Article

Diplomatic communication and resilient governance: problems of governing nuclear weapons

Authors:
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the author.

Abstract

This article examines the resilience of governance. My descriptive argument identifies variations of resilience by analysing the evolution of contestation and decontestation of governance-constituting institutions in the foreground and background layers of governance. My explanatory argument distinguishes different modes of diplomatic communication, ranging from coercion (most closed) via declaration, haggle, and problem-solving to polylogue (most open). While the occurrence of none of these modes is inconsequential, producing resilience in the foreground and background layers does not become possible unless problem-solving and polylogue, respectively, come to dominate communicative encounters. My abductive analysis of nuclear weapons governance underlines the plausibility of this conceptual framework and elaborates on it further. In the past two decades, communicative practices sidelined open modes of communication. This made the resilience of nuclear weapons governance decline. This study makes three contributions: it provides more details on how to describe governance resilience; it shows that additional explanatory power is to be gained by looking at the breadth of communication employed by diplomats; and it contributes to a better grasp of what keeps nuclear governance together and what threatens to tear it apart.

No full-text available

Request Full-text Paper PDF

To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.

Book
This book examines Africa’s internal and external relations by focusing on three core concepts: orders, diplomacy and borderlands. The contributors examine traditional and non-traditional diplomatic actors, and domestic, regional, continental, and global orders. They argue that African diplomats profoundly shape these orders by situating themselves within in-between-spaces of geographical and functional orders. It is in these borderlands that agency, despite all kinds of constraints, flourishes. Chapters in the book compare domestic orders to regional ones, and then continental African orders to global ones. They deal with a range of functional orders, including development, international trade, human rights, migration, nuclear arms control, peacekeeping, public administration, and territorial change. By focusing on these topics, the volume contributes to a better understanding of African international relations, sharpens analyses of ordering processes in world politics, and adds to our comprehension of how diplomacy shapes orders and vice versa. The studies collected here show a much more nuanced picture of African agency in African and international affairs and suggest that African diplomacy is far more extensive than is often assumed. This book will be of much interest to students of diplomacy studies, African politics and International Relations.
Chapter
Full-text available
Nuclear deterrence" describes how states use nuclear weapons to discourage the aggression of other states by threatening them with nuclear punishment. "Communication" is commonly associated with theories and policies of nuclear deterrence (e.g., as a requirement for its effectiveness). Deeper exploration, however, uncovers at least four co-existing images of communication: as "Information," "Interaction," "Signification," and "Discourse." This chapter clarifies the premises, functions, and implications of these images. It argues that scholars and policymakers benefit from greater appreciation for the distinctiveness of communication as a complex phenomenon that is conceptualized and practiced differently across deterrence spheres. A brief case study of symbolism developed in the U.S.-North Korean deterrence relationship illustrates the benefits of communicative analysis.
Book
Full-text available
The Handbook of Communication and Security provides a comprehensive collection and synthesis of communication scholarship that engages security at multiple levels, including theoretical vs. practical, international vs. domestic, and public vs. private. The handbook includes chapters that leverage communication-based concepts and theories to illuminate and influence contemporary security conditions. Collectively, these chapters foreground and analyze the role of communication in shaping the economic, technological, and cultural contexts of security in the 21st century. This book is ideal for advanced undergraduate and postgraduate students and scholars in the numerous subfields of communication and security studies.
Book
Cambridge Core - International Relations and International Organisations - Co-Managing International Crises - by Markus Kornprobst
Article
Full-text available
This article demonstrates that the network structures of historical regimes influence the way information is spread, which in turn circumscribe the behaviors of the different groups that make up the system. It advances two central claims. The first is a methodological one showing that patterns of long-term historical change are best studied at the system level, rather than by a traditional equilibrium framework grounded in models of individual behavior. Then, an empirical claim is established by comparisons of China's hub-and-spoke hypernetwork with Europe's multi-hub hypernetwork to show that their different patterns of interconnectivity forged their respective capacities to weather intermittent socioeconomic transitions.
