The history and evolution

of foreign policy analysis

V A L E R IE M . H U D S O N

Chapter contents
Introduction: three paradigmatic works

13

Classic FPA scholarship (1954-1993)

17

The psychological and societal milieux of foreign policy decision making

FPA self-reflection in the late 1970s and 1980s
Conclusion: contemporary FPA's research agenda

Reader's guide
This chapter traces the evolution of Foreign Policy Analysis (FPA) as a subfield of Inter
national Relations (IR) from its beginnings in the 1950s through its classical period
until 1993; it then sketches the research agenda of contemporary FPA, which is repre
sented by the other chapters in this volume. Three paradigmatic works, by Richard
Snyder and colleagues, James Rosenau, and Harold and Margaret Sprout, laid the
foundation of this subfield. In turn, these works created three main threads of re
search in FPA, focusing on the decision making of small/large groups, comparative
foreign policy, and psychological/sociological explanations of foreign policy. These
three primary areas of research have waxed and waned in importance to the subfield
over the years. Current FPA scholarship explores linkages between these literatures,
seeking both greater cross-level integration of explanation and new methodologies
more appropriate to cross-level analysis.1

Introduction: three paradigmatic works

W h a t a re th e o rig in s o f fo re ig n p o lic y a n a lysis (F P A )? tn on e sense, FPA-style w o rk - th a t is,
sch o larsh ip w h o se th e o re tic a l gro u nd is hum an d ecisio n m akers, a ctin g sin g ly o r w ith in
g ro u p s- h as b een a ro u n d as lo n g as th e re h ave been historians and o th ers w h o h ave sought
to u nd erstan d w h y n atio n a l g o vern m en ts h ave m ade th e ch o ice s th e y did regardin g in te r
state relatio n s. (S e e Bo x 1.1). B u t FPA -style w o rk w ith in th e fie ld o f In tern a tio n al R elatio n s per
se is b est d ated b ack to th e late 1950s and e a rly 1960s.
T h ree p ara d ig m a tic w o rk s arg u a b ly b u ilt th e fo u n d atio n o f FPA.

Decision Making as an Approach to the Study of International Politics by Richard C. Snyder,

H.W. Bruck, and Burton Sapin (1954: see also Snyder et al. 1963; reprinted in 2002).

VALERIE M. HUDSON

foreign policy

The strategy or approach chosen by the national governm ent to achieve its goals in its

relations with external entities. This includes decisions to do nothing.

foreign policy behaviour The observable artefacts of foreign p olicy-specific actions and words used to
influence others in the realm of foreign policy; may include the categorization o f such behaviour, such as
along conflict-cooperation continue, which categorizations could be used to construct data including
event data. FPB may include behaviour that was accidental or unintended by the governm ent, and in
addition decisions to do nothing may not leave any behavioural artefact. Thus there is slippage between
the concept o f foreign policy and the concept of foreign policy behaviour.
foreign policy analysis The subfield of international relations that seeks to explain foreign policy, or,
alternatively, foreign policy behaviour, w ith reference to the theoretical ground o f hum an decision
makers, acting singly and in groups. The subfield has several hallmarks:
a com m itm ent to look below the nation-state level of analysis to actor-specific inform ation;
a com m itm ent to build actor-specific theory as the interface between actor-general theory and the
com plexity of the real world;
a com m itm ent to pursue multicausal explanations spanning m ultiple levels o f analysis;
a com m itm ent to utilize theory and findings from across the spectrum o f social science;
a com m itm ent to viewing the process of foreign policy decision making as im portant as the output thereof.
actor - general theory Theory that explains the behaviour of actors in general, such as gam e theory.
actor - specific theory Theory that explains the behaviour o f specific actors, such as FPA theory. This
type o f theory m ay be generalizable, but under specific scope conditions fo r applicability. Actor-specific
theory is a form o f middle-range theory, in that it is m ore generalizable than insights derived from case
studies but, on the other hand, has m ore severe scope conditions constraining its generalizability than
actor-general theory. However, given its nature, actor-speciflc theory allow s fo r richer explanation and
even prediction o f the foreign policy behaviour o f particular entities than does actor-general theory.

'Pre-th eo ries and T h eo ries o f Fo reign P o lic y ' b y Ja m e s N . R o se n au (a b o o k ch a p te r

w ritten in 1964 and p u blished in Farrell 1966).

Man-Milieu Relationship Hypotheses in the Context of International Politics b y

H aro ld and

M arg aret Sp ro u t (1956: exp and ed and revised in a rtic le fo rm in 1957) a n d th e ir 1965

The Ecological Perspective on Human Affairs with Special Reference to International

Politics). (See Box 1.2.)

b ook

The w o rk o f Rich ard S n yd e r and his co llea g u es in sp ire d re se a rch e rs to lo o k b elo w the
nation-state level o f analysis to th e p layers in v o lve d :
W e adhere to the nation-state as the fun d am ental level o f analysis, y e t w e h ave discarded
the state as a m etaphysical abstraction. B y em phasizing d ecisio n m aking as a cen tral focus
w e have provided a w ay o f organizing th e d eterm in an ts o f a ctio n aro u nd th o se officials who
act for the political society. D ecision m akers are view e d as o p eratin g in dual-aspect setting
so that apparently unrelated internal and external facto rs b eco m e related in th e actions of
the decision makers. H itherto, precise w ays o f re latin g d o m estic facto rs h ave n o t been ad
equately developed. (Sn yd er etal. 1954; 53)

CHAPTER 1 THE HISTORY AND EVOLUTION OF FOREIGN POLICY ANALYSIS

[1 B 1 IJ IIIIVCIIIIIUIIIIIIII wOHrt or foreign policy analysis

Richard Snyder

Jam es R o s e a u

Approach to the Stu d y of

of Fbr \ M iry* hy lames

Harold and M argaret Sprout

fnternatidrtai M U k s by
Richard C . Snyder, H.W.

revised in article form in 1957 and their

Snjck, and Burton Sapin

1965 book The Ecoloc/ical Perspective on

(1954: see also Snyder et al.

Human Affairs with Special Reference to

1963; reprinted in 2002).

Contributed a focus on

Development of actor-specific

Foreign policy can only be explained

the decision-making

theory that would lead to the

with reference to the psycho-milieu (the

process itself as part of the

development of generalizable

psychological, situational, political, and

explanation, rather than just

propositions at the level of

social contexts) of the individuals involved

foreign policy outputs

middle-range theory

in decision making

*jA

Richard Snyder leading a foreign policy seminar.

Source: Princeton University Library. Princeton University Archives, Department of Rare Books and Special Collections,
Princeton University Library.

