Theorizing under the rubric of paradigmatic ‘isms’ has made important conceptual contributions to International Relations, but the organization of the subfield around these isms is based on flawed readings of the philosophy of science and has run its course. A promising alternative is to build on the philosophical foundation of scientific realism and orient International Relations theorizing around the idea of explanation via reference to hypothesized causal mechanisms. Yet in order to transform the practice of International Relations theorizing and research, calls for ‘analytic eclecticism’ must not only demonstrate that scientific realism is a defensible epistemology amenable to diverse methods; they must provide a structured and memorable framework for diverse and cumulative theorizing and research, field-wide discourse, and compelling pedagogy. I Introduce a ‘taxonomy of theories about causal mechanisms’ as a structured pluralist framework for encompassing the theories about mechanisms of power, institutions, and legitimacy that have been providing the explanatory content of the isms all along. This framework encourages middle-range or typological theorizing about combinations of causal mechanisms and their operation in recurrent contexts, and it offers a means of reinvigorating the dialogue between International Relations, the other subfields of political science, and the rest of the social sciences.
AchenC (2002) Toward a new political methodology: Microfoundations and ART. Annual Review of Political Science5: 423–450.
2.
AllisonGZelikowP (1999) Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis, 2nd edn.New York: Pearson.
3.
BantaB (2012) Analysing discourse as a causal mechanism. European Journal of International Relations. First published online 23April2012. doi:10.1177/1354066111428970.
4.
BarnettMDuvallR (2005) Power in international politics. International Organization59(1): 39–75.
5.
BatesRGreifALeviM. (1998) Analytic Narratives. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
6.
BennettA (2003) A Lakatosian reading of Lakatos: What can we salvage from the hard core? In: ElmanCElmanM (eds) Progress in International Relations Theory: Appraising the Field. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 455–494.
7.
BennettA (2011) Qualitative research: Progress despite imperfection. Qualitative and Mutli-Method Research, Newsletter of the American Political Science Association Organized Section for Qualitative and Multi-Method Research9(1): 24–30.
8.
BennettA (2012) Causal mechanisms and typological theories in the study of civil conflict. In: CheckelJT (ed.) Transnational Dynamics of Civil War. New York: Cambridge University Press, 205–230.
9.
BennettALepgoldJUngerD (1994) Burden-sharing in the Persian Gulf War. International Organization48(1): 39–75.
10.
BhaskarR (1975) A Realist Theory of Science. Leeds: Leeds Books.
11.
BradyH (2008) Causation and explanation in social science. In: Box-SteffensmeierJBradyHCollierD (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 217–270.
12.
BradyHCollierD (eds) (2010) Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, 2nd edn.Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
13.
BrewerWF (2001) The theory-ladenness of observation and the theory-ladenness of the rest of the scientific process. Philosophy of Science68(3): 176–186.
14.
BungeM (2004) How does it work? The search for explanatory mechanisms. Philosophy of Science34: 182–210.
15.
CheckelJ (2006) Tracing causal mechanisms. International Studies Review8(2): 362–370.
16.
CheckelJ (2012) Transnational Dynamics of Civil War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17.
ChernoffF (2002) Scientific realism as a meta-theory of international politics. International Studies Quarterly46(2): 189–207.
18.
ChernoffF (2007) Critical realism, scientific realism, and International Relations theory. Millennium: Journal of International Studies35(2): 399–407.
19.
ColganJ (2013) Petro-Aggression: When Oil Causes War. New York: Cambridge University Press.
20.
CollierD (2011) Understanding process tracing. PS: Political Science and Politics44(4): 823–830.
21.
CollierDLaPorteJSeawrightJ (2012) Putting typologies to work: Concept formation, measurement, and analytic rigor. Political Research Quarterly65(1): 217–232.
22.
CollierPHoefflerA (2004) Greed and grievance in civil war. Oxford Economic Papers56(4): 563–595.
23.
DunningT (2012) Natural Experiments in the Social Sciences. New York: Cambridge University Press.
24.
EarmanJ (1992) Bayes or Bust? A Critical Examination of Bayesian Confirmation Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
25.
ElmanC (2005) Explanatory typologies in qualitative studies of international politics. International Organization59: 293–326.
