Periodic Reporting for period 1 - MICROFOUNDATIONS (Microfoundations of International Order)
Berichtszeitraum: 2017-08-01 bis 2019-07-31
"How do international orders emerge? How are they imagined, created, and maintained? What will be the future of the current international order? These and similar questions continue to be of interest to scholars, policymakers, and the public alike. The purpose of MICROFOUNDATIONS is to develop a better understanding of the creation of international orders by bringing the role of individuals and agency (microfoundations), which has been overlooked in the academic literature back into the debate about international order through an interdisciplinary theoretical and methodological framework. As a result of this project, the society in general can develop a better understanding of international order, how it is created, and how it might change/evolve in the coming decades.
To achieve this purpose this project had two research objectives:
RO1: to identify the microfoundations of international order in 20th century
RO2: investigate what might emerge in the next decade as the Post-Cold War “unipolar moment” fades away.
There are two main conclusions that emerged from the project. First, the emergence of new international orders are historical contingent events that are shaped by not only structural factors such as material power but also individual leaders at the helm of Great Powers. In order to understand the microfoundations of international order we need to understand a-) their international ideologies (their political and moral beliefs about international politics), b-) how distant or close they are to each other with regards to their international ideology, and c-) the intensity of their beliefs.
This level of ideological polarization (high polarization to low polarization) tells us much about whether the emerging order will have more or less common values, principles, and institutions (thin or thick international society).
Second, there is an increasing polarization in the current international system that suggests an ""thinning"" of post-Cold War liberal international order in the near future and a long term ""re-thickening"" of international society around values, principles, and institutions that particularistic (as opposed to current universalism of liberal order) and authoritarian (as opposed to liberal democratic aspirations of the current order).
"
To achieve this purpose this project had two research objectives:
RO1: to identify the microfoundations of international order in 20th century
RO2: investigate what might emerge in the next decade as the Post-Cold War “unipolar moment” fades away.
There are two main conclusions that emerged from the project. First, the emergence of new international orders are historical contingent events that are shaped by not only structural factors such as material power but also individual leaders at the helm of Great Powers. In order to understand the microfoundations of international order we need to understand a-) their international ideologies (their political and moral beliefs about international politics), b-) how distant or close they are to each other with regards to their international ideology, and c-) the intensity of their beliefs.
This level of ideological polarization (high polarization to low polarization) tells us much about whether the emerging order will have more or less common values, principles, and institutions (thin or thick international society).
Second, there is an increasing polarization in the current international system that suggests an ""thinning"" of post-Cold War liberal international order in the near future and a long term ""re-thickening"" of international society around values, principles, and institutions that particularistic (as opposed to current universalism of liberal order) and authoritarian (as opposed to liberal democratic aspirations of the current order).
"
To achieve the research objectives, I have developed a theoretical framework bringing together Operational Code Analysis and Moral Foundations Theory, conduct an extensive literature survey, collect and analyze data from primary and secondary sources related to the emergence/creation of international orders in the 20th century, refine and revise the theoretical framework, and use the revised framework to explore the future of international order.
Careful analysis of data informed by the theoretical-conceptual framework developed and refined throughout the project led to the following main empirical, theoretical, and methodological results to achieve RO1 and RO2:
- Individuals and agency matter in the creation of international orders because leaders and their political and moral beliefs work as a filter at the critical junctures of history by eliminating other possible alternatives that are plausible at the time.
- The degree of international ideological polarization (the distance between leaders political and moral beliefs and how strongly they held them) matters in terms of shaping how “thick” (more shared principles, values, and institutions) or “thin” (less common ground, few shared values and principles, limited institutionalization) the international society will be. The higher the polarization the thinner the international society and vice versa. The Cold War international order is an example of a thinner international society, while the immediate post-Cold War international order is an example of a thicker international society.
- Theoretically, a relational approach that investigates how the actual leaders relate to and position vis a vis each other in terms of their political and moral beliefs proved fruitful in discerning the microfoundation of international order and the dynamics of power behind it compared to a purely structural or static theoretical-methodological approach.
- The results re-affirms the benefits of a mixed method approach that combines quantitative automated text analysis and a theoretically-informed close reading of primary and secondary sources in identifying how international orders are created/emerged at crucial, critical junctures of history.
