Constructivism
I - What is it?
• Not a theory (not concerned with who are the main actors or main
problems in IR, nor solutions) rather an ontology (set of
assumptions about world, human motivation and agency).
• Constructivism does not counter either realism or liberalism
(neither pessimistic nor optimistic) rather opposes rationalism
(decisions are not simple products of cost-benefit analysis, but
mediated by ideas, identity and persuasion – social construct)
II - The rise of it
• In the 1980s, scholars began to draw from sociological and critical
theories to argue for the importance of norms, ideas, identity, and rules in
the shaping of IR
• Failure of existing theories to explain end of the cold war created space
for a new approach
• Meteoric rise of constructivism began in the 1990s
• It is now amongst the mainstream approaches in IR
III - Key tenets
IDEAS > IDENTITY > INTERESTS
• Constructivism is about human consciousness and the construction of reality
• ‘Ideas matter’ - It is important to take seriously the role of ideas in world politics
• Our mental maps are shaped by collectively held ideas, such as knowledge,
symbols, language, and rules
• Ideas influence states’ identities (i.e. dem + HRs > liberal state) = mold its interests
and consequently shape state behaviour
• Ideas and beliefs of elite in power particularly important
Global politics as a ‘social construction’
•Constructivism is concerned with the interplay between structure and agency
•Institutionalised ideas (e.g. Geneva Conventions on War > structure) condition global politics dynamics as
we know it and shapes states behaviour
•However, actors can construct, reproduce, and transform structures through the power of ideas
•Agents and structures co-constitute each other
•Old practices of rivalry and war-making may be changed through institutionalization of ideas - set of rules,
norms, practices i.e. state sovereignty and non-intervention, Vattel 1758, subsequently enshrined in
successive treaties > gradually became norm observed by most
• Symbols, rules, concepts and categories shape how individuals construct, interpret and act upon their
world
• identities and interests of actors are not rational objective facts (brute facts) but socially constructed
(social facts – built through practice, i.e. nation, sovereignty, HR) i.e. German identity from Nazi 1930s-45 to
major recipient of refugees at present
• Focus on social context of IR (emphasis on role of identity, beliefs & social norms in int politics) i .e.
national interest
• Variables of IR (military power, trade rel, int inst...) important bc they have social meanings for players
(meaning constructed from mix of history, ideas, norms, beliefs)
• E.g. how US and SA perceive the rise of China
• Emphasis on role of transnational actors (NGOs, Corporations) in altering state’s beliefs and behaviour (i.e.
land mines - through lobbying, persuasion and shaming) and of internationalorganisations (not tools of state
but pursuing their own agenda, i.e. free trade, HR...)
RULES (maybe not in slides check gallery)
- Regulative rules regulate already existing activities - order and
constrain behavior (WTO, NPC...)
- constructive rules create the very possibility for those activities
- create new actors, interests or categories of actions (i.e.
sovreignty regulate state practices but also makes possible the
very idea of a sovreign state; R2P)
Two Logics
•The logic of consequences attributes action to anticipated
costs and benefits
•The logic of appropriateness highlights how actors are rule-
following and worry about the legitimacy of their actions (act in
accordance with state identity)
•The two logics are not necessarily discrete or competing
•Using these approaches, constructivism can question what is
otherwise taken for granted
Meaning and Power
• Constructivists also attempt to identify the meaning actors give
to their practices and social facts
• Culture informs the meanings that people give to their practices
and the objects they construct = different meanings > competing
views (sovereignty, development, HR, security, Humanitarian
intervention etc)
• The fixing of meaning is an accomplishment that is the essence
of politics (allocates differential rewards and capacities)—and
thus power and power brokerage
• Power thus has an ideational component (not only measured in
military force or economic might)
case study The ‘human rights revolution’
• States are increasingly willing to recognize human rights and
sign treaties enshrining them in part because of the work of
transnational activists
• International human rights laws encourage states to comply
by...
• Enabling international NGOs to ‘name and shame’ violators
• Allowing domestic groups to pressure their governments
from below
• States that identify with human rights sometimes use foreign
policy pressure against violators
A. Wendt
(1992): does absence of pol authority in the int syst force states
into self-help behaviour?
• Answer: self-help not structural feature but subjective
understanding about self and other reinforced through practice
= ‘Anarchy is what states make of it’ “Alter and ego on a desert
island”
• The only reason why we might be in a self-help system is
because perceptions and practice made it that way (Wendt,
1992407) – system is not structurally conflictual!
