A critical evaluation of rationalist IR in the analysis of informal institutions

Abstract

AbstractThis article has two major inter-connected objectives about the ascendancy of informal international institutions on a global basis. The first objective is to highlight the extended scope of this phenomenon. The second objective of this article evaluates how the mainstream International Relations (IR) literature has treated the cascading wave of informal institutions. With this expansion in mind, the focus is on a critical evaluation of the rationalist institutionalist literature generally and rational design scholarship more specifically. This scholarship possesses some considerable foundational advantages. At the same time several important deficiencies stand out. First, in terms of participation, the scholarship remains excessively US-centric. Secondly, in terms of projection, the rationalist institutionalist literature lacks both historical context and an anticipatory component. Thirdly, in terms of the ‘living personality’ constitutive of informal institutions, the mode of analysis lacks nuance. Notwithstanding its claims of consistency with respect to the logic of institutionalism, the rationalist institutionalist literature is highly uneven in terms of its analysis about the nature of informal institutions. The most consistent component throughout rationalist institutionalist literature is what type of informal institutionalism is left out. Informal institutionalism is recognized to be on the ascendancy. But the core manifestation of informal institutionalism—state-based plurilateralism—is neglected in the analysis.