- Regarding the future of international order, the results suggests two trends. First, there is a growing ideological-moral polarization between authoritarian-populist leaders (that focus on binding moral foundations) and liberal-democratic leaders (that focus on individualizing moral foundations) at the global level. This would suggest a more fragile-thin international order for the future. Second, emerging powers such as Russia, China, and Brazil have leaders that cluster around similar political and moral beliefs that emphasize the conflictual nature of international system and binding moral foundations such as authority and loyalty. This trend could suggest in the medium to long term, when taken together with their increasing material power, a “thicker” international society around those moral and political beliefs this time, replacing the post-Cold War liberal international order.
The following exploitation and dissemination activities are done and planned:
- I have attended several conferences and workshops including the ISA (2018,2019), APSA (2018), NOPSA (2017), EISA-PEC (2017, 2018) workshops at University of St. Andrews in 2017, at the University of Kent in 2017, at University of Groningen in 2018, and at the LSE in 2018. Furthermore, I have organized a workshop at the University of Copenhagen in May 2019.
- Two articles submitted to international peer-reviewed academic journals.
- A book proposal on the microfoundations of the future international order to be submitted to a University Press.
Furthermore, other outputs are being prepared or planned exploiting the theoretical and empirical results of the project including academic articles, a special issue for an academic journal, and a policy brief for a prominent public policy
Careful analysis of data informed by the theoretical-conceptual framework developed and refined throughout the project led to the following main empirical, theoretical, and methodological results to achieve RO1 and RO2:
- Individuals and agency matter in the creation of international orders because leaders and their political and moral beliefs work as a filter at the critical junctures of history by eliminating other possible alternatives that are plausible at the time.
- The degree of international ideological polarization (the distance between leaders political and moral beliefs and how strongly they held them) matters in terms of shaping how “thick” (more shared principles, values, and institutions) or “thin” (less common ground, few shared values and principles, limited institutionalization) the international society will be. The higher the polarization the thinner the international society and vice versa. The Cold War international order is an example of a thinner international society, while the immediate post-Cold War international order is an example of a thicker international society.
- Theoretically, a relational approach that investigates how the actual leaders relate to and position vis a vis each other in terms of their political and moral beliefs proved fruitful in discerning the microfoundation of international order and the dynamics of power behind it compared to a purely structural or static theoretical-methodological approach.
- The results re-affirms the benefits of a mixed method approach that combines quantitative automated text analysis and a theoretically-informed close reading of primary and secondary sources in identifying how international orders are created/emerged at crucial, critical junctures of history.
- Regarding the future of international order, the results suggests two trends. First, there is a growing ideological-moral polarization between authoritarian-populist leaders (that focus on binding moral foundations) and liberal-democratic leaders (that focus on individualizing moral foundations) at the global level. This would suggest a more fragile-thin international order for the future. Second, emerging powers such as Russia, China, and Brazil have leaders that cluster around similar political and moral beliefs that emphasize the conflictual nature of international system and binding moral foundations such as authority and loyalty. This trend could suggest in the medium to long term, when taken together with their increasing material power, a “thicker” international society around those moral and political beliefs this time, replacing the post-Cold War liberal international order.
The following exploitation and dissemination activities are done and planned:
- I have attended several conferences and workshops including the ISA (2018,2019), APSA (2018), NOPSA (2017), EISA-PEC (2017, 2018) workshops at University of St. Andrews in 2017, at the University of Kent in 2017, at University of Groningen in 2018, and at the LSE in 2018. Furthermore, I have organized a workshop at the University of Copenhagen in May 2019.
- Two articles submitted to international peer-reviewed academic journals.
- A book proposal on the microfoundations of the future international order to be submitted to a University Press.
Furthermore, other outputs are being prepared or planned exploiting the theoretical and empirical results of the project including academic articles, a special issue for an academic journal, and a policy brief for a prominent public policy
Results contributed to the state of the art by increasing our understanding of the microfoundations of international order, developing conceptual and methodological tools (such as international ideology) to understand the role of leaders and agency in international politics, and demonstrate the utility of interdisciplinary approaches for theoretical and methodological innovation by synthesizing variety of fields including foreign policy analysis, international relations theory, moral psychology, and political psychology. The work carried out in the project contributes towards European policy objectives and strategies, particularly to a better understanding of the alternative futures for international order and the place Europe could play in these scenarios and a better understanding of “the global environment in which the EU operates” which is “constantly evolving” as described in Societal Challenges work programme of Horizon 2020. As a result of this project, the society in general can develop a better understanding of international order, how it is created, and how it might change/evolve in the coming decades.