VALERIE M. HUDSON
In tak in g th is a p p ro a ch , Snyder an d his co lleag u es b eq u ea th e d to FPA its characteristic
em p h asis o n fo re ig n p o lic y

decision m aking (FP D M ) as versu s fo reig n

p o licy

outcomes. D eci

sio n m ak in g w a s b est v ie w e d as o rg a n iz a tio n a l behaviour*, b y w h ic h th e b asic determ inants

w o u ld b e sp h ere s o f c o m p e te n c e o f th e a cto rs In vo lve d , co m m u n ic a tio n an d inform ation
flo w , a n d m o tiv a tio n s o f th e va rio u s p layers. D e sira b le e x p lan a tio n s w o u ld thu s b e both m ul
tica u sa! a n d in te rd isc ip lin a ry .
As ex p lo re d in th e F o re w o rd , Ja m e s R osenau 's p re- th eo riz in g en co u ra g e d sch o lars to sys
te m a tic a lly a n d s c ie n tific a lly tea se o u t cro ss- n a tio n ally a p p lic a b le g en e ra liz a tio n s ab ou t na
tio n - sta te b e h a vio u r. A s R o sen au p u t it,
T o id en tify factors is n o t to trace th e ir influence. To understand processes th at affect external
b e h a vio r is n o t to explain h o w and w h y th ey are op erative under certain circum stances and not
u n d er others. T o recognize th at foreign p o licy is shaped by internal as w e ll as external factors is
n o t to com p reh en d h o w th e tw o interm ix o r to indicate the con d itio ns u nd er w h ich on e pre
d o m in ates o ve r th e o th e r.. . . Foreign p o licy analysis lacks com p reh en sive system s o f testable
g en e ra liza tio n s.. . . Foreign p o licy analysis is devoid o f general theory. (Rosenau 1966:98-9)
G e n e ra l te s ta b le th e o ry w a s n eed ed , an d th e in te n t o f Ro senau 's a rtic le w a s to p o in t in the
d ire c tio n it lay. H o w e ve r, th e g en e ral th e o ry R o senau a d vo ca te s is n o t th e g ra n d th e o ry of
C o ld W a r IR : th e m e ta p h o r R o sen au used in th is w o rk is in s tru c tive in th is re g ard FPA re
s e a rch e rs sh o u ld e m u la te G re g o r M e n d e l, th e fa th e r o f m o d ern g en e tics, w h o w a s a b le to
d is ce rn g e n o ty p e fro m p h e n o ty p e in p lan ts th ro u g h ca re fu l o b se rv a tio n a n d co m p a riso n . A re
th e re g e n o ty p e s o f n atio n -states, k n o w le d g e o f w h ic h w o u ld c o n fe r e x p la n a to ry a n d p red ic
tiv e p o w e r o n o u r m o d e ls o f fo re ig n p o lic y in te ra c tio n ? W h a t R o se n a u w a s e n c o u ra g in g was
th e d e v e lo p m e n t o f m id d le - ra n g e th e o ry - th e o r y th a t m e d ia te d b e tw e e n g ra n d p rin cip les
a n d th e c o m p le x ity o f re a lity . A t th e tim e R o sen au w ro te th is a rtic le , h e fe lt th a t th e b est w ay
to u n c o v e r su ch m id -ran g e g e n e ra liz a tio n s w a s th ro u g h ag g re g ate sta tistic a l e x p lo ra tio n and
c o n firm a tio n . R o se n a u a lso u n d e rsc o re d th e n eed to in te g ra te in fo rm a tio n a t se v e ra l le ve ls o f
a n a ly s is - fro m in d iv id u a l le a d e rs to th e in te rn a tio n a l s y s te m - in u n d e rs ta n d in g fo re ig n p o l
icy. A s w ith S n y d e r, th e b est e x p la n a tio n s w o u ld b e m u ltile v e l a n d m u ltica u sa l, in teg ratin g
in fo rm a tio n fro m a v a rie ty o f so c ia l s c ie n c e k n o w le d g e system s.

Jam es Rosenau, pioneer of foreign policy analysis.

CHAPTER 1 THE HISTORY AND EVOLUTION OF FOREIGN POLICY ANALYSIS

H a ro ld a n d M a rg a re t S p ro u t c o n trib u te d to th e fo rm a tio n o f th e fie ld b y su g g estin g th a t u n
d e rs ta n d in g fo re ig n p o lic y o u tp u ts , w h ic h th e y a sso c ia te d w ith th e a n a ly sis o f p o w e r c a p a b ilitie s
w ith in a n in te rs ta te syste m , w ith o u t re fe re n c e to fo re ig n p o lic y u n d e rta k in g s, w h ic h th e y a s s o c i
a te d w ith stra teg ies, d e c is io n s , a n d in te n tio n s , w a s m isg u id e d : 'E x p la n a tio n s o f a c h ie v e m e n t a n d
e stim a tio n s o f c a p a b ilitie s fo r a c h ie v e m e n t in v a ria b ly a n d n e c e s s a rily p re s u p p o se a n te c e d e n t
u n d e rta k in g s o r a s s u m p tio n s re g a rd in g u n d e rta k in g s. U n le ss th e re is a n u n d e rta k in g , th e re c a n
b e n o a c h ie v e m e n t- a n d n o th in g to e x p la in o r estim ate* (1 9 6 5 : 2 2 5 ). T o e x p la in u n d e rta k in g s,
o n e n e e d s to lo o k a t th e

psycho-milieu

o f th e in d iv id u a ls a n d g ro u p s m a k in g th e fo re ig n p o lic y

d e cisio n . T h e p s y c h o - m ilie u is th e in te rn a tio n a l a n d o p e ra tio n a l e n v iro n m e n t o r c o n te x t a s it is

p e rc e iv e d a n d in te rp re te d b y th e s e d e c is io n m akers. In c o n g ru itie s b e tw e e n th e p e rc e iv e d a n d
th e re a l o p e ra tio n a l e n v iro n m e n ts c a n o ccu r, le a d in g to less th a n sa tis fa c to ry c h o ic e s in fo re ig n
p o licy. T h e so u rc e s o f th e s e in c o n g ru itie s w e re d iv e rs e , re q u irin g o n c e a g a in m u ltic a u s a l e x p la n a
tio n s d ra w in g fro m a v a rie ty o f fie ld s. E v e n in th e se e a rly yea rs, th e S p ro u ts sa w a c le a r d iffe re n c e
b e tw e e n fo re ig n p o lic y a n a ly s is a n d w h a t w e h a v e c a lle d a cto r- g e n e ra l th e o ry :
In ste a d o f d ra w in g c o n c lu sio n s re g ard in g an in d ivid u a l's

probable

m o tiv a tio n s a n d p u r

p oses, h is e n v iro n m e n ta l k n o w le d g e, a n d h is in te lle ctu a l p ro cesses lin k in g p u rp o se s a n d

k n o w le d g e , o n th e b asis o f

assumptions

as to th e w a y p e o p le a re lik e ly o n th e a v e ra g e to

b e h a v e in a g ive n s o c ia l co n tex t, th e c o g n itiv e b e h a v io ra listb e h e n a rra tiv e h is to ria n o r sys

