Letting Go of Neoliberal Constraints: Learning from the Regulatory Process

  • Jovana Jezdimirovic Ranito


This chapter demonstrates how the neoliberal approach inhibited study of the regulatory process by its assumptions of formed identities, existing structures, and public–private divisions. In continuation of the chapter, it is constructed as a conceptual framework rooted in Bourdieu’s theory of social practices, which is adjusted to allow observation of the regulatory process of private security contractors. Applying concepts of habitus, doxa, capital, and field to stakeholders involved and venues where the regulatory process occurs, it demonstrates there are numerous dynamics that have not been previously addressed. It points up to where the motivations for behavior should be sought and allows us to look beyond socially constructed identities. Such a framework opens up space for the deconstruction of conventional wisdom.


  1. Abrahamsen, Rita, and Anna Leander. 2016. Routledge Handbook of Private Security Studies. Abingdon, Oxon and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Abrahamsen, Rita, and Michael C. Williams. 2010. Security Beyond the State: Private Security in International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. ———. 2014. “Publics, Practices, and Power.” In The Global Public and the Practices of Governance, edited by Jacqueline Best and Alexandra Gheciu, 243–56. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Adler, Emanuel, and Vincent Pouliot. 2011. International Practices. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Adler-Nissen, Rebecca. 2012. “Introduction.” In Bourdieu in International Relations: Rethinking Key Concepts in IR. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Aglietta, Michel. 2000. A Theory of Capitalist Regulation: The US Experience. London and New York: Verso.Google Scholar
  7. Allison, Graham T., and Philip Zelikow. 1999. Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. 2nd ed. New York: Pearson.Google Scholar
  8. Avant, Deborah. 2005. The Market for Force: The Consequences of Privatizing Security. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. ———. 2007. “The Emerging Market for Private Military Services and the Problems of Regulation.” In From Mercenaries to Market: The Rise and Regulation of Private Military Companies, edited by Simon Chesterman and Chia Lehnardt, 179–95. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Avant, Deborah, and Renee De Nevers. 2011. “Military Contractors & the American Way of War.” Daedalus 140 (3): 88–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Barnett, Michael, and Raymond Duvall. 2005. “Power in Global Governance.” In Power in Global Governance, edited by Michael Barnett and Raymond Duvall. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Baud, Céline, and Eve Chiapello. 2017. “Understanding the Disciplinary Aspects of Neoliberal Regulations: The Case of Credit-Risk Regulation under the Basel Accords.” Critical Perspectives on Accounting 46 (Supplement C): 3–23.Google Scholar
  13. Bigo, Didier. 2011. “Pierre Bourdieu and International Relations: Power of Practices and Practices of Power.” International Political Sociology 5: 225–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. ———. 2013. “Studying Professionals of (In)security in Europe.” In Bourdieu in International Relations, edited by Rebecca Adler-Nissen, 131–47. Abingdon, Oxon and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Bourdieu, Pierre. 1977. Outline of a Theory of Practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. ———. 1979. Algeria 1960: The Disenchantment of the World, the Sense of Honour, the Kabyle House or the World Reversed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  17. ———. 1985. Interview with C. Mahar Unpublished Manuscript.Google Scholar
  18. ———. 1988a. Homo Academicus. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. ———. 1988b. “Vive La Crise! For Heterodoxy in Social Science.” Theory and Society 17 (5): 772–86.Google Scholar
  20. ———. 1990. The Logic of Practice. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  21. ———. 1998. PRACTICAL on the Theory REASON of Action. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. ———. 2000a. Pascalian Meditations. London: Polity.Google Scholar
  23. ———. 2000b. Pascalian Meditations. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  24. ———. 2000c. Propos Sur Le Champ Politique. Lyon: Presses Universitaires de Lyon.Google Scholar
