Analytical Eclecticism Research Articles

Rethinking pragmatism through the lens of Michel Foucault: governance of bilateral relations

Abstract Pragmatism, responding to the call for ‘decentring International Relations’, fosters analytical eclecticism for resolving inter-paradigmatic disputes. John Dewey's pragmatism aligns seamlessly with constructivism, offering nuanced insights. However, in bilateral relations, pragmatism is often confined within realist frameworks, lacking analytical rigor for understanding governmentality. In this article, the author challenges this by emphasizing relational power dynamics and non-neutral knowledge, introducing ‘balancing pragmatism’ rooted in ‘bricolage’ for nuanced governance. Leveraging Foucauldian insights, the author reconceptualizes governance pragmatism within the power-knowledge interplay, illustrated by the India–Bangladesh Land Boundary Agreement (LBA). The LBA's success challenges realist power paradigms, recognizing the pivotal role of Foucauldian dynamics in enhancing pragmatic balancing. This enriches the constructivist paradigm with discerning governance. Interpreting pragmatism through a Foucauldian lens in the LBA underscores implications for bilateral governance, highlighting analytical eclecticism and adaptability within a Foucauldian framework to address geopolitical challenges. It advocates for a more inclusive analytical approach in international relations. Understanding ‘balancing pragmatism’ is crucial for practitioners, challenging the state-centric paradigm and emphasizing nuanced governance through the transformative intersection of power and knowledge. Interpreting pragmatism as a Foucauldian-informed balancing act, as seen in the LBA, holds broad implications for IR, urging scholars to integrate Foucault's dynamics for nuanced global analyses of pragmatic balancing.

Analytical eclecticism for vigor and rigor?

In this Exchanges piece, I comment on centripetal and centrifugal tendencies across social science disciplines with an eye to the possibilities and pitfalls of analytical eclecticism in bridging within-field impasse and generating cross-disciplinary dialogue germane to economic geography.

U.S. Space Policy and Theories of International Relations: The Case for Analytical Eclecticism

Space activities and infrastructure today are critical to international security and the global economy. The space domain is not, however, subject to sovereign control by international law. Like other shared domains, such as the high seas, the polar regions, and arguably cyberspace, space is a domain in which State and non-State actors interact beyond national borders. Given global dependence on space-derived information and an increase in potential adversary threats to space assets, States have taken a number of steps in recent years to protect their national interests in space. Despite its importance and increasing global attention, international cooperation and competition in space is a relatively under theorized topic in international relations. Conversely, international relations theories are not widely used in the development of United States (U.S.) national space policy and the practice of space diplomacy, from a U.S. perspective. The intent of this article is to address this rift between theory and policy by briefly describing major theories of international relations and where they can shed light on how and why States engage in cooperation and competition in space. The article addresses the major schools of realism, liberalism, and constructivism, with applications to space activity. No single theory fully describes the U.S. policy approach to international space activities. Different theories, applied to the same situation, can, however, provide useful perspectives to both theorists and policy-makers. This suggests the use of a mixed, pragmatic approach, referred to as “eclectic theorizing” in international relations literature, as a promising avenue for further research.

States and new markets: the novelty problem in the IPE of finance

Finance has changed, and the study of finance needs to change with it. Previously marginal actors—hedge funds, index providers, tech firms, etc.—have become lynchpins in the global financial system. Likewise, the traditional subjects of international political economy (IPE)—states, international organizations, banks, central banks, etc.—are engaging in once-peripheral spheres. Yet, these novel trends have been largely ignored in mainstream political science and international relations venues for IPE scholarship. We demonstrate this through a discussion of two trends—the rise of shadow banking and central bank involvement in climate change—and an analysis of publications in top international relations and political science journals. While previous commentaries identify a methodological and epistemological divide in IPE, our results suggest an empirical one. We then construct a practical framework to remedy this problem by returning to the work of Susan Strange. Strange’s approach embodied a radical ontology, a focus on structures and their interaction, and an analytical eclecticism that provided keen insights into the politics of finance. We argue that these principles, often embraced in Review of International Political Economy, should be applied more broadly by IR scholars to better contribute to debates on emerging political economic issues.

