Analyzing Foreign Policy: Understanding the State and System Levels of Analysis

-

State Level of Analysis:

At the state level of analysis, the focus is on internal factors that drive states to adopt specific foreign policy behaviors. This perspective considers various elements within the state that shape its foreign policy decisions. Factors examined include the institutional framework of the state, such as the dynamics between the executive and legislative branches, the organization of the government bureaucracy, and whether the state operates as a democracy. Domestic constituencies, such as interest groups, ethnic groups, and public opinion, are also taken into account. Additionally, economic conditions and the state's national history and culture are considered in shaping foreign policy.

According to Pevehouse and Goldstein, the state level of analysis involves studying the combinations of individuals within states that influence state actions on the international stage. This includes examining the role of interest groups, political organizations, and government agencies. They also emphasize that these groups may function differently depending on the type of society and state in which they operate.

Neack highlights that the state level of analysis investigates different features of a country to understand the factors that shape its foreign policy. She emphasizes that what happens internally within states has a significant impact on the dynamics between states. Neack further categorizes these factors into two broad categories: governmental factors and societal factors. Governmental factors pertain to the type of political system, the constitutional framework, decision-making processes across government institutions, the division of powers and authority, bureaucratic dynamics, and the size and institutionalization of bureaucracies. Societal factors encompass the economic system, the historical background of the population, the ethnic, racial, and religious composition, the presence and activities of interest groups and political parties, and the role of the media in setting the agenda.

System Level of Analysis:

The system level of analysis, as described by Breuning, focuses on the comparisons and interactions between states. The international system is defined as a collection of states whose actions are guided by their relative capabilities. These capabilities, such as power and wealth, significantly influence a state's potential actions and success on the global stage.

Pevehouse and Goldstein state that the system level of analysis examines how the international system influences outcomes. This perspective centers on the interactions among states, regardless of their internal structures or the specific individuals leading them. Two essential elements considered are the relative power positions of states and the level of interactions, such as trade, which play a crucial role in determining foreign policy.

According to Neack, the system level of analysis explores global issues and interactions between states. It acknowledges the significance of regional and international organizations and non-state actors, such as transnational non-governmental organizations (NGOs), in shaping the foreign policies of states. These actors have a direct influence on state-level foreign policies at the system level of analysis.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

FPA: Organizational Process Model

-
This model centers on the fact that different bureaucracies have different standard operating procedures. These procedures are made in order to allow day to day operations to be carried out. Thus, a foreign policy decision is made based on these standard operating procedures. It is hard for a bureaucracy to make a decision or let alone function out of character or contrary to their standard operating procedure. The reading Chapter 4: Foreign policy shares a straight forward explanation of the OPM: "An alternative to the rational model of decision making is the organizational process model. In this model, foreign policy decision makers generally skip the labor-intensive process of identifying goals and alternative actions, relying instead for most decisions on standardized responses or standard operating procedures. For example, the U.S. State Department everyday receives more than a thousand reports or inquiries from its embassies around the world and sends out more than a
Read more

Commercial liberalism and the six norms

-
Image
Liberal internationalism is defined by Griffiths, O'Callaghan and Roach (2008, p.190) as a project to transform international relations so that they conform to models of peace, freedom, and prosperity allegedly enjoyed within constitutional liberal democracies. The same scholars go further by dividing liberalism into three distinct groups. They say these are the three ways to implement the project. The way they present liberal internationalism as a project makes their work interesting. Three distinct groups Firstly, commercial liberalism is about free trade between states. States bilaterally or multilaterally via a platform like APEC pursue the goal of trade liberalization. Griffiths, O'Callagahan and Roach (ibid.) argued that economic interdependence would decrease the likelihood of going to war. Republican liberalism is about democratic peace. The scholars argued that the spread of democracy among states so that governments will be accountable to their citizens makes it di
Read more

Rise and fall realism

-
Image
By Colin Elman and Michael A. Jensen Source: Williams, P. D. (Ed.). (2008). Security studies: an introduction . London: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group. What is rise and fall realism? Rise and fall realism remerge as a powerful alternative to the balance of power theories that predominated international relations scholarship during the 1950’s. Central theme Hegemony is the foundation for peace while balance is often associated with war (Organski). Dynamics Rise and fall realism emphasizes that war between major powers is least likely when the international system is dominated by a single state and when there are no rising challengers vying for system leadership. Given its privileged position, a dominant state is capable of shaping the rules and practices of the international system in such a way as to satisfy its selfish interest. Stability is a product of this hegemonic order, as states which are dissatisfied with the status quo lack the capabilities to change it.
Read more