te m a tic s o c ia l sc ie n tistu n d e rta k e s to fin d o u t as p re cise ly as p o ssib le h o w sp e c ific p e rso n s
a c tu a lly d id p e rc e iv e a n d re sp o n d in p a rtic u la r co n tin g en cie s. (S p ro u t a n d S p ro u t 1 9 6 5 :1 1 8 )
T h e m e ssa g e o f th e s e th re e w o rk s w a s p o w e rfu l in its a p p e a l to c e rta in s c h o la rs : th e p a r
tic u la ritie s o f th e h u m a n b e in g s m a k in g n a tio n a l fo re ig n p o lic y w e re v ita lly im p o rta n t to u n
d e rs ta n d in g fo re ig n p o lic y c h o ic e . S u c h p a rtic u la ritie s sh o u ld n o t re m a in a s u n d ig e s te d
id io s y n c ra c ie s (a s in tra d itio n a l sin g le - c o u n try stu d ie s), b u t ra th e r b e in c o rp o ra te d a s in
s ta n c e s o f la rg e r c a te g o rie s o f v a ria tio n in th e p ro ce ss o f c ro ss- n a tio n a l m id d le - ra n g e t h e o r y
b u ild in g . M u ltip le le v e ls o f a n a ly s is , ra n g in g fro m th e m o st m ic ro to th e m o s t m a c ro , s h o u ld
id e a lly b e in te g ra te d in th e s e rv ic e o f su ch th e o ry . T h e sto re s o f k n o w le d g e o f a ll th e s o c ia l
s c ie n c e s m u s t b e d ra w n u p o n in th is e n d e a v o u r. T h e p ro ce ss o f fo re ig n p o lic y m a k in g w a s a t
le a s t a s im p o rta n t, if n o t m o re im p o rta n t, th a n fo re ig n p o lic y as a n o u tp u t. T h e s u b s ta n c e o f
th is m e ssa g e w a s a n d c o n tin u e s to b e th e 'h a rd c o re ' o f F P A . (S e e B o x 1 .3 .)
T h e s e c o n d w a v e o f th e o riz in g b u ilt u p o n th e fo u n d a tio n a l p a ra d ig m a tic w o rk s . B e tw e e n
1974 a n d 1993 F P A d e v e lo p e d a n u m b e r o f p a ra lle l re se a rc h p a th w a y s . (S e e B o x 1 .4 .)
O th e r p a rts o f th e m e ssa g e w e re m o re te m p o ra lly b o u n d e d . A s w e s h a ll se e , c e rta in m e th
o d o lo g ic a l s ta n c e s th a t p e rh a p s se e m e d se lf- e v id e n t in th e e a rly 196 0s w o u ld n o t s ta n d th e
te s t o f tim e . T h e s e w o u ld e n g e n d e r tro u b lin g p a ra d o x es, w h ic h w o u ld p la g u e th e fie ld a n d
le a d to a te m p o ra ry d e c lin e in s o m e a re a s in th e m id to la te 1980 s u n til th e y w e re s a tis fa c to
rily re s o lv e d . D e s p ite th e s e p a ra d o x e s , th e firs t b lo o m o f F P A , la s tin g fro m th e la te 196 0s to
th e a fo re m e n tio n e d d e c lin e , w a s a tim e o f g re a t in te lle c tu a l e ffo rt a n d e x c ite m e n t.

Classic FPA scholarship (1954-1993)

T h e e n e rg y a n d e n th u s ia s m o f th e firs t g e n e ra tio n o f w o rk in F P A (1 9 5 4 - 1 9 7 3 ) w a s tre m e n
d o u s. G re a t strid e s in c o n c e p tu a liz a tio n , a lo n g w ith p a ra lle l e ffo rts in d a ta c o lle c tio n a n d
m e th o d o lo g ic a l e x p e rim e n ta tio n , w e re th e c o n trib u tio n s o f th is tim e p e rio d . T h e s e c o n d

VALERIC M. HUDSON

Harold and Margaret Sprout who emphasized the psychological milieu of individual and group decision making.
Source; C Priceton University Library. Princeton University Archives, Department of Rare Books and Special Collections,
Princeton University Library.

BOxT^TrTrrtaryTevels o f analysis in FPA

C o g n itive p rocesses Cognition, learning, heuristic fallacies, em otion, etc.
L e a d e r p e rs o n a lity an d o rie n ta tio n Operational codes, m otivations, psychobiography, etc.
S m all- g ro u p d yn am ics Groupthink, newgroup, coalitions, etc.
In te rfa c e o f le a d e r p e rs o n a lity w ith sm all-g ro up co m p o sitio n
O rg a n iz a tio n p rocess Increm ental learning, standard operating procedures, im plem entation issues, etc.
B u re a u c ra tic p o litic s Turf, morale, budget, influence, inter-agency group politics, etc.
C u ltu re an d fo re ig n p o lic y Identity and nationalism , heroic histories, role theory, etc.
D o m e s tic p o litic a l co n te s ta tio n Regime type, media, political interest groups, organized party
co n testa tio n an d electo ral politics, etc.
N a tio n a l a ttrib u te s an d fo re ig n p o lic y G eog rap h y, resources, e co n o m ic facto rs, etc.
S yste m e ffe cts o n fo re ig n p o lic y A n arch y, d istrib u tio n o f p o w er, reg io n al b ala n ce s o f p ow er, etc.

generation of w ork from about 1974 to 1993 expressly built upon those foundations. Though
it is alw ays difficult to set the boundaries of a field o f thought, the overview which follows
includes a representative sam pling o f classic w orks in the first and second generation which
both exam ined how the 'specifics' of nations lead to differences in foreign policy choice/behaviour, and put forw ard propositions in this regard th at at least have the potential to be
generalizable and app licable cross-nationally.

CH A PTER 1 THE H ISTORY AND EVO LU TION OP FOREIGN P O LIC Y A N A LYSIS

f$ n ^ ftS 8 !n c a i foici|Wp5n2V analysis-tflffW Biid generation

Small group decision making

to the process ervd stru ctu re o f groups m aking foreign p o licy d ecisions. The groups that w e re
studied ranged in size from ve ry sm all groups to large organ izations and b u reau cracies. Insights from

soc:ial psychology w e re in co rp o rated into FPA. It w as d isco vered that the m o tivatio n to m ain tain group
consensus and personal accp eta n ce b y the group co u ld result in a d eterio ra tio n o f d ecisio n -m aking
quality.

Organizational process and bureaucratic politics

Researchers began to stu d y th e in flu e n ce o f o rg an izatio n process and b u reau cratic p o litics o n fo reig n
p o licy d ecisio n m aking. O rg an izatio n s and b u reau cracies put th e ir o w n su rvival at th e to p o f th e ir list o f
p riorities; o ften th e y w ill seek to in crease th e ir re la tive strength. It w as fo un d th at th e u lte rio r o b je c tiv e s o f
foreign p o licy d ecisio n 'p layers in flu en ced th e ir d ecisio n m aking.

Comparative foreign policy

The su b field o f co m p arative fo reig n p o licy (C F P ) d evelop ed as a response to Ja m e s Rosenau 's c h a lle n g e
to build a cro ss-n atio n al and m u ltile ve l th e o ry o f foreign policy. Foreign p o licy

behaviour, as d isp a ra te

as w arfare, tre a ty m aking, o r d ip lo m a cy these even ts cou ld b e com p ared and aggregated. D a ta w as
co llected on a v a rie ty o f possib le ex p lan ato ry facto rs to d eterm in e pattern s b y w h ich th e se in d e p e n d e n t
variab les w e re co rrela te d . R esearch ers hoped to em erge w ith a grand u n ified th e o ry o f fo reig n p o lic y
b eh avio u r a p p lica b le to all n atio n s and tim e periods. The em p irical results w e re less th an th e p ro ta g o n ists
had hoped.

Psychological influences on foreign policy decision making

In creasin g a tte n tio n w as d ire cte d to th e

mind o f th e fo reig n

p o licy d ecisio n m aker. U n d e r c e rta in stressfu l

con d itio n s, in d ivid u a l ch a ra cte ristics w o u ld b eco m e cru cial in u n d erstan d in g h o w d ecisio n s a re m ad e.
Also, th e p ro b le m o f m isp erce p tio n w as id e n tifie d , w ith p o te n tial d isastrou s co n se q u e n ces in re la tio n to
qu estion s o f w a r and p eace.

Societal milieux
The so cie ta l co n tex t also cam e to th e fo re. R esearch ers ex am in ed h o w fa r n a tio n a l a ttrib u te s , su ch as
culture, history, g eo g rap h y, eco n o m ics, p o litic a l in stitu tio n s, m ilita ry p o w er, id e o lo g y, a n d d e m o g ra p h ics,
d eterm in ed p o lic y m aking. T h e n atu re o f reg im e ty p e also rose in p ro m in e n ce , p a rtic u la rly w ith th e
realizatio n th a t d e m o c ra c ie s te n d e d n o t to fig h t w ith o n e an o th er.