Article
Full-text available
Defines and elucidates the concept of ‘background ideas’; Defines and elucidates neo-liberalism and its relationship to background ideas; Uses discursive institutionalism as framework for analysis of background ideas and neo-liberalism; Explores different levels of neo-liberal ideas in terms of philosophy, program, and policy; Considers how different levels of ideas may be transformed over time through revolutionary or evolutionary change; Examines different forms of ideas, especially as philosophies, ideologies, and discourse, and different types of ideas, both cognitive and normative; Considers the different ways in which ideas are constructed and communicated by policy or political entrepreneurs and/or act in discursive policy communities; Discusses political entrepreneurs as ideological, pragmatic, or opportunistic. Neo-liberalism has come to constitute the core background idea of European political economies, as the unquestioned set of beliefs, understandings, or core philosophy exercising a seemingly incontrovertible hold since the 1980s in Europe. Using a discursive institutionalist framework, this article defines background ideas; describes their different forms, levels, and types; theorizes about the nature of continuity and change in such ideas; and considers the agents and discursive processes through which such ideas are constructed and disseminated. It illustrates throughout with examples of neo-liberalism, from the philosophical origins through its many different permutations in different institutional contexts over time. This article concludes that although ‘background ideas’ as a concept remains somewhat elusive, it is nonetheless useful as a way of understanding how neo-liberalism has managed to infuse people’s deepest assumptions about the possible and thereby to set the limits of the imaginable with regard to political economic action.
Article
Full-text available
Contemporary international finance raises important questions about whether, and how, it might be overseen by national governments and international institutions. Inasmuch as global financial stability is a global public good, there is a normative case for governance structures to try to achieve this goal-whether they take the form of interstate cooperation or international institutions. This, however, does not mean that national states will necessarily be willing or able to work together to provide this global public good, as the incentives to free-ride are enormous. Nonetheless, the past 25 years do indicate that there has been some movement toward the provision of such global public goods as financial harmonization and a semblance of global lender-of-last-resort facilities. The record is spotty, but the trend appears to be in the direction of more global governance of global finance.
Book
Full-text available
European integration continues to deepen despite major crises and attempts to take back sovereignty. A growing number of member states are reacting to a more constraining EU by negotiating opt-outs. This book provides the first in-depth account of how opt-outs work in practice. It examines the most controversial cases of differentiated integration: the British and Danish opt-outs from Economic and Monetary Union and European policies on borders, asylum, migration, internal security and justice. Drawing on over one hundred interviews with national representatives and EU officials, the author demonstrates how representatives manage the stigma of opting out, allowing them to influence even politically sensitive areas covered by their opt-outs. Developing a practice approach to European integration, the book shows how everyday negotiations transform national interests into European ideals. It is usually assumed that states opt out to preserve sovereignty, but Adler-Nissen argues that national opt-outs may actually reinforce the integration process.
Article
Full-text available
Despite the economic crisis that hit full force in 2008 in the US and Europe, political leaders have made little attempt to rethink the neoliberal ideas that are in large part responsible for the boom and bust, let alone to come to terms with how immoderate the ‘Great Moderation’ really was. Much the contrary, neoliberal ideas seem to continue to constitute the ruling ideas. In the financial markets, where the crisis began, reregulation remains woefully inadequate, while the only ideas in play are neoliberal, either for more ‘market-enhancing’ regulation or in favor of greater laissez-faire. The biggest puzzle, however, is the response to the crisis by Eurozone countries that have embraced ‘market discipline’ through austerity and, in so doing, have condemned themselves to slow or no growth. This is in contrast to the US, which has posted better economic results, despite being torn between Republican fundamentalists advocating austerity and a more pragmatic leadership focused on growth.
Article
Full-text available
The traditional arms control approach is slow in dismantling nuclear arsenals. It is also a state-centered approach, and does not enthuse public opinion as it is rather technical and complex. The recent interest in the so-called humanitarian approach of nuclear disarmament can be explained by a growing frustration with traditional arms control. The humanitarian approach points to the consequences of the use of nuclear weapons for individual human beings, and recommends forbidding nuclear weapons. The step-by-step approach is replaced by a principled approach, which holds that nuclear weapons are too destructive to be used, just like chemical and biological weapons. A ban on nuclear weapons will turn the tables. The burden of proof will shift from the non-nuclear weapon states to the nuclear weapon states. Those nuclear weapon states that are not eager to eliminate their nuclear weapons will come under growing pressure from worldwide public opinion as well as their own public opinion. It is this stigmatizing effect of nuclear weapons as inhumane and therefore unusable that may bring all states to pursue Global Zero.