  25. ———. 2003. “Participant Objectivation.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 9 (2): 281–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Bourdieu, Pierre, and Loïc Wacquant. 1992. “The Purpose of Reflexive Sociology (The Chicago Workshop).” In An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology, edited by Pierre Bourdieu and Loïc Wacquant. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  27. Braithwaite, John. 2000. “The New Regulatory State and the Transformation of Criminology.” British Journal of Criminology 40 (2): 222–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Brenner, Neil, and Nik Theodore. 2002. “Cities and the Geographies of ‘Actually Existing Neoliberalism.’” Antipode 34 (3): 349–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Brown, Kimberly. 2013. “We the People, Constitutional Accountability, and Outsourcing Government.” Indiana Law Journal 88 (4): 1347–403.Google Scholar
  30. Brickell, Missye. 2010. “Filling the Criminal Liability Gap for Private Military Contractors Abroad: U.S. v. Slough and the Civilian Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act of 2010.” Legislation and Policy Brief 2 (2): Article 3.Google Scholar
  31. Buzatu, Anne-Marie. 2015. Towards an International Code of Conduct for Private Security Providers: A View from Inside a Multistakeholder Process. Geneve: DCAF.Google Scholar
  32. Cavoukian, Ann. 2012. Privacy and Drones: Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Toronto, ON: Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario.Google Scholar
  33. Cetina, Karin Knorr, Theodore R. Schatzki, and Eike von Savigny. 2001. The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. Chaiklin, Seth, and Jean Lave, eds. 1996. Understanding Practice: Perspectives on Activity and Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Chesterman, Simon. 2010. “Lawyers, Guns, and Money: The Governance of Business Activities in Conflict Zones.” Chicago Journal of International Law 11 (2): 321–42.Google Scholar
  36. Chesterman, Simon, and Angelina Fisher. 2009. Private Security, Public Order: The Outsourcing of Public Services and Its Limits, Vol. 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Chesterman, Simon, and Chia Lehnardt. 2009. From Mercenaries to Market. The Rise and Regulation of Private Military Companies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Cockayne, James. 2007. “Make or Buy? Principal-Agent Theory and The Regulation of Private Military Companies.” In From Mercenaries to Market: The Rise and Regulation of Private Military Companies, edited by Simon Chesterman and Chia Lehnardt. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Collins, Patrick S. 2011. Regulation of Securities, Markets, and Transactions: A Guide to the New Environment. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  40. Crawford, Adam. 2006. “Networked Governance and the Post-Regulatory State?: Steering, Rowing and Anchoring the Provision of Policing and Security.” Theoretical Criminology 10 (4): 449–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Deer, Cécile. 2008. “Doxa.” In Pierre Bourdieu: Key Concepts, edited by Michael Grenfell, 119–30. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  42. De Nevers, R. 2009. “Private Security Companies and the Laws of War.” Security Dialogue 40 (2): 169–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. DeWinter-Schmitt, Rebecca. 2015. Draft ICoCA Recognition Statement for ANSI/ASIS PSC-1 Comments. Geneve: ICOC.Google Scholar
  44. Dezalay, Yves, and Bryant G. Garth. 2011. “Hegemonic Battles, Professional Rivalries, and the International Division of Labor in the Market for the Import and Export of State-Governing Expertise.” International Political Sociology 5 (3): 276–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Dickinson, Laura A. 2013. “Regulating the Privatized Security Industry: The Promise of Public/Private Governance.” Emory Law Journal 63 (2): 417–54.Google Scholar
  46. Doty, Roxanne. 1997. “Aporia: A Critical Exploration of the Agent-Structure Problematique in International Relations Theory.” European Journal of International Relations 3 (3): 365–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Dunigan, Molly. 2011. Victory for Hire: Private Security CompaniesImpact on Military Effectiveness. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Eagleton, Terry, and Pierre Bourdieu. 1992. “Doxa and Common Life.” New Left Review 191: 111–21.Google Scholar
  49. GAO. 2005. Rebuilding Iraq: Actions Needed to Improve Use of Private Security Providers. Washington, DC: Government Accountability Office.
  50. ———. 2006. Military Operations: High Level DoD Action Needed to Address Long-Standing Problems with Management and Oversight of Contractors Supporting Deployed Forces. GAO-07-145. Washington, DC: Government Accountability Office.Google Scholar
  51. ———. 2012. Management and Oversight Improvements Needed in Afghanistan. GAO-12-290. Washington, DC: United States Government Accountability Office.
