in order to show how the mediations between citizens and statehood are once again rapidly changing. The book looks at the ways in which modern societies have developed mixed constitutions in several senses that go beyond the official separation of legislative, executive, and judicial powers. In addition to that separation, one also witnesses a complex set of conflicts, agreements, and precarious compromises that are not adequately defined by the existing conceptual vocabulary on the subject. Darrow Schecter shows why a sociological approach to critical theory is urgently needed to address prevailing conceptual deficits and to explain how the formal mechanisms of democratic statehood need to be complemented and updated in new ways today.

Toleration, power and the right to justification

Rainer forst in dialogue.

Rainer Forst's Toleration in Conflict (published in English 2013) is the most important historical and philosophical analysis of toleration of the past several decades. Reconstructing the entire history of the concept, it provides a forceful account of the tensions and dilemmas that pervade the discourse of toleration. In his lead essay for this volume, Forst revisits his work on toleration and situates it in relation to both the concept of political liberty and his wider project of a critical theory of justification. Interlocutors Teresa M. Bejan, Chandran Kukathas, John Horton, Daniel Weinstock, Melissa S. Williams, Patchen Markell and David Owen then critically examine Forst's reconstruction of toleration, his account of political liberty and the form of critical theory that he articulates in his work on such political concepts. The volume concludes with Forst’s reply to his critics.

• Terms and Conditions
• Privacy notice

© 2023  Manchester University Press

MARC records provided by The University of Manchester Library

• [66.249.64.20|185.80.148.109]
• 185.80.148.109

Character limit 500 /500

• Search Menu
• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Landscape Art and Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• Gender and Sexuality in Art
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Acquisition
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Religion
• Music and Media
• Music and Culture
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Neuroanaesthesia
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Medical Ethics
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Critical Care Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Study and Communication Skills in Life Sciences
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Audio Processing
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Security
• Computer Games
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist and Conservationist Organizations (Environmental Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Strategy
• Business Ethics
• Business History
• Business and Government
• Business and Technology
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic Systems
• Economic History
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Social Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• International Political Economy
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Public Administration
• Public Policy
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Decision Theory
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• War and Defence Operations
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous chapter
• Next chapter >

5 Understanding and Classifying Critical Approaches

• Published: March 2019
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

This chapter argues that what various theoretical approaches to IR that describe themselves or are described as critical share in common is that they are political rather than social theories. There are no other common elements to be found across this group of approaches. Various schemas used to typify different sorts of critical theories (e.g., emancipatory/postmodern; feminist/postcolonial/poststructuralist; Copenhagen School/Aberystwyth School/Paris School) signify different political theories with different political content but share political investment in both disciplinary International Relations and global politics. They are explicitly engaged in International Relations theorizing and International Relations research as a political enterprise with political ends.

Signed in as

Institutional accounts.

• GoogleCrawler [DO NOT DELETE]
• Google Scholar Indexing

Personal account

• Sign in with email/username & password
• Get email alerts
• Save searches
• Purchase content
• Activate your purchase / trial code

Institutional access

• Sign in with a library card Sign in with username / password Recommend to your librarian
• Institutional account management
• Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Sign in through your institution

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth / Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

• Click Sign in through your institution.
• Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
• When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
• Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Sign in with a library card

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

• Click Sign in through society site.
• When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

• View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
• View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Rights and permissions
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2023 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

• Request new password
• Create a new account

World Politics: International Relations and Globalisation in the 21st Century

Student resources, multiple choice quiz.

