The role of role theory in international political economy

Abstract

This article demonstrates the benefits of using a role theory approach in the field of international political economy (IPE) by demonstrating its benefits relative to variants of the social constructivist paradigm, especially vis-à-vis identity-based accounts of IPE. This article also documents how role theory always had a home in IPE even before the constructivist revolution in the 1990s. The social interactionist dimension in the work of Herbert Mead and his notion of a general other are linked to the relational ideas of friendship and impartial spectator present in the works of the founding father of classical political economy, Adam Smith. These similar ideas about the self and their surrounding social environment are a useful starting point to locate role theory in IPE and demonstrate its analytical advantages within social constructivism. After showing the ‘forgotten’ place role theory has always had in IPE, the article illustrates the potential of using a role theory approach within the field of IPE through an illustrative analysis of the Greek economic crisis.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1 Symbolic interactionist role theory focuses on the formation of roles at the micro level. However, states as corporate actors can also play roles, as it is leaders and foreign policy elites who speaks on behalf of the state. On how symbolic interactionist role theory as a micro-level approach can be applied to the meso or macro level (that is, states as conceiving and playing roles) see McCourt (2012; 2014) and Wehner (2018).

2 The second dimension of the role distance concept is based on how an actor moves beyond its own existing role to find new creative ways to perform that existing role better without engaging in the process of role change (Goffman 1961).

3 For a comprehensive analysis of the role concepts see Harnisch (2011a), Thies (2010), Walker (1987) and Holsti (1970).

4 From now on this latter work will be referred to in the text as the Wealth of nations, as it is popularly known.

5 On other similarities and overlaps in the relational thought of Smith and Mead, see Costelloe (1997).

6 Role-taking only captures a part of the social behavior of actors, as the self still enjoys its own creativity to innovate and adjust its role performances as actors try to coordinate their actions with those of others. As actors play roles, they also take part in a process of role-making, which is the improvisation of ‘some features of our behavior in order to construct a role performance that fits with the performance of others while also remaining attuned to our personal goals and inclinations’ (Sandstrom et al 2010, 150).

7 Economic sociology has also focused on the performativity of economic actors and their agency capacity to construct social economic situations and perform dramaturgical acts to understand and make sense of political economic issues (see, for example, MacKenzie 2009; Callon 2007; Knorr Cetina 2009). Future studies on the performative dimension of role could develop synergies between studies that develop the argument that economics is performative and the understanding that role theory is also about performative acts. In fact, roles are drawn from the theatre metaphor of actors playing roles on a stage (see Thies 2010).

8 In symbolic interactionist role theory, the notion of structure does not imply determinist behaviour, as actors can still innovate and improvise around their role scripts and performances, during the role-making and role-taking.

9 The PIGS acronym was coined by financial rating institutions to refer to Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain as a group of countries potentially facing severe financial problems.

10 Out of 80 billions euros provided by the EU, the major contributors were Germany with 27.9 per cent of the total, France with 21 per cent and Italy with 18.4 per cent (Featherstone 2011, 203).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Cameron G. Thies

Cameron G. Thies is Professor and Director of the School of Politics and Global Studies at Arizona State University. He conducts research in the areas of foreign policy analysis, interstate and civil conflict, international trade, and international relations theory. He has published in journal outlets such as World Politics, Review of International Studies, International Studies Quarterly, and the European Journal of International Relations, among others. His books have been published with Oxford University Press, Michigan University Press, Stanford University Press, and Routledge. Email: [email protected]

Leslie E. Wehner

Leslie E. Wehner is a Reader in Foreign Policy Analysis at the University of Bath, UK. Previously, he was a Senior Research Fellow at the GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies, Hamburg. His research interests include social constructivism and role theory within foreign policy analysis and international political economy, as well as he conducts research on regional cooperation and trade strategies of Latin American states. His most recent articles have been published in Foreign Policy Analysis, International Studies Review, International Politics, Journal of International Relations and Development, and The Oxford Encyclopedia of Foreign Policy Analysis. Email: [email protected]