CONSTRUCTIVISM

Dr. Ramzi Theories in International Relations, IIUM

LEARINING OUTCOMES
• UNDERSTABDING CONSTRUCTIVISM
• COMPARING WITH OTHER THEORIES
• THE MAIN ISSUES WITH THE THEORY
 WHAT IS CONSTRUCTIVISM?
Constructivism is a theory in the field of international relations that emphasizes the
role of ideas, norms, and identity in shaping international relations. Constructivism
emerged as an alternative theory to realism and liberalism, which had been the
dominant theories in international relations for much of the 20th century.

Constructivism argues that international relations cannot be reduced to rational

action and interaction within material interests or power but rather by the shared
ideas, norms, and identities that shape the behaviour and interactions of states and
other actors. Constructivists believe that these ideas, norms, and identities are
constructed through social interaction and can change over time.
 CONSTRUCTIVISM AND STATE
For constructivists, state interaction is not among fixed
national interests but must be understood as a pattern of
action that shapes and is shaped by identities over time. In
contrast to other theoretical approaches, social constructivism
presents a model of international interaction that explores the
normative influence of fundamental institutional structures
and the connection between normative changes and state
identity and interests (Griffiths, 2008).
 NATIONAL INTEREST

1. States have a corporate identity that generates basic state

goals, such as physical security, stability, recognition by
others, and economic development.
2. How states fulfil their goals depends upon their social
identities, i.e. how states see themselves in relation to
other states in international society.
3. On the basis of these identities, states construct their
national interests.
(Griffiths, 2008)
 CASE STUDY

The cold war relationship between the United States and

the Soviet Union was a social structure wherein the two
principals identified each other as enemies and defined
their national interests regarding each other in
antagonistic terms. When they no longer defined each
other in these terms, the cold war ended.
 INSTITUTIONS?

Institutions themselves are constantly reproduced and,

potentially, changed by the activities of states and other
actors. Institutions and actors are mutually conditioning
entities.
 ANARCHY UNDERSTANDING

Constructivists accept that anarchy is the characteristic

condition of the international system, but argue that, by
itself, it means nothing. For example, an anarchy of friends
is different from an anarchy of enemies, but both are
possible. What matters is the variety of social structures that
is possible under anarchy.
 THE CHRONOLOGY
• The earliest roots of constructivism can be found in the work of scholars such as
George Herbert Mead and Herbert Blumer, who developed the concept of symbolic
interactionism in the 1920s and 1930s. This approach emphasized the role of
language and communication in shaping social interactions and the construction of
social reality.
• In the 1980s and 1990s, constructivism was developed further by scholars such as
Alexander Wendt, Nicholas Onuf, Martha Finnemore, and Peter J. Katzenstein. These
scholars applied constructivist ideas to the study of international relations and argued
that the ideas, norms, and identities of states and other actors shape the
international system.
• Constructivism has since become a major approach in the field of international
relations and has influenced a wide range of scholarship in the fields of political
science, sociology, and other disciplines.
FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO CONSTRUCTIVISM
End of The Cold
War

Recognition of Non-
state Actors
Factors
Culture and Identity
(Awareness)

Challenges To
Traditional Theories
 FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO CONSTRUCTIVISM
• End of the Cold War: The Cold War had been characterized by a bipolar balance of power
between the United States and the Soviet Union, and the collapse of the Soviet Union led to a
reassessment of the underlying assumptions of traditional theories.
• Increasing recognition of the role of non-state actors: The increasing recognition of the
importance of non-state actors, such as international organizations and non-governmental
organizations, in shaping international relations also contributed to the rise of constructivism.
• Growing awareness of the importance of culture and identity: The growing awareness of
the importance of culture and identity in shaping international relations also contributed to the
rise of constructivism.
• Challenges to traditional theories: Constructivism also emerged as an alternative theory in
response to the limitations of traditional theories such as realism and liberalism. These theories
had been criticized for their narrow focus on material interests and power and their inability to
fully account for the complexity and diversity of international relations.
 CONSTRUCTIVISM VS THEORIES

Aspects

International
Focus Actors Change Individuals
System
 CONSTRUCTIVISM VS REALISM
Focus: Realism emphasizes the role of power and national interest in shaping
international relations, while constructivism emphasizes the role of ideas, norms, and
identity.
Actors: Realism assumes that states are rational actors who pursue their own self-
interest, while constructivism recognizes that states and other actors may be influenced
by a variety of factors, including values and beliefs.
International system: Realism sees the international system as characterized by
anarchy, while constructivism recognizes the role of international organizations and
other institutions in shaping international relations.
Change: Realism sees international relations as largely unchanging and shaped by
inherent characteristics of states, while constructivism recognizes that the culture, norms,
and identities that shape international relations can change over time.
Role of the individual: Realism tends to focus on the behavior of states as a whole,
while constructivism recognizes the importance of individual actors and the role of
social interactions in shaping international relations.
 CONSTRUCTIVISM VS LIBERALISM
Focus: Liberalism emphasizes the role of international institutions, trade, and cooperation in
shaping international relations, while constructivism emphasizes the role of ideas, norms, and
identity.
Actors: Liberalism sees states and non-states as the primary actors in international relations and
assumes that they are motivated by rational self-interest, while constructivism recognizes the
influence of non-state actors and the role of ideas, norms, and identity in shaping international
relations.
International system: Liberalism sees the international system as characterized by
interdependence and cooperation, while constructivism recognizes the role of power and conflict in
shaping international relations.
Change: Liberalism sees international relations as driven by the spread of liberal values and
institutions, while constructivism recognizes that the ideas, norms, and identities that shape
international relations can change over time.
Role of the individuals: Liberalism tends to focus on the behaviour of states as a whole, while
constructivism recognizes the importance of individual actors and the role of social interactions in
shaping international relations.
 THINKERS OF CONSTRUCTIVISM
Alexander Wendt: Wendt is an American political scientist who is widely considered to be one of the founders of
constructivism in international relations. He is known for his work on the role of ideas and norms in shaping
international relations, and his book "Social Theory of International Politics" is considered a classic in the field.