1. Which of the following is a critique of realism advanced by Robert Cox’s approach to Critical Theory?

• That it is a problem solving theory
• That it fails to consider normative issues
• Its claims that its view of international relations is the only authentic one
• All of the options

d. All of the options

2. Which of the following is a criticism of Marxism advanced by the critical approaches?

• Concentrated too heavily on socio-economic class differences rather than other features of society that supported capitalism
• Marxism was too reductionist in that it ignored elements such as culture
• Its emphasis on revolution as the prime method to enact change in society

d.  All of the options

3. What is the purpose of ‘emancipation’ for critical approaches?

• To enable the state to achieve security for itself at the expense of its citizens
• Emancipation is aimed at decreasing domination and increasing freedom in all their forms
• Increasing the control of specific segments of society
• None of the options

b. Emancipation is aimed at decreasing domination and increasing freedom in all their forms

4. In what context does Gramsci refer to the notion of hegemony?

• One or a handful of states establishing dominance over others in the international system
• As a system of class based domination over weaker sections of society
• A process by which a particular cultural, social and political narrative achieves domination within society
• None of the options 

c. A process by which a particular cultural, social and political narrative achieves domination within society

5. What are the goals of critical theory?

• To maintain the present international order
• To challenge the prevailing order and enact change through a process of critique
• To support traditional theories in their ‘problem-solving’ goals
• None of the options. 

b. To challenge the prevailing order and enact change through a process of critique

IR Theory: Problem-Solving Theory Versus Critical Theory?

• Post author By Matt Davies
• Post date 01/10/2014
• No Comments on IR Theory: Problem-Solving Theory Versus Critical Theory?

This article was originally published by E-International Relations on 19 September 2014.

Robert Cox began his canonical 1981 essay “Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory” with the observation that it is “necessary and practical” for academic disciplines to “divide up the seamless web of the real social world”. We make these divisions, Cox wrote, in order to analyse the world and thus to produce practical knowledge of that world. It is not a stretch to suggest that the real social world of International Relations scholarship might also be approached as worthy of analysis and theory. Indeed, reflection on International Relations as theory appears in the field as part of the necessary and practical division of the complexity of the social and political world. Rare is the introduction to IR textbook that does not emphasize, and usually begin with, the “great (theoretical) debates” that have structured the field since it emerged as an academic discipline.

Thus theory itself has long and often been treated as an object for theoretical reflection in International Relations. Recently, we could point to both the founding of a specific section of the US-based International Studies Association dedicated to Theory – indeed, this section honoured Professor Cox at the ISA convention in Toronto in 2014 – as well as the special issue in September 2013 of the European Journal of International Relations on “The End of IR Theory?”, accompanied by a wide-ranging discussion of the papers collected there in the Duck of Minerva blog.

For some of the contributors to the special issue and to the debates on the symposium – and I hope I can be forgiven for making an impressionistic observation rather than an analytical one – it seems that the question mark at the end of “the end of IR theory?” was a sign of fatigue rather than a sense that the debates over theory needed to be renewed. Fatigue, in the sense of “are we still having this conversation?” or “haven’t we moved on yet?” Emblematic of this fatigue were the reflections of Professor Chris Brown in both his article in the EJIR and his contribution to the symposium. It’s not that Brown is hostile to theory; on the contrary, his contribution was a complaint that the critical theories that emerged in the 1980s had not fulfilled their potential and that problem-solving theory had contributed much more.

I disagree with his assessment of the status of critical theory, as do many of the contributors to the special issue and to the symposium, in particular with his claim that it has failed to live up to the promise it showed in the 1980s – but that’s a conversation for another time. What is most interesting here is how Brown takes up Cox’s analytical division of “critical theory” from “problem-solving theory”. Indeed, the trope of problem-solving versus critical theory is asserted quite often in discussions of the status of theory in IR: for example, in A. C. McKeil; in Robert W. Murray; or in Ali Diskaya, just to take a few examples appearing here in e-IR. It is this trope, along with Cox’s other oft-cited claim in the 1981 Millennium article that “theory is always for someone and for some purpose” (Cox 1981: 129) that have made his article canonical. Indeed, Cox’s categories of “critical” and “problem-solving” are now part of the very common-sense ordering of theory in IR.

