Constructivism and globalisation: from units to encounters in international affairs

Abstract

In this article I argue that there is a link between constructivism and globalisation, and it is a strong one. Constructivism evolved as part of a more general trend in international relations scholarship, a trend that has seen a shift from the study of the relationship between assumed fixed, given units, nation‐states, to the study of encounter between political entities. The study of the encounter, however, affects a subtle but significant change in the assumed spatial context in which international relationships are taking place. The underpinning image of the geographical space, the envelope in which international relationships take place, has shifted from an image of a divided space made of separate and isolated nation‐states to an image of a global space, an arena that give rise to problems of encounters between social units. Encounter theories, of which constructivism in all its variations is a good example, are predicated, in other words, on an assumed global world (however ambiguous and inchoate this notion of global might be), and in that sense they advance, unwittingly, a theory of globalisation.

Notes

I would like to thank Alessandra Buonfino, Duncan Wigan and two anonymous referees for their helpful comments.

The argument I am making is by its nature impressionistic and speculative. Much has been written about constructivism. But due to the great diversity, incoherence and contradictions of many of those approaches that go under the banner of constructivism, I am unable within the space of a short article to provide a detailed account of the shift towards the encounter in constructivist literature. Rather, I will have to assume that the reader has a reasonable knowledge of constructivist texts in IR, and work from that presumed knowledge towards my argument. Among major constructivist texts we encounter Kratochwil (1989), Katzenstein (1996), Onuf (1989), Ruggie (1998a) and Wendt (1999). For sympathetic summaries of constructivist thought see: Adler (2002), Checkel (1998) and Guzzini (2000).

See particularly Giddens' (1984) structuration theory; but also older social theories such as Berger and Luckmann (1966).

The concept of ideology refers to the notion that certain (or all) theories are intentional or non‐intentional discursive constructions that function to mask certain unpleasant truths about the world.

There were materialists prior to and after Marx. Marxism must be seen, therefore, as one branch of materialism; hence many prefer terms such as ‘historical materialism’ or ‘dialectical materialism’ to describe Marxism.

The notion of a balance of power ‘system’ is a giveaway. ‘The [balance of power] system tends to be maintained by the fact that even should any nation desire to become predominant itself, it must, to protect its own interests, act to prevent any other nation from accomplishing such an objective. Like Adam Smith's “unseen hand” of competition, the international system is policed informally by self‐interest, without the necessity of a political subsystem' (Kaplan 1966, 296).

For similar views see Poulantzas (1987) and Halperin (1997).