Abstract
In the previous chapter, changes in international regimes governing North-South economic relations were identified. In this chapter, various general approaches to explaining regime changes will be discussed, using the cases of regime changes identified in the previous chapter to determine the potential utility of these approaches. The three main types of explanation of regime change emphasize power, interests, and cognitions, respectively. Changes in the distribution of power, in the configuration of (primarily domestic) interests, and in the beliefs of key policy-makers are the main explanatory variables of these approaches. Here it will be argued that while shifts in the distribution of power undoubtedly occurred during the 1974–7 period and that these shifts provide partial explanations of why regimes changed during the period, nevertheless the exact nature of that change cannot be explained without reference to interests and beliefs.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes and References
Charles Kindleberger, The World in Depression1929–1939 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973).
Robert Gilpin, U.S. Power and the Multinational Corporation (New York: Basic Books, 1975);
Stephen D. Krasner, ‘State Power and the Structure of International Trade’, World Politics, 28 (April 1976) 314–47.
Robert O. Keohane and Joseph S. Nye, Jr., Power and Interdependence (Boston: Little, Brown, 1977) p. 42.
Arthur Stein, ‘The Hegemon’s Dilemma: Great Britain, the United States and the International Economic Order’, paper delivered at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, 4 September 1981.
Works that advocate the use of capabilities to measure power include Hans J. Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations (New York: Knopf, 1948);
Klaus Knorr, The Power of Nations (New York: Basic Books, 1975);
Olav Knudsen, ‘Capabilities, Issue-Areas, and Inter-State Power’, in Kjell Goldmann and Gunnar Sjostedt (eds), Power, Capabilities, and Interdependence (Beverly Hills: Sage, 1979). Both Knorr and Knudsen are careful to specify possible difficulties with using capabilities to indicate power.
Rudolph J. Rummel, ‘A Status-Field Theory of International Relations’, Research Report No. 50, University of Hawaii, August 1971.
Jack Nagel, Descriptive Analysis of Power (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1975) especially ch. 3.
Tom Baumgartner, Walter Buckley, Tom R. Burns and Peter Schuster, ‘Meta-Power and the Structuring of Social Hierarchies’, in Tom R. Burns and Walter Buckley (eds), Power and Control (Beverly Hills: Sage, 1976).
See Stephen D. Krasner, ‘Transforming International Regimes’, International Studies Quarterly, 25 (March 1981) pp. 126–130.
Stephen D. Krasner, ‘North-South Economic Relations: The Quests for Well-Being and Political Autonomy’, in Kenneth A. Oye, Donald Rothchild, and Robert J. Lieber (eds), Eagle Entangled (New York: Longman, 1979) p. 144.
Susan Strange, ‘The Management of Surplus Capacity’, International Organization, 33 (Summer 1979) p. 317.
OECD. Facing the Futures: Mastering the Probable and Managing the Unpredictable (Paris: OECD, 1979) p. 47.
Raymond Vernon, Sovereignty at Bay (New York: Basic Books, 1971) pp. 54–5;
Theodore Moran, Multinational Corporations and the Politics of Dependence (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1974) pp. 8–10.
Susan Strange, ‘Debts, Defaulters, and Development’, International Affairs, 43 (July 1967) 516–29.
V.I. Lenin, Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism (New York: International Publishers, 1939) is the classic work in this field. For a general introduction, see
Steven J. Rosen and James Kurth (eds), Testing Theories of Economic Imperialism (Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1973).
This summary is consistent with those found in Ralph Miliband, Marxism and Politics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1973) ch. 2, and
Nicos Poulantzas, Political Power and the Social Classes London: NLB (Verso), 1978) pp. 25–33.
Two major works in this tradition are Arthur Bentley, The Process of Government: A Study of Social Pressures (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1908) and
David Truman, The Governmental Process (New York: Knopf, 1951). These works were essentially anti-Marxist, denying the relevance of ‘classes’ in societies where individuals did not self-consciously identify themselves as members of classes as a result, for example, of cross-pressures created by membership in organizations which cut across class lines. Like most Marxist writers, however, group theorists attributed little importance to the state as an autonomous force in politics. On this issue, see
Theodore Lowi, The End of Liberalism (New York: Norton, 1969).
A typical treatment of the history of the Cold War is Herbert Feis, From Trust to Terror: The Onset of the Cold War, 1945–1950 (New York: Norton, 1970).
Franz Schurmann, The Logic of World Power (New York: Pantheon Books, 1974).
Fernando Henrique Cardoso, ‘Associated Dependent Development: Theoretical and Practical Implications’, in Alfred Stepan (ed.), Authoritarian Brazil (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1973).
Fernando Henrique Cardoso, Ideologias de la Burguesia Industrial en Paises Dependientes: Argentina y Brasil (Mexico: Siglo XXI. 1971).
Janet Kellyde Escobar, ‘Empresas del Estado, Negociación y el Balance del Poder Economico’, Argos, no. 2 (1981) 69–96.
T.J. Pempel, ‘Japanese Foreign Economic Policy’, in Peter Katzenstein (ed.), Between Power and Plenty (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1978) pp. 145–57.
Eleanor J. Gibson, Principles of Perceptual Learning and Development (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1969) especially chs 1–4.
The classical experiment establishing this is D.H. Hubel and T.N. Wiesel, ‘Receptive Fields, Binocular Interaction and Functional Architecture in the Cat’s Visual Cortex’, Journal of Physiology, 160 (1962) 106–54.
Alexander George, ‘The “Operational Code”: A Neglected Approach to the Study of Political Leaders and Decision-Making’, International Studies Quarterly, 13 (June 1969) 190–222;
Stephen G. Walker, ‘Interface Between Beliefs and Behavior: Kissinger, His Operational Code and the Vietnam War’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 21 (1977) 129–68;
Alexander George, ‘The Causal Nexus Between “Operational Code” Beliefs and Decision-Making Behavior: Problems of Theory and Methodology’, paper delivered at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Washington, D.C., 22–5 February 1978.
Robert Axelrod (ed.), Structure of Decision (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1976):
Jeffrey Hart, ‘Research Note: Cognitive Maps of Three Latin American Policy Makers’, World Politics, 30 (October 1977) 115–40.
Doris Kearns, Lyndon Johnson and the American Dream (New York: Signet. 1976).
Copyright information
© 1983 Jeffrey A. Hart
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hart, J.A. (1983). Theoretical Approaches to Explaining Changes in International Regimes. In: The New International Economic Order. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-06594-3_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-06594-3_3
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-06596-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-06594-3
eBook Packages: Palgrave Economics & Finance CollectionEconomics and Finance (R0)