If Foreign Policy Paradigms Were on the Research Agenda…

Liv Frank,

F. Asli Ergul Jorgensen,

Knud Erik Jørgensen,

Laura Landorff

Abstrakt

The aim of the article is to develop a conceptual framework for the analysis of foreign policy paradigms. In order to develop such a framework, we review the wider literature on policy paradigms and adapt it to the field of foreign relations and diplomacy. Adaptation includes the explication of key concepts, such as identity, values, goals, means and principles. Importantly, we do not only explicate key concepts, but also, subsequently, outline methodological avenues for empirical research on foreign policy paradigms. In this fashion, the article offers a conceptual framework that analysts can apply in empirical studies of both national and transnational foreign policy paradigms, including the field of EU foreign policy.

Słowa kluczowe: policy paradigms, EEAS, foreign policy, methodology, normative structures, principles, values
References

Aarstad, A.K. (2015). “Introduction: The Politics of European Foreign Policy”. In: K.E. Jorgensen, A.K. Aarstad, E. Drieskens, K. Laatikainen, B. Tonra (eds.). The SAGE Handbook of European Foreign Policy. London: Sage.

Adler-Nissen, R. (2014). “Symbolic Power in European Diplomacy: The Struggle between National Foreign Services and the EU’s External Action Service”. Review of International Studies, 40(4), pp. 657–681.

Ball, T. (1995). Reappraising Political Theory: Revisionist Studies in the History of Political Thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Barth, F. (1969). Ethnic Groups and Boundaries: The Social Organization of Cultural Difference. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

Baumgartner, F.R. (2014). “Ideas, Paradigms and Confusions”. Journal of European Public Policy, 21(3), pp. 475–480.

Bleich, E. (2002). “Integrating Ideas into Policy-making Analysis: Frames and Race Policies in Britain and France”. Comparative Political Studies, 35(9), pp. 1054–1076.

Bowen, G.A. (2009). “Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method”. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), pp. 27–40.

Campbell, D. (1993). Politics without Principle: Sovereignty, Ethics, and the Narratives of the Gulf War. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.

Campbell, J.L. (1998). “Institutional Analysis and the Role of Ideas in Political Economy”. Theory and Society, 27, pp. 377–409.

Carlsnaes, W. (1992). “The Agency-Structure Problem in Foreign Policy Analysis”. International Studies Quarterly, 36(3), pp. 245–270.

Carson, M., Burns, T.R., Calvo, D. (2009). Paradigms in Public Policy: Theory and Practice of Paradigm Shifts in the EU. Berlin: Peter Lang.

Carta, C. (2011). The European Union Diplomatic Service: Ideas, P and Identities. London: Routledge.

Chacko, P. (2013). Indian Foreign Policy: The Politics of Postcolonial Identity from 1947 to 2004. Abingdon: Routledge.

Claude, I.L. (1993). “The Tension between Principle and Pragmatism in International Relations”. Review of International Studies, 19(3), pp. 215–226.

Cornut, J. (2015). “To Be a Diplomat Abroad: Diplomatic Practice at Embassies”. Cooperation and Conflict, 50(3), pp. 385–401.

Daigneault, P. (2014). “Reassessing the Concept of Policy Paradigm: Aligning Ontology and Methodology in Policy Studies”. Journal of European Public Policy, 21(3), pp. 453–469.

Daigneault, P.-M. (2015). “Ideas and Welfare Reform in Saskatchewan: Entitlement, Workfare or Activation?”. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 48(1), pp. 147–171.

Derrida, J. (1976). Of Grammatology. New York: The Johns Hopkins University Press. 

Diez, T. (2014). “Setting the Limits: Discourse and EU Foreign Policy”. Cooperation and Conflict, 49(3), pp. 319–333.

Dijk, T.A. van (1993). “Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis”. Discourse & Society, 4(2), pp. 249–283.

Dijk, T.A. van (2001). “Multidisciplinary CDA: A Plea for Diversity”. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, 1, pp. 95–120.

