LEC 2: CONCEPTS and THEORIES of IR
Why do we need Concepts?
Concepts are contested (problematic)
- Definition rarely consensual, scholars don’t always agree
- Their meaning not fixed in time, it may evolve
- Ethno-centrism, definitions may depend on their origin but
may not apply somewhere else (e.g., Western and Southern
applications)
But concepts can be useful to:
- To make sense of complex realities, simplify something
- To make sure we are talking about the same thing, some sort
of consensus
- Ensure some degree of constructive dialogue
- Develop and evaluate theories: statements about concepts,
concept a leads to concept b…
What are theories? Why do we need them? Explanatory statements linking
concepts together
Real life is too complex:
- Too many data points
- Too many variables
- Too many moving parts
Theory: not a description, but an explanation
- Goes beyond mere description
- Is an explanation: an answer to “why did this happen”
- Interprets data
- Identifies patterns, regularities across time and space
- Helps us describe, explain, anticipate and prescribe
Theories try to simplify this reality that is too complex
IR theorists: come from a certain assumption that some
variables are more important than others and they argue that
these in a particular concept will explain most of the event
Example: what led to ww1
Intermediate cause: the assassination of archduke Franz Ferdinand
Other structural causes: …
Which cause is the most important? An ongoing debate between IR theorists
Casual explanations are derived from theories (set of assumptions)
Many different theoretical perspectives/traditions in IR: different lenses
Examples: Is ISIS a state
YES NO
Control and governance of large areas No UN membership
of territory
Available tax revenue No recognition from other states
Police and military force Legitimacy (no other countries recognize it)
Infrastructure service (although very Fluctuating population: migration out of ISIS, no
poor) permanent pop
Limited state capacities: yes, police but not to the
point
,Declarative Theory of Statehood:
The state as a person of international law should possess the following
qualifications:
a. A permanent population
b. A defined territory (clear boarders)
c. Government (recognizes internal level by pop)
d. A capacity to enter into relations with other states (diplomatic
relations: embassies, intermediaries)
PROBLEMS:
- Declarative vs Constitutive Theory of Statehood
Declarative Theory of Statehood is when a state declares itself
independent/autonomous because it fulfils the above four statements
Constitutive Theory of Statehood is that the recognition from other states is
also important
- How is the “state” created in practice?
E.g., the use of violence to create a new state goes against international law:
how it is created will influence its recognition
- Interval vs External Sovereignty
Internal Sovereignty: final internal authority within territory, absolute ruler,
state monopolizes within a territory certain functions: controls force within
territory, controls money at national scale, prints currency, collects taxes, law
enforcement and regulation within its territory
External Sovereignty: no intervention from external power, external forces
against the legitimacy of the state within the territory. The state enjoys a degree
of autonomy not only internally but also in the international system. Other states
recognize their sovereignty or its territory
Examples: Sovereignty in IR today
we expect to have equality of sovereignty within international communities
e.g., Lebanon explosion, population unhappy with government, French government guides
French external sovereignty, Lebanon not even internal
e.g., Brazilian government not acting with the burning of the amazon
States are never completely autonomous in an international community, always
influenced by external events/pressures …
- Internal sovereignty is to some degree shaped with what
happens outside the territory
- States will always be contested both from inside and outside
- Respect of interval vs external sovereignty
In IR theory, states are simply a unit of analysis.
- Entities with well-defined territory and recognize political
authority
- Importance of being recognized internally but also
internationally as a state
What the state is NOT
A nation is not a state:
Nation: a group of people who see themselves as a coercive and coherent
unit based on shared cultural or historical criteria
- Socially constructed and not given by nature
- They have something that they share but it is not automatic
, - Benedict Anderson: imagines communities are bound
together by notion of unity pivot around religion/language/…
- Sometimes build by political actors & some states contain
multiple nations
- A nation is not always limited to a state, such conceptions
often ignore political boundaries: nation could spill over to
multiple states
Nation-State: the idea of a homogenous nation governed by its own
sovereign state where each state only contains one nation
- This idea is almost never achieved
- Nation-building defined as the process by which boundaries
of the modern state and those of the national community
become congruent
- The desired outcome is to achieve nation integration
- Homogenous community within a territory
Non-State Actors: pirates, ISI, multinational corporations… more in AWP
State and Sovereignty
i. Failed state: they don’t control important part of their territory, can’t
provide basic services to their population: problem with autonomy and
degree of legitimacy
ii. Globalization: loss of control of flow of information because of
technology, borders, trade, people
iii. Supra-nation and global governance: traditional monopoly within
your state now becoming global
iv. Disaggregated state: the need for broad strategic cooperation on
critical issues requiring several sovereign entities
What are international relations:
Interactions
Example: war and peace (why do states go to war?), trade (why trade is
certain areas and not others?), international agreements (why certain
agreements and not others)
Bilateral (state to state) vs. Multilateral (more than 2 states, e.g., UN, WHO...)
- Any state action or inaction which affects other states
- Not just interstate relations: transnational relations: non-state
& substate
What are international relations:
International politics vs. national (domestic) politics
Also called the level of analysis
1. International: impact beyond boundaries of a state
2. National/Domestic: within a territory
3. Individual: particular individual impacted by a certain event
Does this distinction matter in a globalized world?
- It matters from a theoretical perspective: making
assumptions & theories for event
National order vs international anarchy
Anarchy is a state of disorder due to absence of non-
recognition of authority
- No sovereign
- “war of all against all” (Hobbes)
- “fear and I were born twins together” (1588)
- Self help
, ‘level of analysis’ framework is a type of theorizing
Analytical toll to think and organize IR
Why do we need Concepts?