Article
Full-text available
While scholars of International Relations and comparative politics have usually treated rhetoric as epiphenomenal, one strand of constructivism has recently returned rhetoric to the heart of political analysis, especially through the mechanism of persuasion. We too maintain that rhetoric is central to political processes and outcomes, but we argue that persuasion is theoretically and methodologically problematic. We aver that rhetoric's role may be more usefully conceptualized in the context of coercion, and we advance a stylized model that illustrates how rhetorical coercion operates, explains why it works, and identifies key scope conditions. We subsequently illustrate our model's relevance through a detailed examination of a ‘hard’ case. This article's agenda is twofold. First, it advises scholars in these fields to avoid focusing on unanswerable questions about actors' motives and to examine instead what actors say, in what contexts, and to what audiences. Second, it lays the groundwork for a ‘coercive constructivism’, complementing the liberal version so prevalent today.
Chapter
Institutions are designed to alter human behavior. To remain effective over time, institutions need to adapt to changes in the environment or the society the institution is meant to regulate. Douglas North referred to this property as adaptive efficiency and suggested the need for a model of how institutions change to remain effective. This essay contributes to a theory of adaptive efficiency by relating it to the burgeoning literature in robust system design. It reviews five models of institutional change, paying particular attention to each model’s ability to explain institutional adaptation. It isolates three common structural features of a robust, adaptive institutional system: diversity, modularity, and redundancy. It illustrates the theory with a brief application to federal systems, and closes by describing some open research questions relating to institutional adaptive efficiency.
Book
In any multilateral setting, some state representatives weigh much more heavily than others. Practitioners often refer to this form of diplomatic hierarchy as the ‘international pecking order’. This book is a study of international hierarchy in practice, as it emerges out of the multilateral diplomatic process. Building on the social theories of Erving Goffman and Pierre Bourdieu, it argues that diplomacy produces inequality. Delving into the politics and inner dynamics of NATO and the UN as case studies, Vincent Pouliot shows that pecking orders are eminently complex social forms: contingent yet durable; constraining but also full of agency; operating at different levels, depending on issues; and defined in significant part locally, in and through the practice of multilateral diplomacy.
Article
It is well known that during a crisis, unitary rational states have an incentive to misrepresent their true resolve and willingness to go to war. This theoretical result has been taken to imply that diplomacy, interpreted as pre-bargaining communication, can have no effect on the way crises play out. This paper shows an intuitive way that diplomatic cheap talk can matter in a single crisis between countries, especially when the bargaining game has multiple equilibria. In particular, if after “diplomacy” states can choose to either fight a war directly or bargain in hopes of reaching a peaceful settlement, then it is possible to find an equilibrium, where diplomacy influences whether there is war or peace. Importantly, the cheap talk diplomacy does three things the standard model says it cannot: it coordinates actions, it reveals information, and it changes the ex ante probability of war. This result demonstrates an easy way of reconciling the discrepancy between the obvious empirical observation that diplomacy often does influence the path of a crisis with the rationalist model of war.