Group decision making

Snyder and colleagues had emphasized the process and structure of groups making foreign
policy decisions (Snyder extended his work with case studies in collaboration with Glenn
Paige; see Snyder and Paige 1958; Paige 1959; Paige 1968). Numerous scholars echoed this
theme in their work, which ranged from the study of foreign policy making in very small
groups to the study of foreign policy making in very large organizations and bureaucracies.

VALERIE M. HUDSON
Sm all g ro u p d yn am ics
Som e o f the m ost theoretically long-lived w ork produced during this period centred on the
consequences o f m aking foreign p olicy decisions in sm all groups. So cial psychologists had
explored the unique dynam ics o f such a decision setting before, but never in relation to for
eign p o licy decision making, w here the stakes m ight be m uch higher. The m ost important
w ork is that o f Irving Janis, w hose sem inal

Victims of Groupthink

alm ost single-handedly

began this research tradition. In that volum e, and using studies d raw n sp ecifically from the
realm o f foreign policy, Jan is shows convincingly that th e m otivation to m aintain group con
sensus and personal acceptance by the group can cause d eterio ratio n o f decision-making
quality. The em pirical research o f Leana (1975), Sem m el (1982), Sem m el and M inix (1979),
Tetlock (1979), and others extended this research using aggregate analysis o f experimental
data as w ell as case studies. G ro u p th in k becom es one o f several possible outcom es in the
w ork o f C.F. H erm ann (1978). H erm ann categorizes groups alon g several dim ensions (size,
role o f leader, rules fo r decision, autonom y o f group participants), and is ab le to m ake general
predictions about the likely outcom e o f deliberations in each typ e o f group.
The work o f the second wave m oved 'beyond groupthink* to both refine and extend our under
standing o f small-group processes. Representative work includes Herek et al. (1987,1989), McCau
ley (1989), Ripley (1989), Stewart et al. (1989), H art (1990), Gaenslen (1992), and H art et al. (1997).
The second w ave also brought w ith it a n ew research issue. H o w does a group com e to un
derstand, represent, and fram e a given foreign po licy situ ation ? W o rks inclu d e those by George
Breslauer, Charles F. H erm ann, Donald Sylvan, Ph ilip Tetlock, and Ja m es Voss (Vertzberger
1990; Breslauer and Tetlock 1991; Voss et al. 1991 f Billings and H erm an n 1994). Turning to ef
forts b y individual scholars, w e w ill highlight the w ork o f Khong (1992) and Bo ynto n (1991).
Bo ynto n w ishes to understand how hum an agents in groups com e to agreem ent on the
nature o f a foreign p o licy situation. In his 1991 p aper (cited ab o ve), he uses th e official record
o f C ongressional C om m ittee hearings to investigate h o w com m ittee m em bers m ake sense of
cu rren t events and policies. By view in g the questions and responses in th e h earing as an un
fo ld ing narrative, Boynton is able to ch art h o w 'm ean ing' crystallizes fo r each committee
m em ber, and h o w th e y attem pt to share th at m eaning w ith o th e r m em bers and w ith those
w h o are testifying. Bo ynto n posits th e co n cep t o f 'in te rp re tive trip le ' as a w a y to understand
h o w con n ection s betw een facts are m ade through p lau sib le in te rp re ta tio n - in effect, ascer
tain in g w h ich interpretation s are p lausible w ith in th e so cial con tex t created b y the hearings.
((hong's 1992 book, Analogies

at War, has a

sim ilar aim b u t w ith a d ifferen t focus: the use

o f analogies to guide p ro b le m fra m in g b y foreign p o licy m akers. In th is particular work,

Khong dem onstrates h o w th e use o f co n flictin g analo g ies to fra m e th e p rob lem of Vietnam
led to concep tual d ifficu lties in group reaso ning a b o u t p o licy o p tio n s. T h e 'Korea' analogy
gained ascendance in fram ing th e V ietn am p ro b lem , w ith o u t su fficie n t atten tio n being paid
to the incongruities b etw een th e tw o sets o f circu m stances.

Organizational process and bureaucratic politics

This first period also saw the em ergen ce o f a strong research ag en d a th a t exam ined the influ
en ce o f organizational process and b u reau cratic p o litics o n fo reig n p o licy decision making
The foun d ations o f this ap proach can b e tra ce d back to W e b e r's

The Theory of Social ad

CHAPTER 1 THE HISTORY AND EVOLUTION OF FOREIGN POLICY ANALYSIS

Eco n om ic O rg a n iz a tio n s (fro m th e 1920s). First- p erio d research sh o w ed h o w 'ra tio n a l' fo reig n
p o lic y m ak in g c a n b e u p e n d e d b y th e a ttem p t to w o rk w ith an d th ro u g h larg e o rgan ized
g o ve rn m e n ta l gro u p s. O rg a n iz a tio n s an d b u rea u cra cie s p u t th e ir o w n su rvival at th e to p o f
th e ir list o f p rio ritie s , a n d th is su rviva l is m easu red b y re la tive in flu e n ce

vis t vis o th e r o rg an i

z atio n s ('tu rf'), b y th e o rg a n iz a tio n s b u d g e t, an d b y th e m o rale o f its p erso nn el. T h e o rg a n i

zatio n w ill je a lo u s ly g u a rd a n d seek to in crea se its tu rf an d strength , as w e ll as to p reserve
u n d ilu te d w h a t it fe e ls to b e its 'essen ce ' o r 'm issio n'. Large o rg an iz atio n s also d e ve lo p sta n d
a rd o p e ra tin g p ro c e d u re s (S O P s ) w h ic h , w h ile a llo w in g th em to re act re flex ively d esp ite
th e ir in h e re n t u n w ie ld in e ss, p e rm it little fle x ib ility o r crea tivity. T h ese SO Ps m ay be th e u n d o
in g o f m o re in n o v a tiv e s o lu tio n s o f d e cisio n m akers o p era tin g at leve ls h ig h er th a n th e
o rg a n iz a tio n , b u t th e re is little a lte rn a tiv e to th e im p le m e n ta tio n o f p o lic y b y b u reau cracy.
T h e in te rfa c e b e tw e e n o b je c tiv e s a n d im p le m e n ta tio n is d ire c tly m et a t th is p o in t, a n d th e re
m ay b e su b sta n tia l slip p a g e b e tw e e n th e tw o b ecause o f th e in c o m p a tib ility o f th e p layers'
p ersp e ctive s.
A lth o u g h th e a rtic u la tio n o f th is research ag en d a can be fo u n d in w o rks such as H untingto n (1 9 6 0 ), S c h illin g

et al.