It is therefore important to consider what Cox actually said about these categories. Problem-solving theory, first, “takes the world as it finds it, with the prevailing social and power relationships and the institutions into which they are organised, as the given framework for action. The general aim of problem-solving is to make these relationships and institutions work smoothly by dealing effectively with particular sources of trouble” (Cox 1981, 128-129). This definition, remember, follows Cox’s opening statements in the article about the importance of theory for the production of practical knowledge. Cox is often interpreted as elevating critical theory over problem solving theory – Brown takes him to do so, for example, in the symposium when he says Cox “compared ‘problem-solving’ theory unfavourably with ‘critical theory’” but I am not convinced that a careful reading of Cox’s article supports this (and Cox argues something similar). In addition to signalling the importance of theory for practical knowledge, Cox explicitly notes, for example, how the analytical procedures he sees as defining problem-solving theory are the source of its strength. He takes issue with the idea that problem-solving theory is value-free and asserts that it is conservative (Cox 1981: 129-130) but this is as close to a normative assessment of problem-solving theory as Cox gets.

Critical theory, in contrast, is holistic where problem-solving theory is analytic. It “does not take institutions and social and power relations for granted but calls them into question by concerning itself with their origins and how and whether they might be in the process of changing. … Critical theory is directed to the social and political complex as a whole rather than to the separate parts” (Cox 1981: 129). Cox also allows that where problem-solving theory might be seen as conservative, critical theory might be seen as utopian: “Its aims are just as practical as those of problem-solving theory, but it approaches practice from a perspective with transcends that of the existing order. … Critical theory allows for a normative choice in favour of a social and political order different from the prevailing order, but it limits the range of choice to alternative orders which are feasible transformations of the existing world” (Cox 1981: 130).

I suspect that it is this holistic and utopian range for critical theory as asserted by Cox that leads Brown to identify critical theory with Quentin Skinner’s notion of Grand Theory and leads so many of the rest of us to assume that critical theory is posited as a superior theoretical approach to problem-solving theory. I’ve tried to show that Cox, at least, makes no explicit claims to that effect. Nevertheless, the categories Cox bequeathed to us seem to encourage us to turn this binary, critical versus problem-solving theory, into a hierarchy. Readers of International Relations theory instinctively want to read it as political theory – though as Rob Walker might remind us, this does not make us careful readers of political theory either. Perhaps we need to acknowledge that the theoretical choice presented by the binary critical theory-problem-solving theory is, at least, theory as engaged in a political contest.

Should Cox’s categories be preserved, critiqued, or abandoned? Would doing so lend a clearer (and practical) view of theory in the field? One way to extend the engagement with the practice of theory would be to read Cox’s categories alongside the other famous definition of critical theory, in Max Horkheimer’s essay “Traditional and Critical Theory” (Horkheimer 2014 [1937]). Though Cox did not explicitly cite Horkheimer, the latter’s efforts to distinguish critical theory from what he called “traditional theory” make him an obvious interlocutor. (There are, of course, many other serious contributions to the effort to situate theory socially and politically, from Bourdieu to Foucault, from Bruno Latour to Walter Mignolo. Many of these efforts are considered in the EJIR special issue and the Duck of Minerva symposium.) I focus on Horkheimer here in part due to the clear affinities between his approach and Cox’s and in part because Horkheimer, like Cox and as I would like to do, provides an explicit defence of the enterprise of critical theory.

While the scale of Horkheimer’s critique, engaged as he was with theory per se, is much grander than the stage Cox builds when he focuses on IR theory in the 1981 article, their accounts of “traditional” and “problem-solving” theory are remarkably similar. Cox notes how the power of problem-solving theory stems from its methodological “fixing” of the social and institutional parameters surrounding the variables it examines. For Horkheimer, this method, rooted in Descartes and predominant not only in social sciences but in science generally in his time, stems from the ability of the scholar to abstract him or herself from these social and institutional parameters in the production of theories and analyses. In other words, just as in any production process where a division of labour separates the subjective functions of planning, designing, interpreting, and analysing from the executive functions, traditional theory renders the world under study as objective and passive and the scientist an active, analysing subject.

