Abstract

This article develops a model for causal explanations amenable to interpretive International Relations (IR) research. A growing field of scholars has turned toward causal inquiry while stressing the importance of shared understandings, identities, and social practices for their explanations. This move has considerable potential to strengthen the contributions of interpretive approaches to IR. However, the article identifies shortcomings in the causal models on which this research is based which work to limit this potential. The article provides a detailed discussion of these limitations and offers an alternative model of causal explanations for interpretive IR. The proposed model builds on a clear differentiation between constitutive and causal analysis and supplies an explicit argument for how they can be combined to generate causal explanations. This paves the way for a more well-defined notion of causal explanation than has commonly been the case in interpretive IR. In doing so, it also offers a more coherent and detailed account of the points at which interpretive explanations intersect with more mainstream approaches and where they differ. Finally, the paper outlines an application of the model through a discussion on an updated form of interpretive process tracing (IPT).

Highlights

  • This article offers a new framework for thinking about causal explanations from an interpretive perspective

  • The study of armed conflict, international diplomacy, dynamics of international organizations (IOs), the foreign and security policies of states are all areas in which interpretive approaches have made important contributions, especially by paying close attention to how socially embedded agents understand their worlds

  • interpretive process tracing (IPT) serves as one possible application of the causal model that could help researchers achieve such aims

Read more

Summary

Introduction

This article offers a new framework for thinking about causal explanations from an interpretive perspective. I agree that the study of how social institutions shape particular outcomes is, from an interpretive perspective, necessarily one which will emphasize contextual specificity over attempts to identify regularities that are as general as possible.

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call