(19 62), H ilsm an (1967), and N eu stad t (1970), p ro b ab ly th e m ost

c ite d w o rk s a re A llis o n (1 9 7 1 ) a n d H alp e rin (1974) (a d d itio n a l w o rks co-au tho red b y H a lp e rin
in c lu d e A llis o n a n d H a lp e rin (19 72) an d H alp erin and K an ter (1973)). In his fam o us

Decision,

Essence of

G ra h a m A llis o n o ffers th re e cuts a t ex p lain in g o n e ep iso d e in fo reig n p o lic y th e

C u b a n M is s ile C risis o f 1962. In ve stig atin g b o th th e U S and th e S o vie t sides o f th is case, A lliso n
sh o w s th a t th e u n ita ry ra tio n a l- a cto r m o d el o f foreign p o licy m aking d o es n o t su ffice to ex
p la in th e c u rio s itie s o f th e crisis. O fferin g tw o ad d itio n al m odels as successive 'cu ts' a t ex p la
n a tio n , th e O rg a n iz a tio n a l Pro cess M o d el and th e Bu reau cratic Po litics M o d e l (o n e o f
in tra - o rg a n iz a tio n a l fa cto rs, an d o n e o f inter-organization al facto rs), a llo w s A lliso n to ex p lain
m o re fu lly w h a t tra n sp ire d . H is use o f th re e levels o f analysis also p o in ts to th e d esire to in te
g ra te ra th e r th a n seg reg ate ex p lan atio n s a t d ifferen t levels.
H a lp e rin 's b o o k

Bureaucratic Politics and Foreign Policy

(1974) is an ex trem ely d eta iled

am alg am o f g e n e ra liz a tio n s a b o u t b u reau cratic behaviour, acco m p an ied b y u n fo rg e tta b le

ex am p les fro m A m e ric a n d efen ce p o licy m aking o f th e Eisenhow er, Kennedy, an d Jo h n so n
yea rs. It sh o u ld b e n o te d th a t b u rea u cra tic p o litics research gained im p etus fro m th e V ie tn a m
W a r o n g o in g d u rin g th is p erio d , b ecause th e w a r w as seen b y th e p u b lic as d efen ce p o lic y run
a m o k d u e, in p a rt, to b u re a u cra tic im p eratives (e.g. Krasner 1971).

Com parative foreign policy

T h o se w h o to o k u p Ja m e s Ro senau 's ch a lle n g e to b u ild a cross-national and m u ltile ve l th e o ry
o f fo re ig n p o lic y a n d su b je ct th a t th e o ry to rigorous aggregate em p irical testin g created th e
su b fie ld k n o w n as c o m p a ra tiv e fo re ig n p o lic y (C F P ). It is in C F P th a t w e see m ost d ire ctly th e
leg a cy o f scie n tism / b e h a vio u ra lism in FPA's genealogy. Foreign p o licy co u ld n o t be studied in
a g g re g a te - fo re ig n p o lic y

behaviour co u ld . Sea rch in g fo r an

an alo g u e to th e 'vo te ' as th e fu n

d am en tal ex p lan a n d u m in b e h a vio u ra list A m erican p o litical studies, C FPers p roposed th e

fo reig n p o lic y e v e n t- th e ta n g ib le a rte fa ct o f th e in flu e n ce attem p t th at is fo reign policy, a l
te rn a tiv e ly vie w e d as 'w h o d o es w h a t to w h o m , h o w ' in in tern a tio n al affairs. Events cou ld be
co m p ared a lo n g b e h a vio u ra l d im en sio n s, such as w h eth er p o sitive o r n eg ative effect w as

VALERIE M. HUDSON
being displayed, o r w hat instrum ents o f statecraft (d ip lo m a tic, m ilitary, econom ics, etc.) were
used m the influence attem pt, o r w h at level o f com m itm en t o f resources w as evid ent. Behav
io u r as disparate as a war, a treaty, o r a state visit cou ld n o w b e co m p ared

and aggregated in a

th eo retically m eaningful fashion.

This co n cep tu alizatio n o f th e d ep en d en t va ria b le w as essen tia l to th e theory-building
en terp rise in CFP. To u n co ver law -like g en eralizatio n s, o n e w o u ld h ave to co n d u ct em piri
cal testing across n atio ns and across tim e; case stu d ies w e re n o t an e ffic ie n t m ethodology
from this stan d p o in t. H ow ever, w ith th e co n cep tu a l b reak th ro u g h o f th e 'e ve n t', it w as now
possib le to c o lle c t d ata on a v a rie ty o f p o ssib le ex p lan a to ry fa cto rs a n d d e te rm in e (b y ana
lysin g th e va ria n ce in th e even t's b eh a vio u ra l d im en sio n s) th e p a ttern s b y w h ic h these in
d ep en d en t va ria b les w e re co rrela te d w ith fo reig n p o lic y b e h a v io u r (see M cG o w an and
Sh ap iro 1973). In d eed , to talk to so m e sch olars in vo lve d in C F P re sea rch , it seem ed that
th e ir goal w as n o th in g less th an a G U T (grand u n ifie d th e o ry ) o f a ll fo re ig n p o lic y behav
io u r fo r a ll n atio n s fo r a ll tim e. So m e set o f m aster eq u a tio n s w o u ld lin k a ll th e relevant
variab les, in d e p e n d e n t and d ep en d en t, tog ether, and w h en a p p lie d to m assive databases
p ro vid in g valu es fo r th ese variab les, w o u ld yie ld R-squares a p p ro a c h in g 1.0. A lth ou gh the
g o al w as p erh ap s n aive in its am b itio n , th e sh eer size o f th e task c a lle d fo rth im m ense
effo rts in th e o ry b u ild in g , d a ta co lle ctio n , and m e th o d o lo g ica l in n o v a tio n th a t h ave few
p a ra lle ls in IR .

Events data
T h e co llectio n o f ev e n ts d a ta w as fund ed to a sign ifican t d eg ree b y th e U S g o vernm en t. An
d rio le and H o p p le (1981) estim ate th a t th e g o vern m en t (p rim a rily D efen se A d vanced Re
search Pro jects A g en cy and th e N atio n al Scie n ce F o u n d a tio n ) p ro vid ed o v e r $5 m illion for
th e d evelo p m en t o f events datasets d u rin g th e tim e p erio d 1967-1981. G e n e ra lly speaking,
th e co lle ctio n effo rt w e n t like this: students w e re em p lo yed to co m b th ro u g h newspapers,
ch ro n o lo g ies, and o th e r sources fo r fo reign p o licy events, w h ich th e y w o u ld th e n code ac
co rd in g to rules listed in th e ir co d in g m anuals, h ave th e ir co d in g p e rio d ic a lly checked fo r in
te rco d e r re liab ility, and fin a lly p u nch th e ir cod in gs up o n co m p u te r card s. F o r exam ple, if we
w an te d to co d e an e ven t such as 'T h e U SA invad ed A fg han istan ', w e w o u ld c o d e a d ate (DDMM Y Y Y Y ), th e a cto r (U S A ), th e su b ject (A fg h an istan ), and so m e c o d e o r series o f codes that
w o u ld in d ica te 'in vasio n '. A series o f cod es m igh t w o rk like th is: th e c o d e fo r in vasio n might
b e '317', th e '3' in d ica tin g th a t th is w as a h o stile a ct, th e '1 ' in d ica tin g it w a s a m ilita ry act, and
th e 7 ' in d ica tin g in m o re sp e cific fash io n in vasio n . M a n y o th e r va ria b le s co u ld also be coded;
fo r exam ple, w e m igh t co d e th a t th e U n ited N a tio n s fa cilita te d th e a c t b y sp o n so rin g a Secu
rity C o u n cil R eso lu tio n , w e m ight lin k in p revio u s eve n ts such as M u lla h O m ar's refusal to turn
in O sam a b in la d e n , and so fo rth . Even ts d a ta sets, th e n , c o n ta in th o u sa n d s o r even millions
o f lin es o f cod e, each o f w h ich is a fo reig n p o lic y 'e ve n t'.
T h e a cro n ym s o f so m e o f th ese even ts d a ta p ro je cts liv e o n : so m e b eca u se th e d ata are still
b ein g co lle cte d (e.g. G e rn e r et

al. 1994) (so m e c o lle c tio n

is fu n d e d b y th e D D IR (D ata Devel

o p m en t fo r In te rn a tio n a l R esearch ) P ro je ct o f th e N S F ), an d o th e rs b ecau se th e d ata are still

useful as a testin g gro u nd fo r h yp o th esesW E IS (th e W o rld E v e n t/ ln te ra c tio n Su rvey), COPD A B (th e C o n flic t an d Pea ce D ata Ban k ), C R E O N (C o m p a ra tiv e R esearch o n th e Events of
N a tio n s), an d so fo rth . T h e Kansas E ve n t D a ta System (K E D S ) is m o re o f a seco n d -w ave effort.

