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