UNASUR: An Eclectic Analytical Perspective of its Disintegration

Objective/Context: This article aims to explain the causes of the virtual disintegration of the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) from the perspective of analytical eclecticism. It is part of the growing literature around the debate on the end of International Relations theory in which analytical eclecticism and integrative pluralism emerge as viable but contested explanatory strategies. Methodology: Based on recent historical evidence and a voluminous body of research on the object of study, we start from analytical eclecticism and sequentially analyze UNASUR from neoclassical realism, institutional liberalism, and social constructivism to comprehensively explain the case. Conclusions: While any of our three approaches can convincingly explain the reasons for UNASUR’s failure, none of them by itself captures the full complexity of its demise. The explanations provided by these analytical approaches are not contradictory but complementary. The creative combination of different International Relations approaches enhances our understanding of an atypical case in the history of Latin American regionalism, generally characterized by the resilience of regional organizations. The analysis of the disintegration of UNASUR reveals structural challenges and tension factors for South American regionalism. It helps understand why PROSUR, as the supposed successor to UNASUR, has not yet taken off. Originality: Research on UNASUR and its destiny has been prolific. Rival explanations such as neoclassical realism, institutional liberalism, and social constructivism have prevailed. This article is the first to collect and integrate these explanations to provide a comprehensive response that accounts for the complex process of South American disintegration.

International development higher education: Looking from the past, looking to the future

ABSTRACT International development higher education is a distinct space in a vibrant and growing field of higher education studies. This paper examines international development higher education scholarship to highlight its thematic, disciplinary, methodological, and analytical eclecticism. At the heart of international development higher education is the assumption that the world can be made better by the human effort invested in higher education. This paper offers a novel conceptualisation of the ways in which higher education’s contributions to development can be understood. The bulk of the existing literature essentialises higher education’s role in the advancement of human capital and the modernisation of societies. In contrast, anti-essentialist understandings can include various conceptualisations of how higher education can contribute to the realisation of human rights and capabilities to pursue the freedoms people value. A holistic understanding of university contributions to development would encompass all of the essentialist and anti-essentialist, as well as post-foundationalist ways of looking at this important but empirically elusive link. The paper suggests to delink development from ‘international’ and reframe development as ‘glonacal’, thus allowing scholars and practitioners to be less bound by nation-state borders, and more conscious of the local nuance and the global connectedness.

The BRICS in the Contemporary Global Order: Objectives, Capabilities, and Limitations

For the first time in the history of mankind several powers emerge simultaneously in different latitudes and can interact intensively. The Contemporary Global Order has presented significant changes among which highlight the absolute and relative decline of American power, and the emergence of new actors who have greater agency power in their international relations. One of these actors is the so-called BRICS that brings together Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. For this reason the aim of this investigation is to analyzing the effective and potential power of the BRICS in the Contemporary Global Order. The methodology is it is situated inside the analytical eclecticism which is characterized by explaining a certain phenomenon without using a block of explanations sustained in a single tradition, but it takes and re-means the elements that it considers most pertinent for the case study. The article states that the BRICS do not claim or have the capacity to become hegemons. The objectives and capabilities of the BRICS have been especially notable in terms of international political economy, especially in the financial architecture, where China has its greatest power. The BRICS can promote an alternative to the existing game rules in the international system and promote a more plural world. They have the capacity to reform and build international economic institutions that allow a fairer distribution of material resources. They can curb unilateral global power interventions in regional affairs, framing interventions for humanitarian causes within multilateralism and the Responsibility to Protect. In terms of democracy and human rights, they will not make any contribution since their main actors, such as China and Russia, are examples of disrespect for these values.

Japan’s Policy on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) in Light of IR Theory and Analytical Eclecticism

Japan’s Policy on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) in Light of IR Theory and Analytical Eclecticism

GISualization: visualized integration of multiple types of data for knowledge co-production

ABSTRACTUrban planning deals with multiple layers of information stemming from concurrent activities and stakeholders intervening in urban development. For a better management of complexity more comprehensiveness and data integration are needed. This study develops an adaptive and iterative mixed-method approach for knowledge production in urban transformation processes. Specific research questions relate to data integration from different sources and facilitation of co-production of knowledge beyond triangulation. A new multi-layer framework, GISualization, has been developed in the context of a research project exploring compact city qualities. The framework is structured through five data layers, representing different methods for data collection and different grades of complexity, richness and interpretation: basic statistics; advanced statistics; exogenous quali-quantitative descriptions; exogenous qualitative descriptions; and endogenous qualitative descriptions. Thus, data stem from both quantitative and qualitative sources. Our study has proven that GISualization is a methodological framework that enables analysis and visualization of complex data in a rich format. The approach is closely related to analytical eclecticism and abductivity. It embodies a collaborative communication platform that provides a language to navigate between heterogeneous data, information and methods. The GISualization framework opens up for broader stakeholder involvement and community participation extending research into the domain of transdisciplinary knowledge production.

