Allison's rational actor model

There are 3 common models of foreign policy decision making according to Graham Allison:

1. rational actor model
2. organizational process mode
3. government politics model. 

We will discuss the 3 models and compare them with the 3 levels of analysis. However, I challenge you to use your own initiative to learn about the other models of decision making. This will help you as future decision makers or analysts to understand how decisions are made and the processes.

When one wakes up from bed he or she decides whether or not to brush their teeth, comb their hair and have a shower. These decisions are paramount, they affect and influence how the individual interacts in a social setting. This highlights the fact that as human beings we make decisions every day.

Decision making is defined as the thought process of selecting a logical choice from the available options. In the case of the ‘Kibung peles boy’ analogy; the male student had a choice of approaching the girl to ask her out in the mess, in front of the female residential area, outside the classrooms or at the betel nut market down at treelain. In the end, he choose the Kibung peles. To him it was a logical and rational choice because it was not too public, away from gossiping eyes.

In reference to the ‘Kibung peles boy’ analogy, a state as a monolithic unitary actor makes rational foreign policy decisions based on its national interest. A state decides rationally how it will interact with other states and non-state actors in the international system in order to advance its interest of developing and protecting its territory and citizens.

The rational actor model is defined by the rational choice theory. The rational choice theory talks about making decisions that maximizes personal advantage. This also includes the cost and benefit of wanting something.

For example, in the case of a female customer trying to buy sandals. The process will involve her making a rational choice by calculating the cost and benefit of buying a sandal that is cheap from buying one that is very expensive. If she has a budget then she will buy one that will cost her less but is comfortable and durable. Comfort and durability are both benefits of the product that she will buy.

Making foreign policies using cost and benefit analysis works using the same logic of ‘lowest cost and highest benefit’. Decision makers set goals, evaluate their relative importance, calculate the cost and benefit of each possible cause of action, and then choose the one with the highest benefit and the lowest cost.

In other words, this means the choice made by decision makers is based on rational calculations using the logic that the benefits must out weight the costs. Such a decision will help a state to maximize its own interest in an anarchic international system.

According to Joshua Goldstein (2005, p. 146), “the choice may be complicated by uncertainty about the cost and benefit of certain actions. In such cases, decision makers must attach probabilities to each possible outcome of an action.” For example, will pressuring a rival state to give ground in peace talks work or backfire? Will pressuring Australia to lessen visa regulations work or backfire? Some decision makers are relatively accepting of risk, whereas others are averse to risk. These factors affect the importance that decision makers place on various alternative outcomes that could result from an action.

Allison stated that another complication happens in the case of a crisis situation. For example, if our hypothetical case of ‘Kisim PNG’ does happen where Indonesia takes over the border town of Vanimo, the government or NEC with its foreign policy making organs will not have enough time to do complex evaluations to determine a rational course of action.

Conducting a cost and benefit analysis is a cumbersome process where one has to collect data about every possible decision one is going to make. Investigating the consequences of the alternative means one has to list down each alternative and go through each one of them and investigate the likely outcome if this alternative is implemented. This requires reasoning and a higher degree of understanding complemented by expert knowledge and experience.

This is where people with area expertise come in. The China, Australia, Indonesia or PNG specialists have a very in depth knowledge of the history, politics, economics and social conditions of the various states. This will help in calculating the cost and benefit.

Reference
Goldstein, J. (2005). International relations (6th ed.). Beijing: Peking University Press.