In their conceptualisations of critical theory, however, Cox and Horkheimer differ slightly but in an important way. While both are concerned to defend theory as an approach to a dynamic and interconnected totality, Cox does not foreground the status of the theorist, while for Horkheimer the critical theorist must engage with theory as a productive process. Cox does take neorealism to task for neglecting the production process in the constitution of national interest (Cox 1981: 134-135) but Horkheimer goes further: it is not a matter of adding another parameter or variable to the theoretical enterprise; it is a matter of understanding the theoretical enterprise itself in relation to and as a part of a general production process and division of labour. When Cox wrote in 1981, the prevailing epistemology in IR and the epistemological commitment of problem-solving or traditional theory was realist: the world exists independently of our thoughts about it and the task of theory is to make thought adequate to reality. What Horkheimer shows is that there is no neat division between thought and reality that can justify the privileged position of the theorist in the social division of labour: our thoughts are part of reality, as real as the city you live in or the job you work at and they must be analysed as part of the general social division of labour and of social reproduction.

Thus the problem-solving theorist becomes a functionary in the maintenance of social order. The critical theorist must understand the role of theory in social reproduction in order to break down the divisions between theoretical reflection and the making of the world.

I am not suggesting that Horkheimer was right where Cox was wrong. Cox was certainly aware of the – explicit or implicit – political commitments of the theorist when he said, “theory is always for someone and for some purpose”. The question for me here is whether our common-sense taxonomy of International Relations theory as “problem-solving” or “critical” remains appropriate. Given how embedded it is in our ways of seeing ourselves and our field, and given that it can be quite useful for teaching theory, I don’t think it should necessarily be abandoned. Given the implicit, instinctual way IR theorists tend to treat the division as a contest, as in Chris Brown for whom problem-solving has produced better results than critical theory, I wonder if it would not be better to try to make the political stakes of that contest more evident.

For me, reading Cox with Horkheimer provides an interesting start on this task. The description of the first category as “problem-solving” or “traditional” points to a theoretical practice where expertise rules, where specialists take up their specific tasks and succeed or fail on the basis of how powerful their explanations are and the impact of their work. Cox and Horkheimer both acknowledge the importance of this approach in terms of method and results. And they both hint at the cost: politically, we might better describe this approach as technocratic theory. The enterprise is to uncover the timeless essences of things and relations and to keep things working by keeping them in their place.

The contrasting approach to theory, which Cox and Horkheimer both dub “critical theory”, seeks instead to enable the transformation of things. But critical theory is more than this, too; after all, as social constructivism suggests, the transformation of things is just the normal state of affairs as people make themselves and make their history. Critical theory does more: it disagrees. As Rancière suggests, it disrupts the order of the “distribution of the sensible.” Critical theory works by making visible the relationships and the things that International Relations refuses to recognise and qualify as relationships or things. It makes audible the voices of people not qualified to speak in International Relations. Against the technocratic barriers to international living and understandings, critical theory identifies the arbitrariness and artificiality of barriers and explains them in relation to their roles in the division of labour, social reproduction, or system maintenance. Politically, critical theory must be democratic theory – not a theory of democracy, posed externally to its object, but a theory that is democratic in its everyday practices. These are the political stakes in our theoretical choices.

Matt Davies lectures in International Political Economy at Newcastle University and is the Degree Programme Director for the MA in World Politics and Popular Culture . He is also a co-editor of the Popular Culture and World Politics book series , published by Routledge.

• Tags International Relations , History , Realism , Neorealism , Liberalism

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Robert W. Cox and Critical Theory of International Relations

2009, International Studies

Robert W. Cox's contribution to International Relations theory places the discipline in a transformational framework. Building on Gramsci's ideas and a variety of other sources eclectically, his theory goes beyond the neorealist statecentric framework and brings out the connections between material conditions, ideas and institutions in what he terms the formation of 'world orders'. How people organize themselves in the sphere of production not only determines their own life but also that of their states and the world order. In saying that change can come from any one of the spheres (material conditions, ideas and institutions), he denies and goes beyond the base-superstructure thesis of Marxism. Cox identifies creation of a vibrant civil society, emergence of organic intellectuals representing the marginalized, development of community-level solidarity, participatory democracy, non-violent methods of conflict resolution, pluralism and multilateralism as key elements of his...