  52. Glaeser, Edward, and Andrei Shleifer. 2003. “The Rise of the Regulatory State.” Journal of Economic Literature XLI (June): 401–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Grenfell, Michael James. 2014. Pierre Bourdieu: Key Concepts. Abingdon, Oxon and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  54. Harker, Richard, Cheleen Mahar, and Chris Wilkes. 1990. “The Basic Theoretical Position.” In An Introduction to the Work of Pierre Bourdieu: The Practice of Theory, edited by Richard Harker, Cheleen Mahar, and Chris Wilkes, 1–25. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  55. Higate, Paul and Mats Utas. 2017. Private Security in Africa: From the Global Assemblage to the Everyday. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  56. Horton, Scott. 2015. Lords of Secrecy: The National Security Elite and America’s Stealth Warfare. New York: Nation Books.Google Scholar
  57. Hurst, Stephanie. 2011. “‘Trade in Force’: The Need for Effective Regulation of Private Military and Security Companies.” Southern California Review 84: 447–86.Google Scholar
  58. Kauppi, Nillo. 2013. “Integration: Elements for a Structural Constructivist Perspective.” In Bourdieu in International Relations, edited by Rebecca Adler-Nissen, 314–26. Abingdon, Oxon and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  59. Kennedy, Patrick. 2011. “Statement by Patrick F. Kennedy Department of State, Under Secretary for Management.” Commission on Wartime Contracting. Scholar
  60. King, Roger. 2007. The Regulatory State in an Age of Governance: Soft Words and Big Sticks. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Kinsey, Christopher. 2006. Corporate Soldiers and International Security: The Rise of Private Military Companies. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  62. Krahmann, Elke. 2010. States, Citizens and the Privatisation of Security. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Leander, Anna. 2008. “Thinking Tools: Analyzing Symbolic Power and Violence.” In Qualitative Methods in International Relations: A Pluralist Guide, edited by A. Klotz and D. Prakash. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. ———. 2010. “Practices Providing Order: The Private Military/Security Business and Global (In) Security Governance.” In The Role of Business in Global Governance: Corporations as Norm-Entrepreneurs, edited by Klaus Dieter Wolf, Annegret Flohr, and Lothar Rieth, 57–77. New York and London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  65. ———. 2011. “The Promises, Problems, and Potentials of a Bourdieu-Inspired Staging of International Relations 1.” International Political Sociology 5 (3): 294–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. ———. 2013. “Technological Agency in the Co-constitution of Legal Expertise and the US Drone Program.” Leiden Journal of International Law 26 (4): 811–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. ———. 2014. “Understanding U.S. National Intelligence: Analyzing Practices to Capture the Chimera.” In The Return of the Public in Global Governance, edited by Jacqueline Best and Alexandra Gheciu, 197–221. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  68. ———. 2015. “Ethnographic Contributions to Method Development: ‘Strong Objectivity’ in Security Studies.” International Studies Perspectives 17 (4): 462–75.Google Scholar
  69. Liivoja, Rain. 2012. “Regulating the Private Military and Security Industry: A Quest to Maintain State Control and Preserve Public Values.” Leiden Journal of International Law 25 (4): 1019–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. MacIntyre, Alasdair. 1984. After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press Notre Dame.
  71. Moran, Michael. 2002. “Understanding the Regulatory State.” British Journal of Political Science 32 (2): 391–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. O’Brien, Justin. 2005. Governing the Corporation: Regulation and Corporate Governance in an Age of Scandal and Global Markets. 1st ed. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  73. Osborne, David, and Ted Gaebler. 1992. Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector. New York: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  74. Percy, Sarah. 2012. “Regulating the Private Security Industry: A Story of Regulating the Last War.” International Review of the Red Cross 94 (887): 941–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. ———. 2013. Regulating the Private Security Industry. London: International Institute for Strategic Studies.Google Scholar
  76. Pouliot, Vincent, and Frédéric Mérand. 2012. “Bourdieu’s Concepts: Political Sociology in International Relations.” In Bourdieu in International Relations: Rethinking Key Concepts in IR, edited by Rebecca Adler-Nissen. Oxon and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  77. Ralby, Ian. 2015. “Accountability for Armed Contractors.” Fletcher Security Review 2: 15.Google Scholar
  78. Schatzki, Theodore R. 2002. The Site of the Social. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
  79. Scott, Collin. 2000. “Accountability in the Regulatory State.” Journal of Law and Society 27 (1): 38–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Shearing, C. 2003. “Governing Security for Common Goods.” International Journal of the Sociology of Law 31 (3): 205–25. Scholar
  81. Singer, Peter W. 2003. “War, Profits, and the Vacuum of Law: Privatized Military Firms and International Law.” Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 42: 521.Google Scholar
  82. Snell, Angela. 2011. “The Absence of Justice: Private Military Contractors, Sexual Assault, and the US Government’s Policy of Indifference.” University of Illinois Law Review 3: 1125–64.Google Scholar
  83. Stanley, Bruce E. 2015. Outsourcing Security: Private Military Contractors and U.S. Foreign Policy. Lincoln, NB: Potomac Books.Google Scholar
  84. Sunstein, Cass. 1993. After the Rights Revolution: Reconceiving the Regulatory State. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  85. Teichert, Erica. 2014. Blackwater Case Tests DOJ Authority Over Contractors Abroad.
  86. Thompson, John. 1991. “Editor’s Introduction’ to Pierre Bourdieu, Language and Symbolic Power.” in Bourdieu, Pierre (1991) Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  87. Thompson, Patricia. 2014. “Field.” In Pierre Bourdieu: Key Concepts, 65–80. Abingdon, Oxon and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  88. Tiefer, Charles. 2009. “No More Nisour Squares: Legal Control of Private Security Contractors in Iraq and After.” Oregon Law Review 88 (3): 745–75.Google Scholar
  89. Turner, Stephen. 1994. The Social Theory of Practices: Tradition, Tacit Knowledge, and Presuppositions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  90. Wacquant, Loïc. 2006. “Pierre Bourdieu.” In Key Contemporary Thinkers, edited by Rob Stones. London and New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jovana Jezdimirovic Ranito
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of History and International RelationsUniversity of PortoPortoPortugal

Personalised recommendations