This paper aims to provoke a discussion about the ineffectiveness and redundancies associated with current institutional arrangements for conducting foreign affairs. Our argument is made in three steps. First, we examine current institutional frameworks for foreign policy. Second, we explain how changing global conditions undermine the basic assumptions that support those institutional frameworks. Finally, we offer a radical alternative for restructuring the institutions responsible for foreign affairs. This alternative replaces the Ministry of Foreign Affairs with a smaller (coordinating) Bureau of Foreign Affairs, allowing professional competence to be developed within existing sectoral ministries of government. Though our argument is a general one, we illustrate the argument with reference to the Norwegian case.
Bergsten, C. Fred
, Keohane, R. and Nye, J. (1975) `International Economics and International Politics: A Framework for Analysis', International Organization29(1): 3-36.
2.
Braudel, Fernand
(1984) Perspectives of the World. New York: Harper & Row.
3.
Buzan, Barry, Wæver, Ole
and de Wilde, Jaap (1998) Security: A New Framework for Analysis. Boulder, CO and London: Lynne Rienner.
4.
Chisholm, Donald W.
(1989) Coordination without Hierarchy: Informal Structures in Multiorganizational Systems. Berkeley: University of California Press.
5.
Coles, John
(2000) Making Foreign Policy. London: John Murray.
6.
Cooper, Richard
(1968) The Economics of Interdependence. New York: McGraw-Hill.
7.
Dunn, David H.
, ed. (1999) Diplomacy at the Highest Level: The Evolution of International Summitry. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
8.
East, Maurice A.
(1981) `The Organizational Impact of Interdependence on Foreign Policy-Making. The Case of Norway', in Charles W. Kegley and Patrick McGowan (eds) The Political Economy of Foreign Policy Behavior. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
9.
East, Maurice A.
(1984) `Coordinating Foreign Policy. The Changing Role of the Norwegian Foreign Ministry', Cooperation and Conflict19(2): 121-134.
10.
Egeberg, Morten
and Trondal, Jarle (1997) `Innenriksforvaltningens og den offentlige politikkens internasjonalisering', in Tom Christensen and Morten Egeberg (eds) Forvaltningskunnskap, pp. 335-366. Oslo: TANO.
Fukuyama, Francis
(1992) The End of History and the Last Man. New York: Free Press.
13.
Gilpin, Robert
and Gilpin, Jean M. (2000) The Challenge of Global Capitalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
14.
Hain, Peter
(2001) The End of Foreign Policy?London: Royal Institute of International Affairs.
15.
Hanf, Kenneth
and Soetendorp, Ben, eds (1998) Adapting to European Integration: Small States and the European Union. London: Longman.
16.
Hocking, Brian
, ed. (1999a) Foreign Ministries. Change and Adaptation. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
17.
Hocking, Brian
(1999b) `Foreign Ministries: Redefining the Gatekeeper Role', in Brian Hocking (ed.) Foreign Ministries. Change and Adaptation, pp. 1-15. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
18.
Hovi, Jon
and Underdal, Arild (2000) Internasjonalt samarbeid og internasjonal organisasjon. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
19.
Huntington, Samuel
(1997a) `The Erosion of America's National Interests', Foreign Affairs76(5): 28-50.
20.
Huntington, Samuel
(1997b) The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. London: Simon and Schuster.
21.
Kegley, C. W., Jr
and McGowan, Patrick, eds (1981) The Political Economy of Foreign Policy Behavior. London: Sage.
22.
Keohane, Robert O.
and Nye, Joseph S., eds (1972) Transnational Relations and World Politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
23.
Keohane, Robert O.
and Nye, Joseph S. (1974) `The Complex Politics of Canadian-American Interdependence', International Organization28(2): 595-607.
24.
Keohane, Robert O.
and Nye, Joseph S. (1985) `Two Cheers for Multilateralism', Foreign Policy60 (Fall): 148-167.
25.
Keohane, Robert O.
and Nye, Joseph S. (1987) `Power and Interdependence Revisited', International Organization41(4): 725-753.
26.
Keohane, Robert O.
and Nye, Joseph S. ([1977] 2001) Power and Interdependence, 3rd edn.New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
27.
Landau, Martin
(1969) `Redundancy, Rationality, and the Problem of Duplication and Overlap', Public Administration Review29: 346-358.
28.
Muir, Ramsey
(1933) The Independent World and Its Problems. London: Constable & Co.
29.
Neumann, Iver B.
(1998) `Departemental identitet', Internasjonal Politikk56(1): 75-103.
30.
Neumann, Iver B.
(1999) `Norway, the Foreign Ministry: Bracketing Interdependence', in Brian Hocking (ed.) Foreign Ministries. Change and Adaptation, pp. 152-169. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
31.
Norman, Erik-Wilhelm
and Bech, Jon (2000) `Utenriksdepartementets historie' (Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs: http://odin.dep.no/ud/norsk/dep/om_dep/historikk/index-b-n-a.html (accessed 3 March 2000).
32.
Nye, Joseph S.
(1974) `Transnational Relations and Interstate Conflicts: An Empirical Analysis', International Organization28(4): 961-996.
33.
Perrow, Charles
(1999) Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
34.
Singer, Max
and Wildavsky, Aaron (1993) The Real World Order: Zones of Peace, Zones of Turmoil. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
35.
Stopford, John
and Strange, Susan (1991) Rival States, Rival Firms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36.
Tranøy, Bent Sofus
and Østerud, Øyvind, eds (2001) Mot et globalisert Norge? Rettslige bindinger, økonomiske føringer og politisk handlingsrom. Oslo: Gyldendal akademisk.
37.
UD (Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)(1999) Modernisering av utenrikstjenesten. Rapport fra arbeidsgruppen om samordning av norsk utenrikspolitikk, 14 October. Oslo: Utenriksdepartementet.
38.
Underdal, Arild
(1987) `What's Left for the MFA? Foreign Policy and the Management of External Relations in Norway', Working Paper No. 12, Norwegian School of Management.
39.
Wallerstein, Immanuel
(1974) The Modern World System. New York: Academic Press.