Violent Punjab, quiescent Bengal, and the partition of India

ABSTRACTWhy did the Punjab bear the brunt of the mass violence and the migration that accompanied the partition of India? This paper makes the case for analytical eclecticism by showing that the following three explanations – centred respectively on democratisation, nationalism, and ideas; the commitment problem; and the security dilemma – account for the violence/migration in the different stages in the run-up to the partition of India. Instead of arguing that ‘everything mattered’, this paper elucidates the complex causality at work by demonstrating how these factors interacted with one another during the different stages leading to India’s partition.

The Schools of Thought Problem in International Relations

AbstractMany scholars are dissatisfied with the tendency of research and teaching in the field of international relations to be framed as clashes among competing schools of thought. I examine two prominent options for reform that relate to the schools and offer one element of an alternative path forward. The first option, which I term analytical singularism, calls for the abandonment of the IR schools and their replacement with a single, uniform framework for the study of international relations. By virtue of a constricted ontology and partialist epistemology, this option is plagued by omitted variable bias and underspecified modeling of important international processes. The second option, analytical eclecticism, suggests that improved IR studies might emerge from the consideration of interactions between causal factors that are drawn from the different IR schools of thought. Analytical eclecticism holds promise but faces serious challenges arising from its preference for qualitative methods and context-specific epistemology. I then outline a process of collaborative challenges between adherents of the different IR schools as one way by which we might advance research in international relations.

Ideational and Material Forces in Threat Perception: The Divergent Cases of Syria and Saudi Arabia During the Iran–Iraq War (1980–1988)

How do states perceive threats? Why are material forces sometimes more prominent in shaping threat perceptions, whereas ideational forces are the motivator in other instances? This article aims to move beyond the task of determining whether material or ideational factors matter to offer an integrated framework based on analytical eclecticism that specifies the conditions under which one of these two factors becomes salient in regimes’ threat perceptions. When regime identity is fixed and the material structure provides multiple strategic options to ensure a state’s physical security, leaders perceive challenges to their identity as more salient. When a state's identity is fluid, providing multiple narratives, and the distribution of military capabilities constrains strategic options for physical security, leaders perceive threats to their physical security as more prominent. As a result, the regime’s identity narrative is reframed to adapt to the constraints of the material structure. To examine the validity of this argument, I analyze the divergent Syrian and Saudi threat perceptions during the Iran–Iraq War (1980–1988). Keywords: threat perception, ideational forces, material forces, Syria, Saudi Arabia

Using Analytical Eclecticism for Improved Policy Relevance: Is There a Case for South Korean Support of Abenomics?

Peter Katzenstein's “analytic eclecticism” argues for problem-driven, policy-relevant international relations, where “messy” problems in the world encourage creative recombinations of theory and sidestep paradigmatic debates. Ideally, the rigor of theory and originality springing from atypical reconfigurations improve policy recommendations. This paper applies this approach to South Korea and Abenomics. Seoul's elites have generally opposed Abenomics, but my eclectic approach argues for six theoretically informed but practically relevant ways in which Japan's reflation is, in fact, in the national interest: First, as a “responsible middle power” in the G-20, “Global Korea” is expected to act with a wider view of its national interest in support of global institutions. Second, as a major trading partner, Japan's reflation is good for Korean growth. Third, an appreciated won is good for heavily indebted Korean consumers. Fourth, a normally growing Japan is good for Korean security. Fifth, a normalized Japan is more likely to deal calmly with Korea on history issues. Sixth, a normalized Japan is likelier to contribute to the costs of eventual unification. Per the eclectic approach, these arguments, first, are not selected for paradigmatic commensurability, but rather for problem/policy-relevance. Second, they leverage international relations theory to enrich the menu of options in the ROK policy space.

New Fighter Aircraft Acquisitions in Brazil and India: Why Not Buy American?