Nicholas Onuf: Onuf was an American political scientist who was one of the early proponents of constructivism in
international relations. He is known for his work on the role of ideas and norms in shaping international relations, and
his book "World of Our Making" is a key text in the field.

Martha Finnemore: Finnemore is an American political scientist who has made significant contributions to the
development of constructivism in international relations. She is known for her work on the role of international
organizations and norms in shaping international relations, and her book "National Interests in International Society" is
a key text in the field.

Peter J. Katzenstein: Katzenstein is an American political scientist who has made significant contributions to the
development of constructivism in international relations. He is known for his work on the role of culture and identity in
shaping international relations, and his book "Cultural Norms and National Security" is a key text in the field.
 THE THEORY OF ALEXANDER WENDT
1) Wendt's theory focuses on the role of ideas and norms in shaping international
relations, and he is known for his concept of "anarchy is what states make of it."
2) According to Wendt, the international system is characterized by anarchy, or the
absence of a central authority to regulate the behavior of states. However, he argues
that the nature of anarchy is not fixed, but rather it is shaped by the identities and
norms that states and other actors hold about the international system. In other
words, anarchy is not a given, but rather it is constructed through social interaction.
3) Wendt also argues that the culture and norms that shape the international system are
not fixed, but rather they are open to change through social interaction. This means
that states and other actors can shape the international system through their
interactions with one another, and the international system is not determined only by
material interests or power.
 CONT…

• Ideas and norms: Wendt emphasizes the role of ideas and norms in shaping
international relations. He argues that the international system is not
determined solely by material interests or power but rather by the shared ideas
and norms that shape the behaviour and interactions of states and other actors.
• Potential for change: Wendt's theory also recognizes the potential for change
in the international system. He argues that the ideas and norms that shape the
international system are not fixed but open to change through social interaction.
This means that states and other actors can shape the international system through
their interactions with one another.
 CULTURE

a) From a constructivist perspective, culture refers to the shared values, beliefs,

norms, and practices that shape the behaviour and interactions of states and other
actors.
b) According to constructivism, culture is not a fixed or objective reality, but rather it
is socially constructed and shaped by the ideas, norms, and identities of states and
other actors. Culture can influence the way that states and other actors perceive and
interact with one another, and it can shape the goals and interests of states and other
actors.
c) Constructivism also recognizes the role of socialization in shaping culture.
Socialization refers to the process by which states and other actors learn and
internalize the values, beliefs, and norms of their society or the international
system. This process can shape the culture and identity of states and other actors
over time.
 EXAMPLES OF CHANGE?

• Role of international organizations: Constructivism recognizes the influence of

international organizations, such as the United Nations, in shaping international
relations. International organizations can help to create and enforce norms and rules
that shape the behaviour of states and other actors.

• Role of identity and culture: Constructivism also emphasizes the role of identity
and culture in shaping international relations. Cultural differences can shape the way
that states and other actors perceive and interact with one another, and identity can
shape the goals and interests of states and other actors.
 TYPES OF CONSTRUCTIVISM
Liberal constructivism: Liberal constructivism emphasizes the role of international institutions and
the spread of liberal values in shaping international relations. It sees the international system as
characterized by interdependence and cooperation, and it emphasizes the role of ideas and norms in
promoting cooperation and stability.
Neoclassical constructivism: Neoclassical constructivism is an approach that combines elements of
constructivism with traditional theories such as realism and liberalism. It emphasizes the role of ideas
and norms in shaping international relations, but it also recognizes the influence of material interests
and power.
Critical constructivism: Critical constructivism is an approach that takes a more critical and skeptical
view of international relations. It emphasizes the role of power and domination in shaping international
relations and the ways in which ideas and norms can be used to justify and legitimize these relations.
Poststructural constructivism: Poststructural constructivism is an approach that emphasizes the role
of language and discourse in shaping international relations. It sees the international system as
constructed through the use of language and discourse and emphasizes the ways in which language and
discourse can shape the identities and interests of states and other actors.
 CRITICISMS TO CONSTRUCTIVISM

• Lack of empirical support: One criticism of constructivism is that it is difficult to test and
measure its hypotheses and concepts, which makes it difficult to provide empirical support for
its claims. Some critics argue that constructivism is too abstract and lacks the concrete,
observable phenomena that are needed for scientific testing.
• Lack of predictive power: Another criticism of constructivism is that it lacks predictive power.
Some critics argue that constructivism is not able to provide accurate predictions about
international relations and that it does not offer the same level of explanatory power as more
traditional theories such as realism or liberalism.
• Lack of focus on material interests: Some critics argue that constructivism neglects the role of
material interests and power in shaping international relations and instead focuses too much on
ideas and norms. This can make constructivism seem unrealistic or naive in the face of real-
world international relations.
• Lack of attention to agency: Some critics argue that constructivism gives too much emphasis
to structural factors and not enough attention to agency, or the ability of individual actors to
shape international relations. This can make constructivism seem deterministic and deprive
individual actors.