Exadaktylos, T. (2015). “Policy Paradigms”. In: K.E. Jorgensen, A.K. Aarstad, E. Drieskens, K. Laatikainen, B. Tonra (eds.). The SAGE Handbook of European Foreign Policy. Vol. 2. London: Sage Publications Ltd., pp. 488–500.

Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge. 

Finnemore, M., Sikkink, K. (1998). “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change”. International Organization, 52(4), pp. 887–917.

Geertz, C. (1974). “‘From the Native’s Point of View’: On the Nature of Anthropological Understanding”. Bulletin of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 28(1), pp. 26–45.

Goertz, G. (2006). Social Science Concepts: A User’s Guide. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 27–67.

Goldstein, J., Keohane, R. (eds.). (1993). Ideas and Foreign Policy: Beliefs, Institutions, and Political Change. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Hall, P. (1993). “Policy Paradigms, Social Learning, and the State: The Case of Economic Policymaking in Britain”. Comparative Politics, 25(3), pp. 275–296.

Hogan, J., Howlett, M. (2015). Policy Paradigms in Theory and Practice: Discourses, Ideas and Anomalies in Public Policy Dynamics. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Holman, O. (2015). “Commercial Internationalism”. In: K.E. Jorgensen, A.K. Aarstad, E. Drieskens, K. Laatikainen, B. Tonra (eds.). The SAGE Handbook of European Foreign Policy. Vol. 2. London: Sage Publications Ltd., pp. 516–529.

Hopf, T. (2002). Social Origins of International Politics: Identities and the Construction of Foreign Policies at Home. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Jackson, R. (2000). The Global Covenant: Human Conduct in a World of States. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jenkins, R. (1996). Social Identity. New York: Routledge.

Jepperson, W., Wendt, A., Katzenstein, P. (1996). “Norms, Identity, and Culture in National Security”. In: P. Katzenstein (ed.). The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Jorgensen, K.E. (2013). “Does Europe Have Foreign Policy Traditions?”. In: F. Bynander, S. Guzzini (eds.). Rethinking Foreign Policy. London: Routledge.

Juncos, A.E., Pomorska, K. (2013). “In the Face of Adversity: Explaining the Attitudes of EEAS Officials vis-a-vis the New Service”. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(9), pp. 1332–1349.

Juncos, A.E., Pomorska, K. (2014). “Manufacturing Esprit de Corps: The Case of the European External Action Service”. Journal of Common Market Studies, 52(2), pp. 302–319.

Kane, J. (2008). Between Virtue and Power: The Persistent Moral Dilemma of U.S. Foreign Policy. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Kennan, G.F. (1995). “On American Principles”. Foreign Affairs, March–April, pp. 116–126.

Keuleers, F., Fonck, D., Keukeleire, S. (2016). “Beyond EU Navel-Gazing: Taking Stock of EU-Centrism in the Analysis of EU Foreign Policy”. Cooperation and Conflict, 51(3), pp. 345–364.

Krasner, S.D. (ed.) (1983). International Regimes. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 

Kratochwil, F., Ruggie, J.G. (1986). “International Organization: A State of the Art on an Art of the State”. International Organization, 40(4), pp. 753–775.

Lequesne, Ch. (2017). Ethnographie du Quai d’Orsay. Les pratiques des diplomates français. Paris: CNRS Editions.

Lequesne, Ch. (2019). Studying Diplomatic Practices through the Lens of Direct Observation. London: Sage.

Lilleker, D. (2003). “Interviewing the Political Elite: Navigating a Political Minefield”. Politics, 23(3), pp. 207–214.

Littig, B. (2009). “Interviewing the Elite –Interviewing Experts: Is There a Difference?”. In: A. Bogner, B. Littig, W. Menz (eds.). Interviewing Experts. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 98–113.

Lucarelli, S. (2006). “Introduction”. In: S. Lucarelli, I. Manners (eds.). Values and Principles in European Foreign Policy. London: Routledge.

Mason, J. (2018). Qualitative Researching. 3rd ed. London: Sage.

Mead, W.R. (2001). Special Providence. American Foreign Policy and How It has Changed the World. London: Routledge.