How do states decide where to source arms? Drawing on theories of international relations, we consider the recent fighter aircraft competitions in Brazil and India, and analyze why the U.S.‐made aircraft lost to their European rivals. Official statements offered by the Brazilian and Indian governments have cited inferior aircraft performance, technology‐sharing issues, and prices. These explanations may be valid, but their main purpose is to direct attention away from the fact that military procurement is, above all, a matter of international politics and policy. Using analytical eclecticism as our guide, we selectively combine constructivist, liberal, and realist theoretical elements to provide a more comprehensive explanation of why Lockheed Martin and Boeing failed to sell fighters to Brazil and India.Related Articles Catalinac, Amy L. 2007. “.” Politics & Policy 35 (): 58–100. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00049.x/abstract Quinn, Adam. 2007. “.” Politics & Policy 35 (): 522–547. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00071.x/abstract Rosen, Amanda M. 2015. “.” Politics & Policy 43 (): 30–58. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/polp.12105/abstract Related Media So, Vishnu. 2012. “.” NDTV. December 8. Duration: 16 min, 42 sec. http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/bigger-higher-faster/the-story-of-the-rafale/257581 . 2015. “.” Notícias Militares. January 10. Duration: 3 min, 38 sec (in Brazilian Portuguese). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P12stwG1jA

An Integrated Model of Legal Transplantation: The Diffusion of Intellectual Property Law in Developing Countries

Why do some countries adopt exogenous rules into their domestic law when those rules contravene their specific interests? We draw on the policy-diffusion literature to identify four causal mechanisms that we hypothesize explain the adoption of such rules. While existing literature treats these mechanisms as independent, we argue that each works in combination with the others to facilitate legal transplantation. While one mechanism—coercion—tends to initiate the transplantation process, it fades over time and three others largely supplant it: contractualization, socialization, and regulatory competition. These mechanisms act in a mutually supportive manner. We test our claims via a quantitative analysis of legal transplants in the field of intellectual property (IP) that incorporates an original index of IP protection in 121 developing countries over more than 14 years. This article concludes with a plea for theoretical eclecticism, acknowledging multicausality and context-conditionality. Any comprehensive explanation of legal transplantation must include the identification of mutual reinforcement between causal mechanisms, rather than simply rank their relative contributions. “[Laws] should be so specific to the people for whom they are made, that it is a great coincidence if those of one nation can suit another” argued Montesquieu in The Spirit of the Laws (1961:295). Apparently, history is full of coincidence. Laws frequently travel across both time and space. Sections of the Code of Hammurabi, enforced in Babylonia four thousand years ago, were integrated into Persian law, made their way into Greek law, and were subsequently incorporated into Roman law (Watson 1974:22–23). The Roman legacy then inspired the European Civil Codes that include elements of the ancient text. More recently, the European Codes have served as models for legal reform in countries as diverse as Peru, Egypt, and Japan. Legal transplantation proves particularly puzzling in situations of asymmetric interests: Those in which the interests of the adopting state conflict with those of the state in which the rule originated. Why would a country adopt foreign rules that run counter to its own interests? Existing scholarship lacks adequate answers to this question. This article argues that the explanation for legal transplantation lies not in any single causal mechanism but in the succession and reinforcement of multiple mechanisms. In making this claim, we favor analytical eclecticism and answer the call of Sil and Katzenstein for “complex causal stories that forgo parsimony in order to capture the interactions among different types of causal mechanisms normally analyzed in isolation from each other within separate research traditions” (2010:412). The article proceeds in three main sections. The first draws upon legal and political scholarship to build a typology of causal mechanisms for legal transplantation. It intro

Beyond metatheory?

Metatheory is out of fashion. If theory has a purpose, we are told, that purpose is the generation of practically relevant knowledge. Metatheoretical inquiry and debate contribute little to such knowledge and are best bracketed, left aside for the philosophers. This article challenges this all-too-common line of reasoning. First, one can bracket metatheoretical inquiry, but this does not free one’s work, theoretical or otherwise, of metatheoretical assumptions. Second, our metatheoretical assumptions affect the kind of practically relevant knowledge we can produce. If our goal is the generation of such knowledge, understanding how our metatheoretical assumptions enable or constrain this objective is essential. Today, the most sustained articulation of the ‘bracket metatheory thesis’ is provided by analytical eclecticists, who call on the field to leave behind metatheoretical debate, concentrate on concrete puzzles and problematics, and draw selectively on insights from diverse research traditions to fashion middle-range theoretical explanations. Yet by forgoing metatheoretical reflection, analytical eclecticists fail to see how their project is deeply structured by epistemological and ontological assumptions, making it an exclusively empirical-theoretic project with distinctive ontological content. This metatheoretical framing significantly impedes the kind of practically relevant knowledge eclecticist research can generate. Practical knowledge, as both Aristotle and Kant understood, is knowledge that can address basic questions of political action — how should I, we, or they act? Empirical-theoretic insights alone cannot provide such knowledge; it has to be integrated with normative forms of reasoning. As presently conceived, however, analytical eclecticism cannot accommodate such reasoning. If the generation of practical knowledge is one of the field’s ambitions, greater metatheoretical reflection and a more expansive and ambitious form of eclecticism are required.