Related Papers

http://www.iibfdergi.ibu.edu.tr/index.php/ijesr/article/view/23/148

Prof. Dr. Sezai Ozcelik

Neorealist and Neo-Gramscian Hegemony in International Relations and Conflict Resolution during the 1990s 1990’lu Yıllarda Uluslararası İlişkiler ve Çatışma Çözümünde Neorealizm ve Neo-Gramsiyan Hegemonya Kavramı Abstract: The article aims to explain international relations and conflict resolution in combination with the neorealist and neo-Gramscian notions of the hegemony during the 1990s. In the first part, it focuses on neorealist hegemony theories. The Hegemonic Stability Theory (HST) is tested for viability as an explanatory tool of the Cold-War world politics and conflict resolution. Because of the limitations of neorealist hegemony theories, the neo-Gramscian hegemony and related concepts such as historic bloc, passive revolution, civil society and war of position/war of movement are elaborated. Later, the Coxian approach to international relations and world order is explained as a critical theory. Finally, the article attempts to establish a model of structural conflict analysis and resolution. Keywords: Neo-realism, Neo-Gramscian, Hegemony, Conflict Resolution, International Relations Özet: Bu makale uluslararası ilişkiler ve çatışma çözümü kuramlarını neorealist ve neo-Gramsiyan hegemonya kavramlarını çerçevesinde 1990’lı yılları kapsayacak şekilde açıklamayı hedeflemektedir. Birinci bölümde, neorealist hegemonya kuramlarını odaklanılacaktır. Hegemonik istikrar kuramı (HİT) Soğuk Savaş sonrası dünya politikası ve çatışma çözümü ile ilgili olaylari açıklayabilme kabiliyeti test edilecektir. Özellikle neorealist hegemonya kuramlarının Soğuk Savaş sonrası dünya düzenini açıklamakta yetersiz kalması sonucu, neo-Gramsiyan hegemonya kavramı ile birlikte Gramsci’nin siyasi düşünce tarihine kazandırdığı öteki önemli kavramlar – tarihsel blok, pasif devrim, sivil toplum ve pozisyon savaşı/hareket savaşı – açıklanacaktır. Daha sonra uluslararasi ilişkiler ve dünya düzeni hakkında önemli çalışmaları bulunan Cox’un kuramı, kritik teori olarak incelenecektir. Makalenin sonunda yapısal çatışmaların çözümü ve analizi konusunda bir model oluşturulmaya çalışılacaktır. Anahtar Kelimeler: Neorealizm, Neo-Gramsiyan, Hegemonya, Çatışma Çözümü, Uluslararası İlişkiler

Randolph B Persaud

Focuses on violence against the Third World via a critique of Neo-Gramscian theory of hegemonic consensus.

Marketing and Smart Technologies

Andrea Mila-Maldonado

Richard Devetak

Ozgur Usenmez

A critical theory route to hegemony, world order and historical change:

PHOEBE MOORE

South Korea’s history of economic development and corresponding political struggle is usually told from the perspective of speculators whose intellectual investment in this nation is rooted in pursuits toward capital accumulation.2 But Korea’s ongoing melee of labour unrest has trans- formed the face of development domestically throughout several stages of what Antonio Gramsci called ‘passive revolution’, which I relate to global political economic struggles for the creation and control of ideas about how to best compete and survive in the rapidly globalising world without complete destruction of national accord. (This is my published PhD and first monograph, published first in 2007 in then in 2012 in paperback)

Çağatay Öner

The decline of American hegemony has always been one of the most controversial issues in international relations. However, in order for this issue to be properly analyzed, the concept of hegemony must be examined with a broad and accurate theoretical approach. This thesis therefore problematizes and analyzes the decline of American hegemony. The main theoretical approach adopted in this context is the Neo-Gramscian perspective, as represented mainly by Robert Cox, which provides a solid understanding to elaborate what is hegemony and why American hegemony is in decline. In order to reach an accurate analysis, this thesis discusses the concepts of hegemony of different theories in international relations and elaborates the misleading analyses of the concept and world order. Later, in the light of Neo-Gramscian perspective, it examines the origins and main patterns of American hegemony during the twentieth century. Finally, with a different dimensional approach to mainstream theories, this thesis argues decline of American hegemony and reveals the underlying reasons. Moreover, the rise of others will be analyzed in this context as well. Thus, this thesis presents a recent (including Trump administration) study in the framework of hegemonic decline.