Milliken, J. (1999). “The Study of Discourse in International Relations: A Critique of Research and Methods”. European Journal of International Relations, 5(2), pp. 225–254.

Morgenstern-Pomorski, J.-H. (2018). The Contested Diplomacy of the European External Action Service: Inception, Establishment and Consolidation. London: Routledge.

Nair, D. (2021). “‘Hanging Out’while Studying ‘Up’: Doing Ethnographic Fieldwork in International Relations”. International Studies Review, 23(4), pp. 1300–1327.

Nau, H.R. (2002). At Home Abroad. Identity and Power in American Foreign Policy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Nau, H.R. (2008). “Conservative Internationalism”. Policy Review, pp. 3–44.

Nau, H.R. (2012). “Introduction”. In: H.R. Nau, D. Ollapally (eds.). Worldviews of Aspiring Powers: Domestic Foreign Policy Debates in China, India, Iran, Japan and Russia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Nau, H.R., Ollapally, D. (eds.) (2012). Worldviews of Aspiring Powers: Domestic Foreign Policy Debates in China, India, Iran, Japan and Russia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Neumann, I.B. (1999). Uses of the Other: The ‘East’ in European Identity Formation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Neumann, I.B. (2012). At Home with Diplomats: Inside a European Foreign Ministry. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

O’Leary, Z. (2014). The Essential Guide to Doing Your Research Project. London: Sage.

Potter, P.B.K. (2010). “Methods of Foreign Policy Analysis”. Oxford Research Encyclopedias International Studies, https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.34 (accessed: 6.07.2022).

Richards, D. (1996). “Elite Interviewing: Approaches and Pitfalls”. Politics, 16(3), pp. 199–204.

Risse, T. (2012). “Identity Matters: Exploring the Ambivalence of EU Foreign Policy”. Global Policy, 3, pp. 87–95.

Schatz, E. (2009). “Introduction. Ethnographic Immersion and the Study of Politics”. In: E. Schatz (ed.). Political Ethnography. What Immersion Contributes to the Study of Power. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 1–22.

Schumaker, J. (2008). From Ideologies to Public Philosophies: An Introduction to Political Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.

Schwartz-Shea, P., Yanow, D. (2013). Interpretive Research Design: Concepts and Processes. New York, NY: Routledge.

Skogstad, G. (2011). “Constructing a Transnational Policy Paradigm in the European Union: The Case of GMO Risk Regulation”. In: G. Skogstad (ed.). Policy Paradigms, Transnationalism, and Domestic Politics. Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press, pp. 91–118.

Solomon, T., Steele, B.J. (2017). “Micro-Moves in International Relations Theory”. European Journal of International Relations, 23(2), pp. 267–291.

Surel, Y. (2000). “The Role of Cognitive and Normative Frames in Policy-Making”. Journal of European Public Policy, 7(4), pp. 495–512.

Thompson, K.W. (1992). Traditions and Values in Politics and Diplomacy: Theory and Practice. Baton Rouge: LSU Press.

Trueb, B. (2014). “Expert Interviews and Triangulation: Foreign Policy Towards Latin America in Europe”. In: SAGE Research Methods Cases, https://www.doi.org/10.4135/978144627305013514663 (accessed: 6.07.2022).

Voorhoeve, J.J. (1979). Peace, Profits and Principles: A Study of Dutch Foreign Policy. The Hague–Boston: M. Nijhoff.

Wedeen, L. (2009). “Ethnography as Interpretive Enterprise. In: E. Schatz (ed.). Political Ethnography. What Immersion Contributes to the Study of Power. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 75–94.

Weir, M. (1992). “Ideas and the Politics of Bounded Innovation”. In: S. Steinhof, K. Thelen, F. Longstreth (eds.). Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis. London: Routledge.

Wendt, A (1992). “Anarchy Is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics”. International Organization, 46(2), pp. 391–425.

Wendt, A. (1994). “Collective Identity Formation and the International State”. American Political Science Review, 88(2), pp. 384–396.

Wendt, A. (1999). Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.