Concepts are contested (problematic)
- Definition rarely consensual, scholars don’t always agree
- Their meaning not fixed in time, it may evolve
- Ethno-centrism, definitions may depend on their origin but
may not apply somewhere else (e.g., Western and Southern
applications)
But concepts can be useful to:
- To make sense of complex realities, simplify something
- To make sure we are talking about the same thing, some sort
of consensus
- Ensure some degree of constructive dialogue
- Develop and evaluate theories: statements about concepts,
concept a leads to concept b…
What are theories? Why do we need them? Explanatory statements linking
concepts together
Real life is too complex:
- Too many data points
- Too many variables
- Too many moving parts
Theory: not a description, but an explanation
- Goes beyond mere description
- Is an explanation: an answer to “why did this happen”
- Interprets data
- Identifies patterns, regularities across time and space
- Helps us describe, explain, anticipate and prescribe
Theories try to simplify this reality that is too complex
IR theorists: come from a certain assumption that some
variables are more important than others and they argue that
these in a particular concept will explain most of the event
Example: what led to ww1
Intermediate cause: the assassination of archduke Franz Ferdinand
Other structural causes: …
Which cause is the most important? An ongoing debate between IR theorists
Casual explanations are derived from theories (set of assumptions)
Many different theoretical perspectives/traditions in IR: different lenses
Examples: Is ISIS a state
YES NO
Control and governance of large areas No UN membership
of territory
Available tax revenue No recognition from other states
Police and military force Legitimacy (no other countries recognize it)
Infrastructure service (although very Fluctuating population: migration out of ISIS, no
poor) permanent pop
Limited state capacities: yes, police but not to the
point
,Declarative Theory of Statehood:
The state as a person of international law should possess the following
qualifications:
a. A permanent population
b. A defined territory (clear boarders)
c. Government (recognizes internal level by pop)
d. A capacity to enter into relations with other states (diplomatic
relations: embassies, intermediaries)
PROBLEMS:
- Declarative vs Constitutive Theory of Statehood
Declarative Theory of Statehood is when a state declares itself
independent/autonomous because it fulfils the above four statements
Constitutive Theory of Statehood is that the recognition from other states is
also important
- How is the “state” created in practice?
E.g., the use of violence to create a new state goes against international law:
how it is created will influence its recognition
- Interval vs External Sovereignty
Internal Sovereignty: final internal authority within territory, absolute ruler,
state monopolizes within a territory certain functions: controls force within
territory, controls money at national scale, prints currency, collects taxes, law
enforcement and regulation within its territory
External Sovereignty: no intervention from external power, external forces
against the legitimacy of the state within the territory. The state enjoys a degree
of autonomy not only internally but also in the international system. Other states
recognize their sovereignty or its territory
Examples: Sovereignty in IR today
we expect to have equality of sovereignty within international communities
e.g., Lebanon explosion, population unhappy with government, French government guides
French external sovereignty, Lebanon not even internal
e.g., Brazilian government not acting with the burning of the amazon
States are never completely autonomous in an international community, always
influenced by external events/pressures …
- Internal sovereignty is to some degree shaped with what
happens outside the territory
- States will always be contested both from inside and outside
- Respect of interval vs external sovereignty
In IR theory, states are simply a unit of analysis.
- Entities with well-defined territory and recognize political
authority
- Importance of being recognized internally but also
internationally as a state
What the state is NOT
A nation is not a state:
Nation: a group of people who see themselves as a coercive and coherent
unit based on shared cultural or historical criteria
- Socially constructed and not given by nature
- They have something that they share but it is not automatic
, - Benedict Anderson: imagines communities are bound
together by notion of unity pivot around religion/language/…
- Sometimes build by political actors & some states contain
multiple nations
- A nation is not always limited to a state, such conceptions
often ignore political boundaries: nation could spill over to
multiple states
Nation-State: the idea of a homogenous nation governed by its own
sovereign state where each state only contains one nation
- This idea is almost never achieved
- Nation-building defined as the process by which boundaries
of the modern state and those of the national community
become congruent
- The desired outcome is to achieve nation integration
- Homogenous community within a territory
Non-State Actors: pirates, ISI, multinational corporations… more in AWP
State and Sovereignty
i. Failed state: they don’t control important part of their territory, can’t
provide basic services to their population: problem with autonomy and
degree of legitimacy
ii. Globalization: loss of control of flow of information because of
technology, borders, trade, people
iii. Supra-nation and global governance: traditional monopoly within
your state now becoming global
iv. Disaggregated state: the need for broad strategic cooperation on
critical issues requiring several sovereign entities
What are international relations:
Interactions
Example: war and peace (why do states go to war?), trade (why trade is
certain areas and not others?), international agreements (why certain
agreements and not others)
Bilateral (state to state) vs. Multilateral (more than 2 states, e.g., UN, WHO...)
- Any state action or inaction which affects other states
- Not just interstate relations: transnational relations: non-state
& substate
What are international relations:
International politics vs. national (domestic) politics
Also called the level of analysis
1. International: impact beyond boundaries of a state
2. National/Domestic: within a territory
3. Individual: particular individual impacted by a certain event
Does this distinction matter in a globalized world?
- It matters from a theoretical perspective: making
assumptions & theories for event
National order vs international anarchy
Anarchy is a state of disorder due to absence of non-
recognition of authority
- No sovereign
- “war of all against all” (Hobbes)
- “fear and I were born twins together” (1588)
- Self help
, ‘level of analysis’ framework is a type of theorizing
Analytical toll to think and organize IR