Article
Multi-level governance may facilitate learning and adaptation in complex social-ecological circumstances. Such arrangements should connect community-based management with regional/national government-level management, link scientific management and traditional management systems, encourage the sharing of knowledge and information, and promote collaboration and dialogue around goals and outcomes. Governance innovations of this type can thus build capacity to adapt to change and manage for resilience. However, critical reflection on the emergence of adaptive, multi-level governance for the commons is warranted. Drawing on examples from the North and South, the purpose of this review is to connect three complementary bodies of scholarship with insights for commons governance in a multi-level world: common property theory, resilience thinking and political ecology. From the commons and resilience literature, normative principles of adaptive, multi-level governance are synthesized (e.g., participation, accountability, leadership, knowledge pluralism, learning and trust). Political ecological interpretations, however, help to reveal the challenge of actualizing these principles and the contextual forces that make entrenched, top-down management systems resilient to change. These forces include the role of power, scale and levels of organization, knowledge valuation, the positioning of social actors and social constructions of nature. Also addressed are the policy narratives that shape governance, and the dialectic relationship among ecological systems and social change. tekst
Article
How do actors come to contest previously uncontested background ideas? This is a difficult question to ask. On the one hand, deep backgrounds seem to be too foundational for actors to transform. Their political efficacy appears to end where ideas constitute their efficacy in the first place. On the other hand, ideas must not be reified. Even deeply taken-for-granted ideas do not always stay the same, and agents have a lot to do with these changes. In order to answer this question, we draw from social theory and rhetorical studies. We conceptualize the deep background as nomos, and the more easily accessible background as endoxa. We then proceed to identify three sets of conditions that make nomic change possible. These relate to opportunity, message, and messenger. Nomic change becomes possible when the need forsomething new has become widely established and a supply of new nomic ideas is easily available (opportunity); new nomic ideas are ‘smuggled’ into more orthodox and widely resonating arguments (message) as well as rhetorical encounters in which these arguments are made; and advocates are widely recognized as interlocutors (messenger). A plausibility probe of nomic contestation about nuclear governance provides evidence for this framework.
Conference Paper
This essay reconstructs communication theory as a dialogical-dialectical field according to two principles: the constitutive model of communication as a metamodel and theory as metadiscursive practice. The essay argues that all communication theories are mutually relevant when addressed to a practical lifeworld in which "communication" is already a richly meaningful term. Each tradition of communication theory derives from and appeals rhetorically to certain commonplace beliefs about communication while challenging other beliefs. The complementarities and tensions among traditions generate a theoretical metadiscourse that intersects with and potentially, informs the ongoing practical metadiscourse in society In a tentative schedule of the field, rhetorical, semiotic, phenomenological, cybernetic, sociopsychological, sociocultural, and critical traditions of communication theory are distinguished by characteristic ways of defining communication and problems of communication, metadiscoursive vocabularies, and metadiscoursive commonplaces that they appeal to and challenge. Topoi for argumentation across traditions are suggested and implications for theoretical work and disciplinary practice in the field are considered.
Chapter
A goal of this volume is to gain analytic traction on what seem to be great changes in the character and effects of diplomacy by bringing international relations (IR) and social theory to bear on the question. Toward this end, the Introduction proposes that while diplomacy has long been understood as a practice of representation, it is now “about much more” in that it also is about governance (Introduction, 111). Several scholars have offered interpretations of diplomacy as representation – for example, James Der Derian,1 Iver Neumann,2 Paul Sharp,3 Saffron Sofer,4 and Rebecca Adler Nissen.5 But that work does not consider how representation relates to governance. Representing and governing are distinct, and the distinction matters, because the practice of diplomatic representation is constitutive of the international society of states and its members, 6 while the practice of global governing is potentially transformative of it. To assess the provocative proposition that the international system is moving beyond diplomatic representation, therefore, we need to have in mind what a practice of governing might entail, and along which dimensions it differs from versus overlaps with representation. That is the goal of this chapter.
Article
Conflict is a roller coaster, with its ups and downs. The roller coaster is exhilarating because it is a simulation of danger: we have our hearts in our mouths in anticipation as we go up and a scream in our mouths in excitement as we go down. But it is only a simulation (or we would not have bought the ticket), and not an accurate one at that. While we know where the top of the roller coaster is, we do not know how extreme the conflict is going to become before it starts to decline. It is that unknown and the dynamics of getting there that make for the deadly excitement of conflict. Escalation is the dynamics of determining where the conflict peak is and if it has been reached. The conflict occasioned by apartheid in South Africa escalated from the repression of the Defiance Campaign in 1952 through the spontaneous Sharpeville demonstrations and massacre of 1960, the Rivonia Trial of Nelson Mandela of 1963, the intensified police measures, the Black Consciousness movement, the Soweto riots of 1976, and the Umkonto we Sizwe attacks that challenged surveillance and repression through the 1980s. But it also saw the constitutional changes of 1983, followed by attempts to talk with Mandela and others of the African National Congress, until finally the apartheid policy began to crumble in 1990 and negotiations began. © International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis 2005 and Cambridge University Press, 2009.
