Realist Constructivism

Barkin, Jamie S.

doi:10.1046/j.1079-1760.2003.00503002.x

Cited by 232 publications

(128 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

119

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, an approach that understands rationalist and constructivist frameworks as offering alternative explanations for norm adoption is deficient. This conclusion has wider implications for debates in IR theory regarding the utility of rationalist and constructivist approaches, and supports Barkin's (2003) call for a 'realist constructivism' that accounts for the interplay between material power and ideas or values.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 59%

IR theory and domestic adoption of international norms

O’Faircheallaigh

2013

Int Polit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International Relations (IR) scholars have devoted considerable attention to domestic adoption of international norms, because application of these norms occurs largely through domestic political systems. This article argues that research on norm adoption is hampered by characteristics of current IR theory that result in a lack of appropriate attention to key actors and processes. The role of corporations in norm adoption is largely ignored, reflecting a wider failure to theorise their role in international politics. The agency of domestic groups that stand to benefit from application of international norms is underplayed, reflecting the heavy emphasis on structural factors that characterises the dominant constructivist approach to analysis of international norms. The interplay between material and ideational resources and strategies in norm contests receives inadequate attention, reflecting a continuing tendency to see constructivism and rationalism as alternative explanatory frameworks. The article presents a model of domestic norm adoption that allows these shortcomings to be addressed, with implications for IR theory generally.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 59%

IR theory and domestic adoption of international norms

O’Faircheallaigh

2013

Int Polit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One might expect the development of mutual understanding between states to lead to more cooperative behavior, and indeed constructivism is generally viewed as (and often criticized for) being more focused on the possibilities for international cooperation than conflict. 30 Yet Wendt argues that social learning is, or at least should be, "analytically neutral between cooperation and conflict," 31 suggesting that the same process of social learning can be used to explain the development of a Hobbesian culture of anarchy in which states pursue egoistic interests at each other's expense (i.e., realism). He explains this as follows:…”

Section: A Reactive Model Of Nationalist Conflictmentioning

confidence: 98%

The “Role” of Nationalism in Chinese Foreign Policy: A Reactive Model of Nationalism & Conflict

Brittingham

2007

J OF CHIN POLIT SCI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A growing literature has sought to address the question of Chinese nationalism, and particularly whether or not its rise over the last decade could make China more prone to international conflict. Yet these discussions have often not been well grounded in either theories of nationalism or international relations (IR) theory. This paper will seek to fill this gap by using a constructivist approach to examine how nationalism is constituted by the interaction of states. By doing so, it will be argued that Chinese nationalism can best be understood as a reactive response to international events rather than domestic political manipulation.

show abstract

“…For instance, Risse and Wiener (1999, 778 emphasis added) argue that constructivism, while not a substantive theory of IR like (neo)realisms or (neo)liberalisms, is "a meta-theoretical approach offering an ontology which differs from, say, rational choice". In contrast, Barkin (2003;2010) has argued that realist theory is compatible with constructivist methodologies, and that constructivist epistemology is compatible with classical realist theory 13 .…”

Section: A Socially Constructed Social Constructivist Familymentioning

confidence: 99%

A tale of two cognitions: The Evolution of Social Constructivism in International Relations

Peltonen

2017

Rev. bras. polít. int.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

• Este é um artigo publicado em acesso aberto e distribuído sob os termos da Licença de Atribuição Creative Commons, que permite uso irrestrito, distribuição e reprodução em qualquer meio, desde que o autor e a fonte originais sejam creditados.http://www.scielo.br/rbpi Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional ISSN 1983-3121 A tale of two cognitions: The Evolution of Social Constructivism in International Relationshttps://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329201700105 Rev. Bras. Polít. Int., 60(1): e014, 2017 Abstract Constructivism in International Relations (IR) is popular, but constructivists seem disappointed. Allegedly something has been lost. Such criticisms are misplaced. There was never a uniform Constructivism. Since constructivism is socially constructed, to argue that constructivism has evolved "wrongly" is odd. This paper explains the dissatisfaction with constructivism followed by a second reading of its evolution as a tale of two cognitions. These two cognitions distinguish genera in the constructivist "family". A criticism against one genus based on the cognition of the other is unfair. A focus on cognitions and the use of genera helps in perceiving constructivism's future evolution.Keywords: Cognition, constructivism, evolution, evolutionary branching, disciplinary history. Received: September 7, 2016Accepted: March 24, 2017Introduction T he contemporary state of social constructivism in International Relations (IR) is somewhat paradoxical 1 . Constructivism is well established and popular, but many constructivists seem unhappy. The common claim by dissatisfied constructivists is a variation on a theme about the mainstreaming of constructivism and how something important was lost in that process. Yet, as this article argues, such claims are misplaced. For one, there was never some uniform IR "Constructivism," which then lost something. Rather, constructivism has been characterized by plurality from the start. Second, dissatisfaction with contemporary mainstream constructivism risks being based on some notion of "real" constructivism, which in turn is difficult to square with an important constructivist tenet -social construction -which must apply also to social constructivism. It is odd to argue that the evolution 1 For convenience, I use the singular "constructivism" with full awareness of the diversity of social constructivist approaches in IR. The plural, constructivisms, is used when necessary. of constructivism has somehow been "wrong," because social constructivism is itself socially constructed, thus implying that there is no "right" or "wrong" way for it to evolve. Third, IR constructivism experienced evolutionary branching resulting in two "genera" in the constructivist "family". I distinguish the genera depending on the kind of cognition behind them. Because the history of IR constructivism is a tale of two cognitions, assessing one genus with the cognition used by another genus explains contemporary disappointment with constructivism, but it also highlights how such dissatisfaction is mi...

show abstract

Realist Constructivism

Cited by 232 publications

References 58 publications

IR theory and domestic adoption of international norms

IR theory and domestic adoption of international norms

The “Role” of Nationalism in Chinese Foreign Policy: A Reactive Model of Nationalism & Conflict

A tale of two cognitions: The Evolution of Social Constructivism in International Relations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About