26.
ElmanCElmanM (2003) Introduction, and lessons from Lakatos. In: ElmanCElmanM (eds) Progress in International Relations Theory: Appraising the Field. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1–70.
27.
Esping-AndersenG (1990) The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
28.
FearonJ (1995) Rationalist explanations for war. International Organization49(3): 379–414.
29.
FearonJLaitinD (2003) Ethnicity, insurgency, and civil war. American Political Science Review97(1): 75–90.
30.
FinnemoreMSikkinkK (1998) International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization52(4): 887–917.
31.
FoucaultM (1978) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Pantheon Press.
32.
FriedmanM (1953) The Methodology of Positive Economics. Reprinted in MakiU (ed.) (2009) The Methodology of Positive Economics: Reflections on the Milton Friedman Legacy. London: Cambridge University Press, 3–44.
33.
GeorgeALBennettA (2005) Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
34.
GiddensA (1984) The Constitution of Society: Outline of a Theory of Structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.
35.
GoertzGMahoneyJ (2004) The possibility principle: Choosing negative cases in comparative research. American Political Science Review98(4): 653–659.
36.
GoertzGMahoneyJ (2006) A tale of two cultures: Contrasting quantitative and qualitative research. Political Analysis14(3): 227–249.
37.
GuzziniS (2012) Social mechanisms as microdynamics in constructivist analysis. In: GuzziniS (ed.) The Return of Geopolitics in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 251–277.
38.
HallP (2003) Aligning ontology and methodology in comparative politics. In: MahoneyJReuschemeyerD (eds) Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 373–406.
39.
HallPSoskiceD (eds) (2001) Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
40.
HansenL (2006) Security as Practice: Discourse Analysis and the Bosnian War. London: Routledge.
41.
HarreRMaddenE (1975) Causal Powers: Theory of Natural Necessity. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
42.
HedstromPYlikoskiP (2010) Causal mechanisms in the social sciences. Annual Review of Sociology36: 49–67.
43.
HempelC (1965) Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science. New York: Free Press, 245–290.
44.
HempelCOppenheimP (1948) Studies in the logic of explanation. Philosophy of Science15: 135–175.
45.
HopfT (1998) The promise of constructivism in International Relations theory. International Security23(1): 171–200.
46.
HopfT (2007) The limits of interpreting evidence. In: LichbachMLebowN (eds) Theory and Evidence in Comparative Politics and International Relations. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 55–86.
47.
JacksonPT (2011) The Conduct of Inquiry in International Relations. New York: Routledge.
48.
JacksonPTNexonD (2009) Paradigmatic faults in International Relations theory. International Studies Quarterly53(4): 907–930.
49.
JordanRMalinkakDOakesA. (2009) One discipline or many? TRIP survey of International Relations faculty in ten countries. Teaching, Research, and International Policy (TRIP) Project, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA.
50.
KalyvasS (2003) The ontology of ‘political violence’: Action and identity in civil wars. Perspectives on Politics1(3): 475–494.
51.
KalyvasS (2006) The Logic of Violence in Civil War. New York: Cambridge University Press.
52.
KeckMSikkinkK (1998) Activists beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
53.
KeohaneR (1984) After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
54.
KeohaneR (1988) International institutions: Two approaches. International Studies Quarterly32(4): 379–396.
55.
KingC (2004) The micropolitics of social violence. World Politics56: 431–455.
56.
KingGKeohaneRVerbaS (1994) Designing Social Inquiry. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
57.
KlotzALynchC (2007) Strategies for Research in Constructivist International Relations. New York: M.E. Sharpe.
58.
KoremenosBLipsonCSnidalD (2001) The rational design of international institutions. International Organization55(4): 761–799.
59.
KowertPLegroJ (1996) Norms, identity, and their limits: A theoretical reprise. In: KatzensteinP (ed.) The Culture of National Security. New York: Columbia University Press, 451–497.
60.
KrebsRRJacksonPT (2007) Twisting tongues and twisting arms: The power of political rhetoric. European Journal of International Relations13(1): 35–66.
61.
KuhnT (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
62.
KurkiM (2007) Critical realism and causal analysis in International Relations: Causes all the way down. Millennium: Journal of International Studies35(2): 361–378.