Daniel R . McCarthy

Gramsican approaches in International Relations (IR) have sought to outline the relationship between ideas and material forces in the construction of world order. Scholars working within this broad school have sought to emphasise that ideas are material forces, and must be considered as concrete historical structures (Cox, 1987) central to the establishment of particular historical and hegemonic blocs. This literature has primarily focused on the discursive construction of hegemony by international elites and the impact this has on political practices. While these insights are important in understanding the construction of world order, it is necessary to extend them to include the creation of actual physical structures – that is, it is vital to link the ideational aspects of hegemony with actual material processes. I will argue that a consideration of the role of technology provides an ideal vehicle for this process, building on the preliminary work of Bieler and Morton in this regard (2008). Technological structures are the product of particular cultural values and embed these cultural values within their very structure. Physical material factors thereby express ideational values constructed by specific social forces. Social practices are thus not only a function of the dominance of certain ideological formations, but also the product of the material environment itself and the manner in which the human metabolism with nature must function through these physical constructions. Daniel McCarthy is currently completing a PhD at the Department of International Politics, Aberystwyth University, funded by the ESRC. His research, linking together science and technology studies, historical materialism, and sociological theories of power, explores the nature of information technology as a form of institutional power in international politics, through an examination of the Internet in American foreign policy. Daniel can be contacted at: {[email protected]}. The question of the ontological primacy of ideas or materiality has occupied a central role in theoretical debates in International Relations (IR) for the past 30 years. Whether in disputes over the status of ideas within research paradigms, 1 the nature of the structure-agency problem, 2 or any number of other controversies, * This article was first presented at the British International Studies Association (BISA) Conference, 17 December 2008. I would like to thank Ian Bruff, Lisa Denney, Matthew Fluck, Lene Hansen, Columba Peoples and James Perry for their helpful comments.

International Studies Review

Giorgio Shani

This article explores the possibilities of the emergence of a genuinely ''post-Western,''and less Eurocentric,''critical''international relations (IR) theory through a brief examination of ''critical''discourses within two ''non-western''cosmopolitan traditions: Islam and Sikhism. It is argued that, although critical IR has created space for the articulation of post-western discourses within the discipline, it continues to speak for and to the West.

Abdullahi Dhiblawe

RELATED PAPERS

Alejandra Peña

Colombia Internacional

Ralf Leiteritz

Susan Engel

International Socialism

Adrian Budd

Mark McNally

Johnna Montgomerie

Shannon Brincat

Jess (Julia Flora) Mezo

Francesco Cecon

Deepshikha Shahi

Perspectives on International Relations and World History, IGNOU Political Science B.A. (Honours)

Vikash Chandra, PhD

Vendulka Kubálková

From International Relations to World Civilizations: The Contributions of Robert W. Cox

Bieler Andreas

Global Governance

Craig Berry

Tim Geschwindt

Greig Charnock

Ahmet Görgen

Marc Venhaus

Eve Croeser

The SAGE Handbook of Political Science, pp.1256-1271.

Stéphane Paquin

BINU JOSEPH

Örsan Şenalp , Mehmet Gürsan Şenalp

International Studies Quarterly

Claire Cutler

Marlies Glasius

Alfredo Saad Filho

E. Bastiaan van Apeldoorn

Steven C Roach

OIKOS – Revista de Economia Política Internacional

OIKOS (Rio de Janeiro) Revista de Economia Política Internacional

Bilecik Seyh Edebali University Journal of Social Sciences

Gorkem Altinors

Anna Schärer

British Journal of Politics & International Relations

Huw Macartney

Adam Morton

Review of International Studies

Matthew D Stephen

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2023