Article
In this important new book, Giandomenico Majone examines the crucial but often overlooked distinction between the general aim of European integration and the specific method of integration employed in designing an (ill-considered) monetary union. Written with the author's customary insight and precision, this highly topical and provocative book reviews the Union's leaders' tradition of pushing through ambitious projects without considering the serious hurdles that lie in the way of their success. Regional and European integration topics are discussed, including credibility of commitments, delegation of powers, bargaining and influence activities, adverse selection and moral hazard. The author also offers a deeper examination of the specific crisis of monetary integration, arguing that it might be more effectively achieved with inter-jurisdictional competition and suggesting how integration should be managed in the globalized world.
Article
Distinguishes five contending International Relations perspectives on background ideas Calls for more cross-fertilisation across perspectives to deal with conceptual challenges pertaining to backgrounds, agency, as well as change and persistence Summarises contributions to forum The actors we study do not reflect upon their background ideas. They simply take them for granted. Precisely because of this taken-for-grantedness, these ideas are very powerful. They shape world politics in profound ways. The discipline of International Relations has neglected background ideas for a long time. In the last two decades, however, a heterogeneous cluster of research has developed that inquires into what constitutes background ideas, how backgrounds affect politics, and how they come to change. The purpose of this special forum is to take stock of the current state of research, to make authors embracing different perspectives on background ideas engage with one another’s arguments, and thus to improve our explanatory and normative understandings of backgrounds in world politics.
Article
Develops a rhetorical field theory that conceptualises the relationship between background ideas and foreground communication Distinguishes between two layers of background ideas ( nomos and topoi) that underpin communicative encounters in a field Conceptualises communicative opportunities and moves through which actors change the nomos of a field Illustrates the added value of a rhetorical field theory by inquiring into nomic change in the nuclear-weapons field A burgeoning literature in International Relations draws on Bourdieu’s theory of social fields to address the question of how actors make and unmake order in world politics. Inquiring into deeply seated background ideas constituting order, this literature often neglects how communication reproduces and (de)contests background ideas. Our article seeks to remedy this shortcoming by outlining a rhetorical field theory. This theory puts background ideas and foreground communication on an equal footing and conceptualises their relationship in detail. We distinguish between two layers of background ideas ( nomos and topoi) and address the crucial question of how nomic change becomes possible. We introduce a typology of nomic change (destabilisation, adaption, disorientation, shift) and conceptualise the interplay of rhetorical opportunities and rhetorical moves that bring about particular types of nomic change. We probe this theoretical framework by analysing the recent nomic change in the nuclear-weapons field. This empirical analysis provides evidence for our theoretical framework.
Article
The article takes issue with available critiques of resilience as self-evidently in keeping with neoliberal governance. It complicates this contention by making three interventions. First, it highlights how key neoliberal thinkers invoked evolutionary rationalisations to challenge liberal forms. Second, in drawing on the work of Friedrich Hayek and Douglass North, it proposes that neoliberalism, rather than a success story, seems to be confronted with a central paradox as it shifts from apologia to governmentality. This paradox concerns the incommensurability between portraying the world as complex and non-linear in which cause-and-effect relations cannot be securely established, on the one hand, and understanding human agency primarily in terms of goal-oriented decision-making, on the other. Third, it suggests that it is early pragmatist theorisations, rather than neoliberal thought, that can help us comprehend resilience rationalities. While pragmatists shared the evolutionary-complex ontology with neoliberal thinkers, it is particularly its Deweyan version that offers a different conception of human agency and its relation to the world. Dewey’s pragmatism redirects agency into the inner life of humans as the site where genuine change and transformation can be effected under conditions of complexity. The overall argument made is that resilience thus emerges as a mode of governance that should be understood as a response to the dilemma of neoliberal logics rather than a continuation of its system of rule.
Article
In nuclear nonproliferation negotiations, many governments pursue multiple objectives, and changes in policy can occur rapidly—and often unexpectedly. For these reasons, understanding nonproliferation requires empathy and imagination rather than just historical fact. This article considers one teaching tool to encourage such insight—simulations—and demonstrates how teaching and scholarship can interact to improve our understanding of the complex decisions and negotiations involved in nuclear nonproliferation. The article consists of five parts: first, it explains the benefits of simulations as both a policy development tool in Washington and as a teaching tool in universities; second, it describes the pedagogical strategy of the Stanford University simulation program; third, it shows how the simulations have identified and highlighted theoretical and substantive insights that are often neglected in scholarly studies of nonproliferation; and fourth, it describes how students are tested to enhance the learning experience from the simulation. Fifth and finally, the article provides concluding observations about how using simulations in the classroom can help scholars develop insights that improve their understanding of real-world nuclear negotiation dynamics and outcomes.