63.
KyddAWalterB (2002) Sabotaging the peace: The politics of extremist violence. International Organization56(2): 263–296.
64.
LakatosI (1970) Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. In: LakatosIMusgraveA (eds) Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. New York: Cambridge University Press, 91–196.
65.
LakeDA (2011) Why ‘isms’ are evil: Theory, epistemology, and academic sects as impediments to understanding and progress. International Studies Quarterly55(2): 465–480.
66.
LapidY (1989) The third debate: On the prospects of international theory in a post-positivist era. International Studies Quarterly33(3): 235–254.
67.
LaudanL (1977) Progress and its Problems: Toward a Theory of Scientific Growth. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
68.
LichbachM (1998) The Rebels’ Dilemma: Economics, Cognition, and Society. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
69.
MahoneyJ (2000) Path dependence in historical sociology. Theory and Society29(4): 507–538.
70.
MahoneyJ (2001) Beyond correlational analysis: Recent innovations in theory and method. Sociological Forum16(3): 575–593.
71.
MaliniakDOakesAPetersonS. (2011) International Relations in the US academy. International Studies Quarterly55(2): 437–464.
72.
MarchJOlsenJ (1984) The new institutionalism: Organizational factors in political life. American Political Science Review78(3): 734–749.
73.
MayntzR (2004) Mechanisms in the analysis of macro-social phenomena. Philosophy of the Social Sciences34(2): 237–259.
74.
MillikenJ (1999) The study of discourse in International Relations: A critique of research and methods. European Journal of International Relations5(2): 225–254.
75.
MilnerH (1997) Interests, Institutions, and Information: Domestic Politics and International Relations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
76.
OstromE (1990) Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
77.
PatomakiHWightC (2000) After postpositivism? The promises of critical realism. International Studies Quarterly44(2): 213–237.
78.
PosenB (1993) The security dilemma and ethnic conflict. Survival35(1): 27–47.
79.
PriceRReus-SmitC (1998) Dangerous liaisons? Critical international theory and constructivism. European Journal of International Relations4(3): 259–294.
80.
RossM (1999) The political economy of the resource curse. World Politics51(2): 297–322.
81.
RossM (2001) Does oil hinder democracy?World Politics53(3): 325–361.
82.
SalehyanI (2009) Rebels without Borders: Transnational Insurgencies in World Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
83.
SalmonW (1990) Four Decades of Scientific Explanation. Minnesota, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
84.
SalmonW (1998) Causality and Explanation. New York: Oxford University Press.
85.
SchultzKA (2001) Democracy and Coercive Diplomacy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
86.
SilRKatzensteinP (2010) Beyond Paradigms: Analytical Eclecticism in the Study of World Politics. London and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
87.
StedmanSJ (1997) Spoiler problems in peace processes. International Security22(2): 5–53.
88.
TannenwaldN (1999) The nuclear taboo: The United States and the normative basis of nuclear non-use. International Organization53(3): 433–468.
89.
TicknerA (1992) Gender in International Relations: Feminist Perspectives on Achieving Global Security. New York: Columbia University Press.
90.
WallersteinI (1974) The Modern World System, Vol. 1: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European and World Economy in the Sixteenth Century. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
91.
WaltzK (1959) Man, the State, and War: A Theoretical Analysis. New York: Columbia University Press.
92.
WaltzK (1979) Theory of International Politics. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
93.
WendtA (1992) Anarchy is what states make of it: The social construction of power politics. International Organization46(2): 391–425.
94.
WendtA (1995) Constructing international politics. International Security20(1): 71–81.
95.
WightC (2006) Agents, Structures, and International Relations: Politics as Ontology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
96.
WightC (2007) A manifesto for scientific realism in IR: Assuming the can-opener won’t work!Millennium: Journal of International Studies35(2): 379–398.
97.
WoodE (2003) Insurgent Collective Action and Civil War in El Salvador. New York: Cambridge University Press.
98.
YanowDSchwartz-SheaP (eds) (2006) Interpretation and Method: Research Methods and the Interpetive Turn. New York: M.E. Sharpe.
99.
ZiblattD (2006) Structuring the State: The Formation of Italy and Germany and the Puzzle of Federalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
