Theories and International Relations

Introduction International relations theory refers to the study of the theoretical perspective of international relations. It provides a framework which is conceptual upon which analysis of international relations is done. International relations theories can also act like pairs of colored sunglasses which only allows the person wearing it to see what’s relevant to the theory. There are three most prominent theories available - constructivism, liberalism and realism. International relations theories are divided into rationalist and reflectivist theories.

Rationalist theories are those that focus on analysis that is principally of state level. Reflectivist theories incorporate the meanings of security in an expanded manner from post-colonial security, gender to class. International relations theories have a big role in helping policy-makers produce solutions that are effective instead of being regarded as being too abstract. In policy organizations that are foreign, people are not selected by their theories’ quality but by their quality of knowledge and intelligence of a particular area.

Theories are usually created to give an understanding of reality of life. A good theory must be consistent, complete, proved by factual evidence, must have the ability of explaining what was confusing in the past, stated clearly and have useful recommendations. Policy and theories are linked. Theories can lead to policies which could help in future innovations in the field of theories. Theories influence policy in terms of diagnosis. This is seen when policy makers have to deal with large amount of information when looking into an issue.

With theories, the policy makers will be able to decide on what is relevant and plan efficiently on how the issue can be reacted upon. Theory is also linked to policy through prediction. Policy makers are able to develop a determined view of the world through theories from which they can properly respond to events (Checkel, 1998). However, sometimes theories can make predictions that are false. Prescription is another way theory is linked to policy. When a new policy is imposed by decision makers, they usually expect an outcome.

Theories assist them in making choices on what course of action they need to undertake for achievement of results, on setting objectives and goals. Evaluation is another way theories can be linked to policies. This can be done when the undertaken policies are evaluated in every stage with the available theories in mind. Academics and policy makers have assumptions that differ especially about world-based policymaking. For instance, academics might be distanced from policy making in order to develop knowledge on conclusions across the government.

On the other side, civil servants might develop expertise that is in-depth during policy development process (Cox, 1981). Both may learn from one another on how to understand and influence policy making in everything. However, there may be a barrier like having different languages hence understanding or having a conversation that is meaningful might need translation. There are many ways in which past and current policy theories have been used to impact policy making process. Policy theories’ ideas can be used as a guide to the general behavior.

Policy theories can be used to influence a country’s policy process and influence people’s ways of thinking. Evidence-based policies happen to be a theme that is dominating in public services. However, practical challenges and realities involved in the evidence-based policy making is that they are formidable. Complexity usually forms part of the problem. For instance, in health services, complex social interventions are dealt with because they act on the social systems such as inspection, funding reforms, performance measures and regulations (Cox, 1981).

Old method used mainly had focus on reporting and measuring on the ejectiveness of a program. The evidence can be conflicting or mixed which might provide little clue as to why interventions might work when applied in different circumstances used for different purposes. The complex social interventions is based on the realist approach to evaluation that is on emergence. An explanatory analysis is provided which is aimed at discernment of what circumstances, for whom, how and in what respect is it working.

The initial step is usually to ensure the program theories are made explicit and what effects are expected to come out. Modifying, supporting, theoretical framework and contradicting of program theories can be populated by looking for empirical evidence. Focusing on explaining the link between the context of application of intervention, working mechanisms and the produced outcomes is important. The main purpose is to ensure decision makers are able to reach an intervention understanding and how it can end up working in an effective way.

Realist review does not only give answers to simple questions or inform policy makers if something is working or not. However, it provides the policy community with practical, detailed and rich understanding of social interventions that are complex. This is because it is of use during implementation and planning process of programs at a national, regional and local level. Constructivists argue that structure and agency are constituted mutually that implies that agency influences structures and structures influence agency.

Agency is the acting of someone while structure is an international system consisting of elements and materials. Identities and interests are other issues associated with constructivism. Constructivists argue that countries with multiple identities that is constructed through interaction with socially other actors. Identities form an understanding of an actor’s representations with signals of interests. Identities have been found to constitute actions and interests. For instance, a small country implies interests different from those from a large country (Hatto, 1979).

This is because mall countries focus more on survival while large ones focus on dominating the world in terms of military, economic and political affairs. Social norms is also associated with constructivism. Social norms can be referred to as standards for an appropriate behavior within a provided identity. Countries with identities are expected to comply with the social norms associated with the identity. The idea arises with expectations of some acceptable behaviors than others.

People behave in a particular manner because they believe it is appropriate for them to do so. Conventional constructivists asks the question “what.” They even have a belief that the world can be explained in casual concepts and discovering the links between identities, social norms and interests. On the other hand, critical constructivists ask the question “what.” They are not interested on the identity’s effect, rather, on its component parts. Language a huge factor for critical constructivists since it has the ability to change.

Cognitive theories are those that examine the role of psychological processes such as misperception and belief on policies within an individual, state or an organization level. This depends if the research is focusing on the organization’s shared perceptions, a nation’s shared belief or the psychological dynamics of the decision maker (Cox, 1981). For example, the shared perception between the political leaders of USSR and US enabled each one of them to explain the cold war as the outcome of the negative perceptions.

This was mainly because neither of the two states had the perceptions of the other state reshaped. The concept of the government separating the enforced powers through balances and checks was incorporated into the constitution of the US (Hopf, 1998). This was mainly to ensure that no person or new government branch could become too powerful. This system’s intentions was to ensure that no federal government’s department or branch is guarded from conducting fraud.

This system is intended to separate powers and balance the authorities of the separate government’s branches. Power separation divides power into legislative, executive and judicial branches of the American government. The legislative branch functions to enact the laws of the nation, the executive branch enforces and implements the enacted laws and the judicial branch interprets laws in reference to the American constitution. The separation of powers’ concept states that the constitution of the 40 states should allow division into legislative, executive.