CHAPTER 1 THE HISTORY AND EVOLUTION OF FOREIGN POLICY ANALYSIS

in that th e Kansas team has d evelo p e d m ach in e co d in g o f events, lead in g to m uch m o re re li
able and cap a cio u s d a ta co lle c tio n and cod in g than w as p o ssib le in th e first w a ve o f even ts
data (Schnodt 1995).

Integrated explanations
In co n trast to th e o th e r tw o typ e s o f FPA sch o larsh ip b ein g discussed, C F P research aim ed
ex p licitly a t integrated multilevel ex p lan atio n s. T h e fo u r m ost a m b itio u s o f th ese p ro je cts w e re
those o f B re c h e r (1 9 7 2 ) an d h is asso ciates in th e I BA P ro je ct (W ilk e n fe ld
(R u m m el 1972,1977), C R E O N (E a st et

al.

1978; C allah an

et al.

et al. 1980),

DON

1982), an d H a ro ld Guetzkow's

IN S (G u etz k o w 1963). In d e p e n d e n t va ria b le s at several levels o f an alysis w e re lin k ed b y th e o

retical p ro p o sitio n s (so m etim es in stan tiated in statistical o r m a th e m a tica l e q u a tio n s ) to
p ro p erties o r ty p e s o f fo re ig n p o lic y b eh aviou r. A t least th re e o f th e fo u r a tte m p te d to co n firm
o r d isco n firm th e p ro p o sitio n s b y aggregate em p irical testing. U n fo rtu n ately, th e fa ct th a t th e
e m p irical resu lts w e re n o t a ll th a t had b een h o p ed fo r u shered in a p erio d o f d is e n ch a n tm e n t
w ith a ll th in g s C FP, as w e sh all see in a la te r sectio n .

The psychological and societal milieux of foreign policy

decision making
Th e m in d o f a fo re ig n p o lic y m aker is n o t a

tabula rasa:

it co n tain s co m p lex a n d in tric a te ly

related in fo rm a tio n a n d p attern s, such as beliefs, attitu d es, values, ex p erien ces, e m o tio n s ,
traits, style , m em o ry, n a tio n a l, a n d self-co ncep tio n s. Each d ecisio n m aker's m in d is a m ic ro
cosm o f th e v a rie ty p o ssib le in a g iven so ciety. C u ltu re, history, geograp hy, e c o n o m ic s, p o liti
cal in stitu tio n s, id e o lo g y, d em o g rap h ics, and in n u m erab le o th e r fa cto rs sh a p e th e s o c ie ta l
co n tex t in w h ic h th e d e c is io n m ak er o p erates. T h e Sp ro u ts (1 9 5 6 ,1 9 5 7 ,1 9 6 5 ) re fe rre d to
th ese as th e m ilie u o f d e c is io n m aking, an d sch o la rly effo rts to ex p lo re th a t m ilie u w e re b o th
in n o v a tiv e a n d im p re ssive d u rin g th is first p erio d . M ich a e l B rech er's w o rk c ite d a b o v e (B re
ch e r 1972) b e lo n g s in th is g e n o ty p e as w e ll. Brech er's

The Foreign Policy System of Israel

ex

p lo res th a t n a tio n 's p sych o - cu ltu ral e n viro n m e n t an d its effects o n Israel's fo re ig n p o licy .
U n lik e B re c h e r's in te g ra tiv e a p p ro a c h to th e p sycho -social m ilie u , m o st w o rk s in th is g e n o
ty p e ex a m in ed e ith e r th e p sy c h o lo g ic a l asp ects o f F P D M , o r its b ro a d e r so c ie ta l asp ects.

Individual characteristics
W o u ld th e re b e a d is tin c t fie ld o f fo re ig n p o lic y a n a lysis w ith o u t th is m o st m ic ro o f a ll ex
p la n a to ry le v e ls ? A rg u a b ly n o t. It is in th e co g n itio n a n d in fo rm a tio n p ro ce ssin g o f a n a ctu a l
hum an a g e n t th a t a ll th e e x p la n a to ry le ve ls o f F P A a re in re a lity in te g rate d . W h a t sets F P A
ap art fro m m o re m a in s tre a m IR is th is in siste n ce th a t, as H e rm a n n a n d K eg ley p u t it, '[a ] c o m
p ellin g e x p la n a tio n (o f fo re ig n p o lic y ) c a n n o t tre a t th e d e c id e r e x o g e n o u sly' (1 9 9 4 :4 ).
P o litic a l p s y c h o lo g y ca n assist us in u n d e rsta n d in g th e d ecid e r. U n d e r c e rta in c o n d itio n s
high stress, h ig h u n c e rta in ty , d o m in a n t p o sitio n o f th e h ea d o f sta te in F P D M th e p e rso n a l
ch a ra cte ristics o f th e in d iv id u a l w ill b e c o m e c ru c ia l in u n d e rsta n d in g fo re ig n p o lic y c h o ic e .

VALERIE M. HUDSON
The w ork o f Harold Lasswell on political leadership was a significant influence on m any early
pioneers o f political psychology w ith reference to foreign policy (see Lasswell, 1930,1948).
Joseph de Rivera's

The Psychological Dimension of Foreign Policy (1968) is an excellent survey

and integration o f early attem pts to apply psychological and social psychological theory to
foreign policy cases. Another early effort at a system atic study o f leader personality effects is
the concept of operational code, an idea originating w ith Leites (1951), and refined and ex
tended by one o f the m ost im portant figures in this area o f researchAlexander George
(1969). Defining an operational code involves identifying the core political beliefs of the
leader about the inevitability o f conflict in the w orld, the leader's estim ation o f his or her own
pow er to change events, and so forth, as w ell as an exploration o f the preferred means and
style o f pursuing goals (see also O. Holsti 1977; Johnson 1977; W alker 1977). It should be
noted th at George's influence on the field is by no means confined to his w ork on operational
codes; he has offered useful suggestions on m ethodological issues (see George on process
tracing (George 1979), on the dem erits o f abstract theorizing versus actor-specific theory
(George and Sm oke 1974; George 1993), and on the need to bridge the gap between theory
and practice in foreign policy (George 1993,1994).
The w ork o f M argaret G. Herm ann is likewise an attem pt to typologize leaders w ith spe
cific reference to foreign policy dispositions. A psychologist by training, she w as also in
volved in a C FP project (CREO N ). However, the core o f her research is leaders' personal
characteristics (Herm ann 1970, 1978). Using a m odified operational code fram ew ork in
conjunction w ith content analysis, she is able to com pare and contrast leaders' beliefs, mo
tivations, decisional styles, and interpersonal styles. Furtherm ore, Herm ann integrates this
inform ation into a m ore holistic picture of the leader, w ho m ay belong to one o f six distinct
fo reig n policy orientations'. O rientation allows her to make m ore specific projections about
a leader's behaviour in a variety o f circum stances, in the second w ave o f research, scholars
began to explicitly com pare and contrast the findings o f different personality assessment
schem es (W in te r

etal. 1991; Singer and Hudson 1992; Snare 1992; see also W in te r 1973;

Po st1990).
The role o f perceptions and images in foreign policy was a very im portant research agenda
in this first generation o f FPA. The w ork o f both Robert Je rvis and Richard Cottam deserves
special m ention here.Jervis's Perception and Misperception in
Cottam 's Foreign

International Politics (1976) and

Policy Motivation: A General Theory and a Case Study (1977) both explicate

the potentially grave consequences o f m isperception in foreign po licy situations by explor

ing its roots. D eterrence strategies can fail catastrophically if m isperception o f the other's
intentions or m otivations occur (see also the stim ulus-response m odels o f Holsti

et al.