Article
Originally published in 1977, this book deals with the social psychological factors which influence the process of bargaining. It examines the structure behind the process, by which it can be analysed and better understood. Particular attention is paid to the character of negotiations in which agreements are obtained. © 1977 George Allen & Unwin (Publishers) Ltd.. All rights reserved.
Article
Benjamin S. Lambeth is a senior staff member of the Rand Corporation, specializing in Soviet political and military affairs. He served previously in the Office of National Estimates and Office of Political Research, Central Intelligence Agency. 1. For detailed discussion of the principal differences between U.S. and Soviet strategic thought and how they affect U.S. national security planning, see Benjamin S. Lambeth, Selective Nuclear Options in American and Soviet Strategic Policy (The Rand Corporation, R-2034-DDRE, December 1976) and How To Think About Soviet Military Doctrine (The Rand Corporation, P-5939, February 1978). See also Fritz W. Ermarth, "Contrasts in American and Soviet Strategic Thought," International Security, Fall 1978, pp. 138-155. 2. One notable dissenting view, which argues that the Soviet leaders have now come to accept the desirability of mutual deterrence notwithstanding the seeming suggestions of formal Soviet military doctrine to the contrary, may be found in Raymond L. Garthoff, "Mutual Deterrence and Strategic Arms Limitation in Soviet Policy," International Security, Summer 1978, pp. 112-147. For a cogent critique of this article, see Donald G. Brennan, "Commentary," International Security, Winter 1978, pp. 193-198. 3. In this regard, my colleague Nancy Nimitz has argued that among the factors of military capability, external political trends that affect the practical utility of a given array of forces, and national determination (or "resolve"), the Soviet leaders assign the greatest importance to the latter of these in determining their overall strategic prowess and regard the first (military capability) as, at best, a necessary but quite insufficient key to Soviet security. "Soviet Perceptions of the Military Balance" (unpublished manuscript). 4. V. M. Kulish, Military Force and International Relations (Moscow: Izdatel'stvo Mezhdunarodnye Otnosheniia, 1972), p. 29. 5. For an insightful amplification on this point, which convincingly scores much of what passes for "strategic analysis" in the United States as being little more than uninspired and operationally irrelevant number-crunching, see Edward Luttwak, "The American Style of Warfare and the Military Balance, Survival, March-April 1979, pp. 57-60. 6. A. Migolat'ev, "Who is Forcing the Arms Race and Why?" Mezhdunarodnaia Zhizn', No. 10, October 1977, p. 87. 7. Foreign Minister A. A. Gromyko, "The Peace Program in Action," Kommunist, No. 14, September 1975, p. 5. 8. Lieutenant General P. Zhilin, "The Great October and the Defense of the Socialist Homeland," Voenno-Istoricheskii Zhurnal, No. 10, October 1977, p. 18. 9. G. Sviatov, "United States Policy Regarding Armed Forces Construction and Arms Limitation," Voprosy Istorii, No. 2, February 1978, p. 90. 10. Yu. Oleshuk, "The Bankrupt Arguments of the Opponents of Detente," SShA: Ekonomika, Politika, Ideologiia, No. 10, October 1977, p. 44. 11. For further discussion, see Jack L. Snyder, The Soviet Strategic Culture: Implications for Limited Nuclear Operations (The Rand Corporation R-2154-AF, September 1977). 12. Kulish, Military Force and International Relations, p. 103.
