Toward a differentiation-based framework for middle power behavior

Teo, Sarah

doi:10.1017/s1752971920000688

Cited by 14 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Traditional approaches do not inspire too much hope in this respect. On the contrary, a Differentiation Theory-based approach, which was already used to reconfigure the study of middle powers (Teo, 2021), is quite promising.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Luhmann's Differentiation Theory (Buzan, Albert, 2010) is apt for the task, especially given its focus on stratification and functional differentiation, reflecting hierarchy and specialization in IR. Luhmann's theory has recently been used to reconfigure the study of middle powers by Sarah Teo (2021) and produced promising results. This study aims at creating a single approach of applying Differentiation Theory to the study of International Hierarchy, which would not be limited to one power status category.…”

Section: Hierarchy In An Anarchic International Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Apart from the article about middle powers(Teo, 2021), another research should be mentioned as an exception(Fehl, Freistein, 2020).19 On the applicability of expert surveys to study complex political phenomena, see.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

International Hierarchy and Functional Differentiation of States: Results of an Expert Survey

Nesmashnyi

Zhornist

Safranchuk

2022

Vestnik MGIMO-universiteta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article investigates the existing international hierarchy employing expert survey as its primary method. 'Authority hierarchy' and 'power status hierarchy,' the two existing research traditions of hierarchy studies, are briefly introduced. We demonstrate a gap between basic research on power status, emphasizing its social nature, and applied case studies, primarily relying on purely material indicators of a country's capabilities, such as the GDP and CINC. In times of rapid hierarchical shifts, there is a need for a more nuanced and holistic approach. The article suggests placing hierarchy studies onto the ontological foundation of Niklas Luhmann's Differentiation Theory to overcome these problems. We trace the international society's segmentary differentiation, stratificatory differentiation (status hierarchy), and functional differentiation (specialization). The paper argues that the functional roles of states and their positions in the international hierarchy are interconnected. The hierarchy of states' roles, resulting from functional differentiation, is understood in terms of authority hierarchy. In order to lay the ground for further research, three valuable insights of states in the international hierarchy. Firstly, we categorize 26 countries as belonging to one of the power status categories (small power, middle power, great power, superpower) as of autumn 2021 based on the survey results. We calculate indices operationalizing power, roles, public goods provision, and revisionism for the states in the survey. Secondly, the paper presents experts' evaluations of the importance of various valued attributes (such as the size of the economy, military might, international prestige, autonomy, etc.) for different power status categories. Thirdly, we suggest a novel approach linking a country's position in the international hierarchy to its functional roles. We use correlation analysis to test the hypothesis and compare the roles index to other popular power status indicators.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Hierarchy In An Anarchic International Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

International Hierarchy and Functional Differentiation of States: Results of an Expert Survey

Nesmashnyi

Zhornist

Safranchuk

2022

Vestnik MGIMO-universiteta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They argue that the structural changes of the 21 st century make an illiberal, regional, and often unilateral approach a 'viable strategy' and one that other middle powers may later pursue. 59 54 Cooper et al 1993, 19. 55 Harding and Merchant 2016;Weatherbee 2017, 163-64. 56 Teo 2022Teo , 1140 57 Haugom 2019, 215. 58 Sucu et al 2021, 316. 59 Ibid.…”

Section: No Longer Internationalistsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is anyone a middle power? The case for historicization

Robertson

Carr

2023

Int. Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What should happen to a concept as it loses real-world application? The concept of ‘middle power’ rose to prominence in the mid-20th century, establishing an influential practitioner–scholarly nexus over the next several decades. This prestigious history came at a cost, embedding three core assumptions into the concept: that middle powers are International in focus, Multilateral in method, and Good Citizens in conduct. While there have been significant attempts by scholars to reform the concept, middle power theory has proven inseparable from these assumptions. In this paper, we examine six middle power states (Canada, Australia, South Korea, Indonesia, Turkey, and Mexico) and show middle power theory no longer helps us distinguish or interpret these states. Changes in the international environment suggest this finding will endure. As such, we argue for the historicization of the concept of ‘middle power’. We conclude by identifying a series of analytical puzzles which researchers will need to address to develop an appropriate conceptual lexicon for theorizing this type of state in the 21st century.

show abstract

“… 1 Sharman 2017, 560. For a small selection of recent and classic works on ‘middle powers’, see Teo 2022; Thies and Sari 2018; Cooper et al 1993; Cooper 1997; Holbraad 1984; Teo 2018; Carr 2014; Aydin 2021.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking ‘middle powers’ as a category of practice: stratification, ambiguity, and power

Bhal

2023

Int. Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scholars have attempted to theorise the social structure of the international system from the perspective of the ‘middle powers’ for decades. However, scholars have struggled to agree on the essential dispositional characteristics of this category of actors, stunting theoretical progress. Drawing on sociological and literary approaches to the rhetoric of the ‘middle class’ in domestic societies, this article shifts the terms of this debate away from asking who the ‘middle powers’ are or what their ‘essence’ is, to ask what actors do with the term in practice. Combining this with and contributing to scholarship on hierarchy in international relations, I recast ‘middle powers’ as a category of practice and argue that one of the term's main uses is to differentiate certain status-anxious states – that hold no real prospect of achieving great power status – from ‘small states’ that occupy the lowest stratum of stratification within the ‘grading of powers’. Following an illustrative case study of Australian and Canadian attempts to establish the ‘middle power’ category in the 1940s, the article then outlines the contributions of the argument for the study of status and hierarchy in world politics.

show abstract

Toward a differentiation-based framework for middle power behavior

Cited by 14 publications

References 45 publications

International Hierarchy and Functional Differentiation of States: Results of an Expert Survey

International Hierarchy and Functional Differentiation of States: Results of an Expert Survey

Is anyone a middle power? The case for historicization

Rethinking ‘middle powers’ as a category of practice: stratification, ambiguity, and power

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About