Theory Matrix (Creation & Impact)

Front 1

Creation - realism

Back 1

Creation/persistence
i) Institutions unlikely to be created, as cooperation in anarchy is not possible.
ii) Two strands of realism suggest why there exist intl. institutions after all:

1. Hegemonic Stability Treaty: Regimes are established and maintained by an actor who has a dominant power position in the issue area in question. The basic assumption is that the hegemonic states - via the institution - provide the members with a “public good”.

Institutions will dissolve or turn into ineffective rules and norms that are violated when states want to, if the power balance changes (and the hegemonic state is no longer is a hegemon).

2. Alliance Theory: Alliances (intl. institutions) are created if an external threat exists. The stronger the external threat, the more likely is the creation of alliances. If the threat disappears, so will the alliance.

Front 2

Creation - constructivism

Back 2

Condition for creation of IO’s: high degree of shared norms, values and standards of legitimacy likely to become institutionalised via intl. organisation.

It is not thereby said that constructivist accounts' disregard that actors are rational and that institutions are created through an act of rational choice. However, they claim that such rational interests cannot be seen as created outside the socail environment. Hence, states act rationally in creating intl. instituions, but such rationality derives from the social interaction of states in the international society (Hasenclever&Rittberger)

EXAPLES: NATO:
Conventional explaination of creation of NATO is that it was created to balance the Soviet treat.

Constructivism (Risse): While the percieved Soviet threat certainly strengthened the sense of community among western democraciesm it did not create it in the first place =According to what was considered 'appropriete' behaviour among like-minded states, Stalin's behaviour and refusal to join the liberal order, could not be trusted. NATO then institutionalised the already existing common security identity among liberal democracies in respose to the Soviet Union.

=NATO was thus only able to be created because of the already existing high degree of shared norms, values and standards of legitimacy.

Front 3

Creation - rationalism

Back 3

Institutions are created when it is in the interests’ of the member states. Therefore, understanding the functions of regimes (decreasing insecurity - fostering cooperation within an area) holds key to understand their existence => i.e. regimes are created & maintained by states as instruments to achieve certain (selfish) goals.
=Thereby – the more efficient a regime would be for the states, the more likely it is to be created.

Condition for regime creation: interdependence (possibility of mutual absolute gains from cooperation)

Why in the interests? :
- Regimes can help states escape the PD by 1) lowering uncertainty via providing information 2) be a framework for repeated “games” to take place
- Regimes reduce transaction costs i.e. costs associated with the negotiation, monitoring and enforcement of agreements.

=It is however not without costs to create a regime, why states are then assumed to create them if the value of these functions provided by the regime, outweigh the costs of creating it.

EXAMPLES: Lots of examples – any emergence of institutions could fall under this category: EU; UN; NATO; WTO etc.

Front 4

creation - weak cognitivism

Back 4

Ideas can facilitate the creation of institutions or institutional design, and be used as explanatory factor as to why an institution is build in that particular moment in time (or at all build up). (Garrett & Weingast): Ideas facilitate cooperation and without ideas as focal points regimes may not be formed at all or at a later time. (ex: SEA). The crucial assumption is that shared ideas help to identify particular cooperative solutions.

EXAMPLE: SEM, EMU:
Ideas as focal points: Garrett & Weingast argue that a single market based solely on de-centralized, self-interested behaviour of the MS could not have emerged in the 1980s and the later EMU developments would have been more economic than monetary union.

Instead: ideas work as focal points => shared ideas help to identify particular cooperative solutions. In case of EMU, it was the idea of “sound money” i.e. rigid budgetary policies & low inflation would create growth + idea that EU was the right “environment” for the European countries to pursue such strategies in order to “deal” with globalisation. The shift in normative beliefs regarding monetary policy crucial to understand why EMU entered the agenda in 1987-8:

Front 5

Impact - realism (Mearsheimer)

Back 5

Core assumptions of realism => institutional impact on state behaviour:

Realism is derived from a few core assumptions:
States are (1) unitary, rational actors operating in an (2) anarchic international system, in which they have to (3) fear other states’ offensive military capability and can thus (4) never trust one another, so that their (5) own interest will always be survival.

=Due to these system characteristics, states are in constant competition for power in a system without any central authority capable of punishing any aggressors. Therefore states are deeply concerned with maximizing their relative power position in relation to other states, leading to a constant security competition.

Thus, cooperation among states is almost impossible to achieve, since each state will be worried about their relative gains. Moreover, states’ fear of partnering states defecting on them will always impede chances of forming such cooperation in the first place.

Due to the character of the international system inhibiting states from almost any cooperation, the effects of institutions on state behavior can only be marginal.

Front 6

impact - constructivism

Back 6

Constructivists highlight dimension of international relations largely ignored by the rationalist approaches= States are formed and influenced by values and norms in the social environment in which they participate in. States are thus not just rational utility maximizers, but rule-following social actors. Key element of the constructivist account of state behavior = "logic of appropriateness": Actors do not make pure cost-benefit calculations but follow appropriate actions in each situation, while existing social norms define what is appropriate.

Thus constructivists stress the importance of international institutions and their effects on state behavior: They do not treat states’ interests as exogenously given by the international system – on the contrary, institutions and formal/unformal values within institutional environment have deeper (constitutive) effect on actors’ identity and interests.
=This does not necessarily ignore traditional interests like power, security and others, but it emphasizes that these are not automatically given by the international system but defined by the state.

EX: german FP after WWII.

Front 7

impact - rationalism (Keohane)

Back 7

Assumes that the behavior of states is affected by the constraints and incentives provided by the international environment” - but thus only in an constraining manner that states accept in order to further own egoistic long-term gains from cooperation.

EX:
ECJ
QMV

Front 8

impact - weak cognitivism

Back 8

Impact: ideas => simple learning =ideas/learning can facilitate change in behaviour i.e. instruments/means to achieve a goal may change but the goal in itself will not change.
Unintended (but tolerated) constraints on behaviour