Article
Venue — the institutional setting in which actors interact — is a critical but neglected factor in international norm creation. This article brings together constructivist and rationalist insights to explain both why and how venue affects norm creation and how norm leaders choose among different venues. First, it highlights the importance of negotiation alongside persuasion in norm emergence — the first stage of Finnemore and Sikkink’s (1998) norm life cycle — thus opening space for a full consideration of venues within the constructivist paradigm. Second, it details how venue membership, mandate, output status, rules of procedure/operating procedures and legitimacy affect both the content and the level of international support of an emerging norm. Third, it offers a conceptual framework for understanding how norm leaders choose venues. Finally, it illustrates the impact of venue on norm creation and the dynamics of strategic venue choice by examining venue changes during the movement to ban anti-personnel landmines and the effort to promote international consensus on humanitarian intervention.
Article
The development of negotiation theory over recent decades has been organized around two major paradigms: bargaining and problem solving. For the bargaining paradigm, indicators of flexibility include concession rates, initiation of new proposals, and other soft behaviors. For the problem-solving perspective, flexibility is usually indicated by a search for better, mutually beneficial solutions to problems that satisfy the needs, identities, and interests of all parties. Empirical research generally reveals that bargaining behaviors are used more frequently in international negotiations than is problem solving. This may be explained by the dominance of the realist paradigm of international relations, within which most diplomats are socialized. Since diplomats generally construct their image of negotiations in terms of bargaining, it is hardly surprising that these behaviors should be prevalent in actual negotiations. In addition, empirical research methods utilized to study negotiations tend to emphasize bargaining variables, and more subtle problem-solving behaviors are more difficult to detect. The empirical prevalence of bargaining, however, does not imply that it is the best method to induce flexibility in international negotiations. On the contrary, most research tends to reveal that problem solving produces greater flexibility and more frequent, efficient, equitable, and durable agreements than bargaining does.
Article
Bonham, G. M., Jönsson, C., Persson, S., Shapiro, M. J. Cognition and International Negotiation: The Historical Recovery of Discursive Space. Cooperation and Conflict XXII, 1987, 1-19. The research reported in this article represents a continuation of work begun earlier on developing a cognitive mapping approach to collective decision-making. It is based on two shifts in the structure of previous theoretical thinking. First, the emphasis is on discursive rather than psychological imagery. Second, the idea chain or "path" is privileged over the person or the "actor". The cognitive map is thus conceived less as a psychological template than as a discursive space. Rather than conceiving of persons having positions which they bring to decisions and then hold to them or alter them in confrontation with other positions, we conceive of positions as having persons. As a process of negotiations unfolds, its degree of success, within our conception, is to be related to the degree to which the parties can construct a shared discursive space, which amounts to their building of a shared "reality". The new model is situated with respect to extant game-theoretical, "manipulative", and "cybernetic" conceptions of bargaining. By way of illustration, applications of cognitive mapping to the negotiations on the dissolution of the Swedish-Norwegian union in 1905 and the 1919 Paris Peace Conference are analyzed.
Article
The 2005 Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) failed to produce any agreed action plan for addressing nuclear disarmament or proliferation. Detailed discussions and negotiations on such a plan were much curtailed because of procedural wrangles. This article describes the evolution of the conference and argues that changes in the international political environment and problems inherent in the revised NPT review process agreed at its 1995 Extension Conference contributed to the meager outcome. The main issues raised by delegations in their plenary statements, working papers, and the limited time available for interactive discussion are summarized, and three perspectives are offered on the reasons for the lack of any substantive product. Finally, the implications of that failure for the NPT, its review process, the wider regime for international nuclear governance, and nuclear disarmament, nuclear nonproliferation, and the peaceful use of nuclear energy are examined.
Article
The concept of ‘governance’ has become a central catchword across the social and political sciences. In Governing and Governance, Jan Kooiman revisits and develops his seminal work in the field to map and demonstrate the utility of a sociopolitical perspective to our understanding of contemporary forms of governing, governance and governability. A central underlying theme of the book is the notion of governance as a process of interaction between different societal and political actors and the growing interdependencies between the two as modern societies become ever more complex, dynamic and diverse. Drawing upon a wide range of interdisciplinary insights, the book advances a comprehensive conceptual framework that seeks to capture the different elements, modes and orders of governing and governance. A series of useful distinctions are employed, for example, between self, ‘co’, and hierarchical modes, and between first, second, or meta orders to illustrate the many different structures and levels of modern governance today. Theoretically rich and illuminating, Governing and Governance will be essential reading for all students and academics across the social and political sciences, public management and public administration.