(1968)). U kejanis, Halperin, and others, the w ork o f Je rvis and Cottam is consciously pre
scriptive: both include advice and suggestions fo r policy makers. W o rk in the late 1980s
continuing this tradition included scholarship b yjan ice Gross Stein, Richard Ned Lebow, Ole
Holsti, Alexander George, Deborah W elch Larson, Betty Glad, and Stephen W a lt (as well as
Jervis

et al. 1985; Larson 1985,1993; M. Cottam 1986; Glad 1989; George and Sm oke 1989;

O. Holsti 1989; Lebow and Stein 1990; W alt 1992). An excellent exam ple o f w ork in this pe
riod is that of Richard Herrm ann (1985,1986,1993), w ho developed a typology o f stereotyp
ical images with reference to Soviet perceptions (the other as 'child', as 'degenerate', etc.) and
began to extend his analysis to the images held by other nations, including Am erican and

Islam ic images.

CHAPTER 1 THE HISTORY AND EVOLUTION OF FOREIGN POLICY ANALYSIS

T h e w o rk o n c o g n itiv e c o n stra in ts w as in fo rm e d b y th e w o rk o f sch o lars in o th e r field s,
in clu d in g th a t o f H e rb e rt S im o n (19 8 5 ) o n b o u n d ed ra tio n a lity, H eu er (1999, b u t w ritte n b e
tw ee n 1978 a n d 1986) o n c o g n itiv e bias, an d K ah n em an

et al. (19 82) o n

h eu ristic error. M a n y

o th e r im p o rta n t c o g n itiv e an d p sych o lo g ica l stu dies w h ich a p p e ared d u rin g th e 1970s and

early 1980s d e a lt w ith a d iv e rs ity o f facto rs: m o tivatio n s o f lead ers (B a rb e r 1972; W in te r 1973;
Eth ere d g e 1978), c o g n itiv e m ap s, scripts, an d sch em as (Sh a p iro and B o n h a m 1973; A xelrod
1976, C a rb o n e ll 1978), c o g n itiv e sty le (Su e d fe ld an d T etlo ck 1977); life ex p erie n ce o f lead ers
(S te w a rt 1977), a n d o th e rs. G o o d e d ite d c o lle c tio n s o f th e tim e in clu d e H erm an n (19 77) an d
Falko w ski (1 9 7 9 ).

National and societal characteristics

K al H o lsti's (1 9 7 0 ) e lu c id a tio n o f n a tio n a l ro le c o n c e p tio n spans b o th th e p sych o lo g ica l an d
th e s o c ia l m ilie u . W ith th is c o n ce p t, H o lsti seeks to cap tu re h o w a n atio n vie w s itse lf a n d its
ro le in th e in te rn a tio n a l a re n a . O p era tio n a lly, H olsti turn s to e lite p ercep tio n s o f n a tio n a l role,
a rg u in g th a t th e se p e rc e p tio n s a re arg u ab ly m o re salien t to fo reig n p o licy ch o ice . P e rce p tio n
o f n a tio n a l ro le is a lso in flu e n ce d b y so cietal character, a p ro d u ct o f th e nation's so cia liz a tio n
p ro cess. D iffe re n c e s h e re can lead to d ifferen ces in n atio n al b eh a vio u r as w e ll (e.g. B ro d erso n
1961; H ess 1963; M e re lm a n 1969; Renshon 1977; B o b ro w

et al.

1979). T h e m e th o d o lo g y o f

n a tio n a l ro le c o n c e p tio n w as co n tin u ed in th e 1980s b y W a lk e r (1987) and o th ers (W is h 1980;

C o tta m a n d S h ih 1992; Sh ih 1993).
T h e stu d y o f c u ltu re as an in d e p e n d e n t va ria b le affectin g fo reig n p o licy w as ju s t b eg in n in g
to b e re d e v e lo p e d n e a r th e en d o f th e 1980s afte r p eterin g o u t in th e 1960s (A lm o n d a n d
V e rb a 1963; P y e a n d V e rb a 1965). C u ltu re m ight h ave an effect on co g n itio n (M o to k a w a
1989); it m ig h t h ave ra m ifica tio n s fo r stru ctu ratio n o f institu tio n s such as b u reau cracie s
(Sa m p so n 1987). C o n flic t re so lu tio n tech n iq u es m ight be d ifferen t fo r d ifferen t cu ltu re s as
w e ll (C u sh m a n a n d K in g 1985; P y e 1986; G aen slen 1989). Indeed, th e ve ry processes o f p o lic y
m ak in g m ig h t b e stam p ed b y one's cu ltu ral h eritage and so cializatio n (H o lla n d 1984;
Eth e re d g e 1985; La m p to n 1986; M erelm a n 1986; Leung 1987; B a n e rje e 1991; Voss an d
D o rse y 1992).
T h e s tu d y o f th e ro le o f so cie ta l group s in fo reig n p o licy m aking can b e seen as an o u t
g ro w th o f th e m o re a d va n c e d stu d y o f so cie ta l groups in A m erican d o m estic p o litics. So m e
tim es a n in d iv id u a l sc h o la r used th e o ry d evelo p e d fo r th e A m erica n case to ex p lo re th e
m o re d iv e rs e u n iv e rse o f th e in te rn a tio n a l system . Fo r exam ple, R o b ert D ahl's vo lu m e,

gimes and Oppositions (1 9 7 3 ), p ro vid e d

Re

th e key th e o re tica l co n cep ts n ecessary to a n a lyse th e

re la tio n sh ip b e tw e e n d o m e stic p o litic a l pressure b y so cie tal groups an d fo reig n p o licy

c h o ic e b y th e g o ve rn m e n t. O th e r m o re cou n try- and regio n -sp ecific case studies w e re also
d e ve lo p e d : see D e u tsch

et al.

