In recent years, it has been highlighted in international relations theory that mainstream approaches neglect the role of ideas in relation to the formation of interests and international cooperation. This article critically discusses the renewed emphasis on ideas. ‘Cognitive’ and ‘constructivist’ approaches are outlined as the two main strands in the debate and a neo-Gramscian position within it is sketched. Importantly, a neo-Gramscian position is able to conceptualise the material structure of ideas, thereby overcoming the separation between ideas and material structure from the very beginning.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdlerEmanuel (1997), ‘Seizing the Middle Ground: Constructivism in World Politics’, European Journal of International Relations3(3), pp. 319–363.
2.
AdlerEmanuelHaasPeter M. (1992), ‘Conclusion: Epistemic Communities, World Order, and the Creation of a Reflective Research Program’, International Organization46(1), pp. 367–390.
3.
BielerAndreas (2000), Globalisation and EU Enlargement: Austrian and Swedish Social Forces in the Struggle over Membership, London: Routledge.
4.
BielerAndreasDavidMorton Adam (2001), ‘The Gordian Knot of Agency-Structure in International Relations: A Neo-Gramscian Perspective’, European Journal of International Relations7(1), pp. 3–35.
5.
CoxRobert W. (1981), ‘Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies10(2), pp. 126–155.
6.
CoxRobert W. (1983), ‘Gramsci, Hegemony and International Relations: An Essay on Method’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies12(2), pp. 162–175.
7.
CoxRobert W. (1987), Production, Power and World Order: Social Forces in the Making of History, New York: Columbia University Press.
8.
CoxRobert W. (1996), ‘Towards a Posthegemonic Conceptualization of World Order: Reflections on the Relevancy of Ibn Khaldun’ in CoxRobert W.SinclairT., Approaches to World Order, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 144–173.
9.
GillStephenDavidLaw (1988), The Global Political Economy: Perspectives, Problems and Policies, London: Harvester-Wheatsheaf.
10.
GoldsteinJudithKeohaneRobert O. (1993), ‘Ideas and Foreign Policy: An Analytical Framework’ in JudithGoldsteinKeohaneRobert O. (eds.), Ideas and Foreign Policy: Beliefs, Institutions, and Political Change, Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, pp. 3–30.
11.
GramsciAntonio (1971), Selections from the Prison Notebooks, ed. and trans. by QuintinHoareNowellSmith Geoffrey, London: Lawrence and Wishart.
12.
GramsciAntonio (1995), Further Selections from the Prison Notebooks, ed. and trans. by DerekBoothman, London: Lawrence and Wishart.
13.
HaasErnst B. (1980), ‘Why Collaborate? Issue-linkage and International Regimes’, World Politics32(3), pp. 357–405.
14.
HaasPeter M. (1992), ‘Introduction: Epistemic Communities and International Policy Coordination’, International Organization46(1), pp. 1–35.
15.
HallStuart (1986), ‘The Problem of Ideology – Marxism Without Guarantees’, Journal of Communication Inquiry10(2), pp. 29–44.
16.
JacobsenJohn Kurt (1995), ‘Much Ado About Ideas: The Cognitive Factor in Economic Policy’, World Politics47(1), pp. 283–310.
17.
KeohaneRobert O. (1984), After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
18.
KratochwilFriedrich (1988), ‘Regimes, Interpretation and the “Science” of Politics: A Reappraisal’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies17(2), pp. 263–284.
19.
KratochwilFriedrich (1989), Rules, Norms and Decisions: On the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Affairs, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20.
KratochwilFriedrichGerardRuggie John (1986), ‘International Organization: A State of the Art on an Art of the State’, International Organization40(4), pp. 753–775.
21.
LaffeyMarkJuttaWeldes (1997), ‘Beyond Belief: Ideas and Symbolic Technologies in the Study of International Relations’, European Journal of International Relations3(2), pp. 193–237.
22.
NeufeldMark A. (1995), The Restructuring of International Relations Theory, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
23.
SpindlerManuela (1997), ‘The Role of Ideas in Regime Building: The EU and APEC Compared’, RIES: Occasional Paper, No. 8 (November).
24.
VaccaGiuseppe (1982), ‘Intellectuals and the Marxist Theory of the State’ in ShowstackSassoon Anne (ed.), Approaches to Gramsci, London: Writers and Readers, pp. 37–69.
25.
WaltzKenneth N. (1979), Theory of International Politics, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
26.
WendtAlexander (1992), ‘Anarchy is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics’, International Organization46(2), pp. 391–425.
27.
WendtAlexander (1994), ‘Collective Identity Formation and the International State’, American Political Science Review88(2), pp. 384–396.
28.
WendtAlexander (1999), Social Theory of International Politics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29.
WoodsNgaire (1995), ‘Economic Ideas and International Relations: Beyond Rational Neglect’, International Studies Quarterly39, pp. 161–180.
30.
YeeAlbert S. (1996), ‘The Causal Effects of Ideas on Policies’, International Organization50(1), pp. 69–108.