Decolonizing Educational and Social Development Platforms in Africa

Abstract This essay aims to engage, mainly from theoretical perspectives with analytical eclecticism, a historical and contemporary analysis of African educational and social developmental contexts. It relays the real colonial connections that are still attached to this context. The essay relates the historical location as well as the socio-cultural embeddedness of the African philosophy of Ubuntu, which may have indirectly facilitated the initial entry of colonialism. It critically locates the thick philosophical and epistemological problematics that have previously and again, post-factually limited the foundational reconstructions, and by extension, the relevance of Africa’s learning and related possibilities for achieving social well-being. At the end, the essay calls for the urgent decolonization of Africa’s philosophies and epistemologies of education, so that learning contexts can aid the now non-delinkable desires, indeed, needs for social development.

Bargaining Theory and Rationalist Explanations for the Iraq War

In “Two Cheers for Bargaining Theory: Assessing Rationalist Explanations for the Iraq War,” David Lake makes several important contributions to international relations scholarship.1 He provides greater empirical testing of the hypotheses generated by bargaining theory, a need that many theorists have long recognized.2 He likewise provides greater “analytical eclecticism” to international relations scholarship by seeking to integrate rationalist and behavioral explanations for war.3 He also draws needed attention to the issue of postwar governance costs in strategic bargaining and decisionmaking. Finally, he provides a theoretical framework for the 2003 war in Iraq, arguably the most important U.S. conoict since the Vietnam War. Nevertheless, in evaluating rationalist explanations for the Iraq War, Lake does not fully take into account the strategic environment faced by Saddam Hussein or the George W. Bush administration. Instead, he concludes that both sides suffered from “self-delusions, biased decisionmaking, and failures to update prior beliefs,” which illustrated “deviations from rationality” and “cognitive limitations” (pp. 9–10). Although both sides are likely guilty in this respect, Lake overlooks or downplays the incentives to misrepresent and commitment problems faced by both sides, and thereby overstates the limits of rationalist propositions to explain the Iraq War.4 Further consideration of their respective strategic environments demonstrates that bargaining theory provides greater insights into the Iraq War than Lake claims.

Explaining Japanese Antimilitarism: Normative and Realist Constraints on Japan's Security Policy

Since the late 1990s, Japan has sent increasing numbers of its military forces overseas. It has also assumed a more active military role in the U.S.-Japan alliance. Neither conventional constructivist nor realist approaches in international relations theory can adequately explain these changes or, more generally, changes in Japan's security policy since the end of World War II. Instead, Japan's postwar security policy has been driven by the country's powerful antimilitarism, which reflects the following normative and realist factors: pacifism, antitraditionalism, and fear of entrapment. An understanding of the influence of these three factors makes it possible to explain both Japan's past reluctance to play a military role overseas and its increasing activism over the last decade. Four case studies—the revision of the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty in 1960, the anti–Vietnam War period, increases in U.S.-Japan military cooperation during détente, and actions taken during the administration of Junichiro Koizumi to enhance Japan's security profile—illustrate the role of antimilitarism in Japan's security policy. Only through a theoretical approach based on analytical eclecticism—a research strategy that considers factors from different paradigms—can scholars explain specific puzzles in international politics.

Geopolitics, (sub)regionalism, discourse and a troubled ‘power triangle’ in the Black Sea

Following the end of the Cold War, the Black Sea gradually began to undergo a process of region‐building, while simultaneously emerging as a key area in a new spiral of geopolitical competition. The purpose of this article is to analyse the interrelated terms of geopolitics, subregionalism and discourse by investigating the fundamental significance of the geography of the region, the ambiguous role of the hegemon(s), the performance of the various regional organizations, the value of history and identity, and the policies of the full‐fledged geopolitical subjects (United States, Russia, European Union). To this end, it uses various tools from different strands of thought in international relations, trying to apply what is known as analytical eclecticism.