Relations Before States:

Jackson, Patrick Thaddeus; Nexon, Daniel H.

doi:10.1177/1354066199005003002

Cited by 447 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…At one extreme is the promotion of rational choice historical sociology by Michael Hechter (1992), Edgar Kiser (1996) and others (see the various contributions in Gould (ed.) 2005), an attempt which has spawned a wide-ranging meta-theoretical debate which, in turn, has prompted significant work on relationalism (Emirbayer 1997, Somers 1998, Nexon and Jackson 1999 path-dependency (Mahoney 2000(Mahoney , 2001Goldstone 1998;Pierson 2004), temporality (Aminzade 1992, McDaniel (ed.) 1996, Sewell 2005, historical institutionalism (Powell and DiMaggio (eds.)…”

Section: Application Application Applicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Historical Sociology in International Relations: Open Society, Research Programme and Vocation

Lawson

2007

Int Polit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the last twenty years, historical sociology has become an increasingly conspicuous part of the broader field of International Relations (IR) theory, with advocates making a series of interventions in subjects as diverse as the origins and varieties of international systems over time and place, to work on the co-constitutive relationship between the international realm and state-society relations in processes of radical change. However, even as historical sociology in IR (HSIR) has produced substantial gains, so there has also been a concomitant watering down of the underlying approach itself. As a result, it is no longer clear what exactly HSIR entails: should it be seen as operating within the existing pool of available theories or as an attempt to reconvene the discipline on new foundations? This article sets out an identifiable set of assumptions and precepts for HSIR based on deep ontological realism, epistemological relationism, a methodological free range, and an overt normative engagement with the events and processes that make up contemporary world politics. As such, HSIR can be seen as operating as an open society, a research programme and a vocation. Every field of enquiry goes through an important and necessary stage during which scholars turn their attention to the kind of enterprise in which they are engaged. After a prolonged period of concern with substantive matters, self-consciousness of purpose develops and questions arise about the road that has been travelled to date and the direction which enquiry should follow in the future. At this point, histories of the field are written, exploration of its boundaries are undertaken, methods of research are sensitized, and the requirements of further theoretical concepts are re-examined.While it is not clear whether this process of maturation constitutes "healthy fervent" or "hopeless confusion", the nature and limits of the field eventually emerge with greater clarity, thus enabling its practitioners to move on to the central task of accumulating knowledge through the investigation and interpretation of substantive materials.This article is a Rosenau-inspired stock-taking exercise into the use of historical sociology in International Relations (HSIR). Neither the broader enterprise of historical sociology nor the more particular orientations of HSIR are, of course, the FPA's of their day. Historical sociology can be seen as at least two-centuries old (albeit depending to some extent on when and where you start counting) -an attempt by economists, philosophers of history and nascent sociologists to provide a historically sensitive, yet generally applicable, account of the emergence of capitalism, industrialisation, rationalism, bureaucratisation, urbanisation (Rosenberg 1994a(Rosenberg , 2006. HSIR is now a formally recognised, if still minority, approach within the discipline.In which case, why the need for a stock-take? The answer is hinted at by Rosenau (1969: 1): 'After a prolonged period of concern with substantive matters, self-consci...

show abstract

Section: Application Application Applicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Historical Sociology in International Relations: Open Society, Research Programme and Vocation

Lawson

2007

Int Polit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An implementation approach starts from the premise that foreign policy is a process. It demands a processual analysis (Jackson and Nexon, 1999). “Implementation studies… represent the tangible link between foreign policy and the wider international relations of which they form a part” (Clarke and Smith, 1989:171–172).…”

Section: Lenses Of Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

The Growing Role of States in U.S. Foreign Policy: The Case of the State Partnership Program

Howard

2004

Int Studies Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

States can and do play an important role in contemporary U.S. foreign policy. This article will discuss the growing role of states through an investigation of the State Partnership Program (SSP). The SSP pairs state National Guards with the militaries of other countries through U.S. military engagement programs. The state‐level National Guard then becomes the primary site for implementing U.S. military engagement programs. Both a federalism and decision‐making perspective, however, are unable to recognize this role. The decision‐making bias of foreign policy analysis affords states a limited international role and minimal influence in shaping the policies of the government toward other countries. An implementation perspective, however, reveals a growing role of states carrying out U.S. foreign policy, including the “high politics” of national security issues. States give decisions meaning through the practice of policy implementation. A detailed case study of the Maryland–Estonia partnership illustrates how an implementation perspective can recognize a growing role of states in shaping U.S. foreign policy.

show abstract

“…Jackson and Nexon note that contrary to the challenge facing realism, "the challenge" for constructivism becomes "to account for stability rather than change." 57 Because there is no ontological "furniture" to sit on regarding this point, many constructivists have resorted to questionable explanatory tactics to say something systematic about transformation in global social practices. Several commentators have observed, for example, that the difficulties of operationalizing the concept of codetermination have led to a reliance on sequential causal ordering and the bracketing of either agents or structures.…”

Section: Ontological Choices and The Differences They Can Makementioning

confidence: 99%

Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting, Reconstructing, or Rereading

Sterling‐Folker¹

2002

Int Studies Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

oes realism have nothing to say about change in the actors, identities, social practices, and institutions that constitute the present or any future global order? Constructivism has given renewed impetus to this perspective on realism due to its almost universal characterization as a challenge to realism's emphasis on structure at the expense of history. 1 Because the reintroduction of "change" as an analytical concept into international relations (IR) theorizing proper is the constructivist goal, many constructivists believe realism is the very antithesis of constructivist theorizing. If the widely accepted claim that realism is incapable of accounting for dynamism in global politics is correct, it is hard to fathom how realism has managed to survive so long as a general theoretical category, let alone dominate the field, as its critics continue to claim.Realists have been just as content to ignore the development of constructivism on the grounds that it is a passing fad. Yosef Lapid's and Friedrich Kratochwil's review of initial realist reactions to the constructivist challenge confirms a realist penchant for elaboration and revision rather than "reconstruction," which involves "significant changes in theoretical cores without an intention . . . to sever all links with the established theoretical tradition." 2 Beyond a 1 In this context, the term "constructivism" includes what John Gerard Ruggie has termed in

show abstract

Relations Before States:

Cited by 447 publications

References 43 publications

Historical Sociology in International Relations: Open Society, Research Programme and Vocation

Historical Sociology in International Relations: Open Society, Research Programme and Vocation

The Growing Role of States in U.S. Foreign Policy: The Case of the State Partnership Program

Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting, Reconstructing, or Rereading

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About