• and if that is so, then practice could also ‘un-make’ a
‘conflictive’ culture. EU and NATO as examples of these ‘un-
makings’.
The unmaking of
conflict: EU
After WW2, Europe set to reconstruct itself and appease
tensions by bringing econ closer (R. Schuman, Fr FM – make
war
materially impossible ).
- 1951: T. of Paris > European Coal and Steel
Community (Bel, Fr, Ger, It, Hol, Lux)- neutralise
competition over nat resources
- 1957: T. of Rome>EEC established customs union + Euratom
(coop in nuclear energy)
- 1967 – all institutions merged into EEC
- Gradually joined by another 22 countries (half from eastern
Europe post-CW)
- To become member: Copenhagen criteria (1993) – stable
democracy, respect HR, rule of law, functioning mkt econ,
acceptance of EU law
- 6 candidates (Albania, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia,
Turkey) one drop out - UK
V - Constructivism and global
change
•Constructivists criticize neo-realists and neo-liberal institutionalists for
failing to explain contemporary global transformations
•Westphalian norms do not appear as robust or timeless as has been
suggested (Sovereignty appears to be conditional on how a state treats
its citizens – R2P)
•Changing understandings of what constitutes a legitimate international
order is a more reasonable explanation than just great power
preferences (i.e. current contestation to liberal word order)
Diffusion
•Diffusion asks how particular models, practices, norms, strategies, or beliefs
spread within a population
•Institutional isomorphism: observes that organizations that share the same
environment will, over time, resemble each other (i.e. nation-state,
democracy, market economy...).
•Either because believed to be more efficient, or states want to be
accepted, for legitimacy or prestige (i.e. dem wave in Africa pos-CW)
•Diffusion occurs via coercion, strategic competition, pressures to secure
resources, mimicking of successful models, the symbolic standing of certain
models, and professional associations and expert communities
Socialization
• Socialization explains:
• How states change so that they come to identify with the
identities, interests, and manners of the existing members of
the club
• How states, accordingly, change their behavior so that it
is consistent with that of the group
• i.e. China and IOs
• There are various pathways to socialization (mimicking, social
influence, persuasion)
• Can be based on rational ‘cost-benefit’ calculations or more
constructivist in nature – internalization of norms to become a
modern responsible state (be accepted in the community and
learn > appropriate behaviour)
The ‘life cycle of norms’
• Norms evolve through different stages:
1. Norm emergence is often pushed by norm entrepreneurs,
who frame issues in ways that promote their ideas (NGO’s
campaign against use of landmines in conflicts in 1990s)
2. A norm cascade occurs as the norm diffuses, often because
of pressure for conformity, desire for international legitimacy,
or leaders’ quests for enhanced self-esteem (Ottawa
Convention, Mine Ban Treaty, 1999 – 162 countries)
3. Norm internalization means that the norm is taken for
granted and is no longer contested (USA, Ru, China, India,
Pakistan – have not signed MBT...)
IV - The essence of constructivism
Subtopic 1
Structure
- consists of both material and ideational factors, codified in formal rules
(written or spoken) and norms (collective understanding of appropriate behavior
- to become a member, must follow these)
Hence change in norms > change in practice > change in identity and interests =
change in culture of anarchy (conflict to cooperation, i.e. EU)
Agents behavior is influenced by their identity
- place in the social world deriving from cult, hist, pol, soc background
- process under constant reconstruction - but continuity through narrative
- Identity imply set of normative interests / prefenreces that determines choices
(rather than pure self-interest)
- March and Olsen (1989) states not always driven by logic of consequence (most
utility -realist/liberalist), may also act on logic of appropriateness (norms
associated with their identity = appropriate behavior)
- i.e. EU sheltering Syrian and Afghan refugees may not be in the best interests (econ
and security) but aligns with their normative identity
Belief in the mutual 'consitutiveness' of agents
and structure
- Actors can also change structure through practice > social facts that became embedded in
system - i.e. self-help or cooperation in anarchy)
- Transformative change most likely to occur following disruptive event that made existing
structures and practices obsolete > window for intentional policy change (adoption of new rules
> change in practice > indentity)
- i.e. construction of EU after destruction caused by 2 WWs
- i.e. Rwanda & Serbia genocides mid 1990s > from non-intervention to Responsibility to protect
(UN 2005)
