Regime theory – International Regimes

p. 1Regime Theory | Becky Cooper , Abdul Adeel and Saskia Kawczynski | Political Science/Chair of International Relations
Regime Theory
Becky cooper, Abdul Basit Adeel, Saskia Kawczynski

Regime Theory:
• Regimes are “implicit or explicit principles, norms, rules
and decision-making procedures around which actors’
expectations converge in a given area of international
relations.” (Krasner, 1982)
• In simple words: International Treaties, institıtions,
agreements etc.

Neo-liberal:
• Regimes facilitate cooperation
• States are Anarchic but they can share interests
• Regime = Rational Relationship COOPERATION
• Mutually beneficial agreements

Realist:
• Regimes reflect the distribution of power
• Powerful Hegemon = Successful Regime
• Regimes are put in place to secure States interests
(economic/security)
• Regimes such as IMF, General Agreement On Tariffs &
Trade were implemented to Boost American
hegemony?

Constructivist:
• Regimes can alter identities and intersts
• Our decisions will not be the same Tomorrow
• States have their own identities
• Perception is key

The Emergence:
• To aid cooperation
• To tackle specific International problems
• To boost economic growth
• IMF
• 1944- Reconstruction of the Worlds payment system
• Countries donated to a global Pool so other countries
could loan
• No authority over Domestic policies of members
• Same set of policies for any situation

Characteristics of international Regimes
• International Regimes are created to tackle specific
international problems.
• They are composed of principles and norms.
• They also consist of rules and procedures, which have
to be in accordance with the principles and norms.
• Rules and procedures convert the norms and principles
into specific instructions.
• Short: inter. Regimes are “stets of rules meant to
govern international behavior” (Simmons+ Martin 2002).

Distinction of International Regimes
• International organizations and international Regimes
are both international Institutions.
• International organizations can function as actors in
international politics and overstep boundaries of issue
areas.
• International regimes always relate to a specific issue.
• They don’t have an administration or an office.

Further Development of Regime Theory
In the 1980s new Regimes Theories came up, which
have to be differentiated from Keohane´s Regime
Theory. The most important and influential ones are :
1. Hegemonic stability theory
2. Neoliberalism : game theory – concept
3. Two-level approach
4. Problem-oriented approach
5. The concept of epistemic communities

1. Hegemonic stability theory (HTS)
• The formation and continued existence of international
regimes depend on the international distribution of
power.
• Charles P. Kindelberger argues that international
regimes can only exist under a hegemony of a state.
• This state has to be willing and capable of forming
international regimes and obtain the required power to
enforce the regime regulations and control its
compliance.
• Thus if the hegomony is terminated, so are the
emerged regimes .

2. Neoliberalism: Game Theory -Concept
• It reprobates keohane´s perception that the “prisoners
dilemma” is the only possible problem-concept of
international relations.
• With help of the game theory new problem
constellations are being created that give us different
probabilities of the formation of international regimes.
• We distinguish between coordination games and the
dilemma game.
• Reason for the failure of international regimes lays in
the difference of interests.

3. The two- level approach
• Distinguishes not only different interests of different
states but different interest within one state.
• The probability of international regimes depends not
only if the interests of the joined states are compatible.
• The intended regimes must also be compatible with the
central interest of the society in the joined states.
• International regimes are influenced at two levels.

4. Problem-oriented Approach
• Shifts the emphasis to conflict management.
• Conflicts are not specific injurious actions between two
actors but rather incompatible differences in the
positions of actors.
• States create international regimes to resolve the
conflicts in everybody's interest.

5. The concept of epistemic communities
• Is a network of professionals with recognized
knowledge and skill in a particular issue-area.
• International regimes depend particularly on the
distribution of knowledge in the problematic issue-area.
• If the knowledge of cause and effect –coherence on a
particular issue-area is non-consensual it decreases the
probability of international regimes.
• Especially significant in technical or very complex,
multifaceted issue areas.

RECAP :
• What do we need those theories for ?

Criticism of International Regimes
• 1. Neorealistic criticism : developed by John Grieco in
1988.
• The given regime theories underestimate the
anarchistic structures of international politics.
• Not only a problem of trust but also a problem of
unequal distribution of gains.
• States don’t act rational.
• They are also concerned about the gains of the other
state.

Criticism
• 2. Social constructive criticism: among others
developed by Alexander Wendt 1992.
• Regimes do not solely reflect the interests of states.
• They are able to influence and even change these
interests.
• they are social institutions who enable debates and
communication.
• The process of cooperation tends to redefine and
reconstruct prior identities.

So, why not International Regimes?
• What about anarchy?
• Unequal distribution of gains
• When hegemonic power declines, what happens to
regime?

REGIME THEORY
EXEMPLES OF INTL. REGIMES

Recap:
• Regimes are “implicit or explicit principles, norms, rules
and decision-making procedures around which actors’
expectations converge in a given area of international
relations.” (Krasner, 1982)
• In simple words: International Treaties, Organizations
etc.

Examples

Case Study:
• Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Regime
• Aftermath of WW-II and death of millions due to the use of
nuclear weapons
• Treaty opened 1968 – Operational 1970
• Parties = 189
• Expectations: Pakistan, India, Israel, North Korea and
South Sudan

Case Study:
• Non-proliferation of nuclear arsenal
• Limiting the nuclear power to 5 and discouraging them to
help other desiring states.
• Disarmament of nuclear arsenal
• Leaving no or least possible nuclear weapons available to
use in future
• Right to peaceful use nuclear technology
• Use of civil nuclear technology for the benefit of mankind

Working:
• Setting of Rules
• Rules concerning use of nuclear technology
• Rules concerning transfer of nuclear technology from one
state to other
• Rules concerning cooperation between states in nuclear
technology
• International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
• Makes sure nuclear technology is used only for civil
purposes
• Facilitates and supervises civil nuclear use

Outcome:
• Success
• Predictions of 25–30 nuclear weapon states within 20
years while established
• Limited the total number to 9.
• Reduction in global nuclear arsenal
• Failure
• 4 states gained nuclear power after the establishment of
regime
 Pakistan, India, North Korea, Israel (allegedly)

CONCLUSION
ANY QUESTIONS?

Regime theory – International Regimes

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to Regime theory – International Regimes

More from Abdul Basit Adeel

Recently uploaded

Regime theory – International Regimes