(19 67), H eilm a n (1969), D a llin (1969), C h ittick (1970), H ughes

(1978), an d O g a ta (1 9 7 7 ), a m o n g o th ers. In th e late 1980s, a n e w w a v e o f th in k in g began to

ex p lo re th e lim its o f sta te a u to n o m y in re la tio n to o th e r so cie tal groups in th e cou rse o f
p o licy m aking. T h e w o rk o f P u tn a m (19 88) o n th e tw o - le v e l g am e o f fo reig n and d o m estic
p o lic y w as p a ra d ig m a tic fo r e sta b lish in g th e m a jo r q u estio n s o f this research subfield. O th e r
e x celle n t w o rk in clu d e s Evan s

et al. (1985), H agan

(1989), Le vy a n d V a k ili (19 89), an d M a stan d u n o

(1987), Le vy (1988), Lam b orn and M u m m e

et al. (1989). A

se co n d w a v e o f research in

th is a re a can b e seen in th e w o rk o f K aarb o (1993), Sk id m o re and H udson (1993), and Van

VALERIE M. HUDSON
lIlflflM ( I W y ) to t

ln to r ftfln g f O frihln*tiO fi

Belle (1993) (see also Butno dc M esc]Ulift

Ileal Impafallva* and thalr effect on
of game theory and FPA to understand domaillr |
foreign policy).
id an
The second-wave work of Joe Hagan deserves ipi dal note. He has compi
database on the fragmentation and vulnerability of political regimes, with special refereri'*
to executive/legislative structures (Hagan 1993). Thi set Includes 94 regimes for 38 nations
on
over a 10-year period. His purpose Is to explore the facts of political opposition

foreign
policy choice. Using aggregate statistical analysis, Hagan Is able to show, for example, that the
internal fragmentation of a regime has substantially less effect on foreign policy behaviour
than military or party opposition to the regime.
Domestic political imperatives could also be ascertained by probing elite and mass opinion
(again, piggy-backing onto the sophisticated voter-attitude studies of American politics).
Though usually confined to studies of democratic nations (especially America, where survey
research results were abundant), these analyses were used to Investigate the limits of the socalled Almond-Lippman consensus-that is, that public opinion Is Incoherent and lacking
unity on foreign policy issues, and thus that public opinion does not have a large impact on
the nation's conduct of foreign policy (see Bailey 1948; Almond 1950; Llppman 1955; Camp
bell et al. 1964; Converse 1964; Upset 1966). Opinion data collected during the Vietnam War
period appears to have served as a catalyst to re-examine this question. Caspary (1970) and
Achen (1975) found more stability in American public opinion concerning foreign policy and
international involvement than their predecessors. Mueller (1973) used the Vietnam War to
show that although the public may change their opinions on international issues, they do so
for rational reasons. Holsti and Rosenau (1979) and Mandelbaum and Schneider (1979) used
survey data to identify recognizable ideological positions to which the public subscribes on
foreign policy issues. A large amount of research was undertaken to show that public and elite
opinion does affect governmental foreign policy decision making (see Cantril 1967; Verba et
al. 1967; Graber 1968; Verba and Brody 1970; Hughes 1978; Yankelovich 1979; Beal and
Hinckley 1984).
The study of the effect of national attributes (size, wealth, political accountability, eco
nomic system, etc.) on foreign policy was certainly, in a theoretical sense, in the Sprout geno
type, but was carried out by scholars and with methods more to be placed in the Rosenau
genotype (if you exclude pre-Rosenau writers such as Lenin). The propensity to be involved in
war was usually the foreign policy dependent variable of choice in this work (see Rummel
1972,1977,1979; Kean and McGowan 1973; East and Hermann 1974; East 1978; Salmore and
Salmore 1978; for a more holistic treatment, see Korany 1986).
The questions raised by these theorists are fascinating. Are large nations more likely to go
to war than small nations? Are rich nations more likely to go to war than poor ones? Are au
thoritarian regimes more bellicose than democracies? Statistical manipulation of aggregate
data, at best a blunt instrument, was unable to uncover any lawlike generalizations on this
score (though for an interesting and hard-to-dassify treatment of the multilevel causes and
effects of war, see Beer (1981)). Political economy research on the effects of economic struc
tures and conditions on foreign policy choice are fairly rare: the 'culture' of I PE and the 'cul
ture' of FPA did not mix well, for reasons explored below. However, the works of Neil
Richardson and Charles Kegley (e.g. Richardson and Kegley 1980) and Peter Katzenstein (e g
Katzenstein 1985) are notable as exceptions to this generalization.

CHAPTER 1 THE HISTORY AND EVOLUTION OF FOREIGN POLICY ANALYSIS

However, in the second-wave years, one notable exception to all the analysis of the previ
ous years burst forth upon th e scene-dem ocratic peace theory. Dem ocracies, it was noted,
tend not to fight on e another, though they fight hon-dem ocratic countries as often as other

non-dem ocracies do. This appeared to be an exam ple of how a difference in polity type pro
duced a d ifferen ce in foreign p o licy behaviour (Russett 1993a,b). This has been a particularly
interesting bridging question fo r FPA and IR (and is examined further in Chapter Three). W h y
do dem ocracies n o t fight o n e ano th er? H ere w e find m ore abstract theorists of w ar (M erritt
and Zinnes 1991; M organ 1992; Brem er 1993; Dixon 1993; Ray 1993; M aoz and Russett 1993)
w restling w ith a qu estion th at leads them into FPA waters and into conversation w ith FPA
scholars (H agan 1994; H erm ann and Kegley 1995).
Finally, if it is possib le to see the international system as part of the psycho-social m ilieu in
w h ich foreign p o licy d ecisio n m aking takes place, then the work of much of m ainstream IR at
this tim e can b e seen as con trib u tin g to the Foreign Policy Analysis research agenda. The ef
fects o f system typ e, as elu cid ated b y Kaplan (1957,1972), m ay depend on the num ber of
poles in the system , th e distribution o f pow er am ong poles, and the rules of the system game
th at perm it its m ainten an ce. This structure m ay then determ ine to a large extent the range of
p erm issible fo reign p o licy b ehaviour o f nations. The w ork of W altz was extrem ely influential
in its d escrip tio n o f th e effects o f an anarchical w orld system on the behaviour o f its m em ber
states (see also H offm ann 1961; Rosecrance 1963; Singer

et al.

1972). FPA seem ed not to

em phasize th is typ e o f explanation, prim arily because the variation in behaviour during the
tim e w h en a certain system is m aintained cannot be explained by reference to system struc
tu re b ecause th e structure has not changed. Explanation o f that variation must be found at
lo w er levels o f analysis, w h ere variation in the explanations can be identified. Here, then, is
o n e o f several sources fo r th e notable lack of integration between actor-general systems
th e o ry in IR an d FPA.

FPA self-reflection in the late 1970s and 1980s

A p erio d o f c ritica l self-reflection in FPA began in the late 1970s and continued until the mid1980s. T h e effects w e re fe lt u neven ly across FPA, w ith C FP being affected the m ost; it is here
th a t w e see th e m ost pruning, both theoretical and m ethodological, w hich w ill be discussed
later. In d ecisio n -m aking studies there was a period o f rather slow growth because o f m eth
o d o lo g ical con sid eratio n s. The inform ation requirem ents fo r conducting a high-quality
group o r b u rea u cra tic analysis o f a foreign p o licy choice are trem endous. If one w ere not part
o f th e g ro u p o r b u reau cracy in question, detailed accounts o f w hat transpired, preferably
from a v a rie ty o f p rim a ry so u rce view points, w ould be necessary. Because of security consid
eration s in fo reig n po licy, such inform ation is not usually available fo r m any years (e.g. until
d eclassified ). T h e q u estio n facin g decision-m aking scholars becam e: Is it possible to be theo
re tica lly and p o licy re le va n t if o n e is relegated to doing case studies o f events tw enty years or
m o re o ld ? If so, h o w ? If n o t, h o w is it possible to m anoeuvre around the high data require
m ents to say so m ething m eaningful ab out m ore recent events? (See R Anderson 1987.)
Scho lars w restlin g w ith this issue cam e up w ith tw o basic responses: (a) patterns in group/
b u reau cratic processes can be isolated through historical case studies, on the basis o f w hich
both general p red ictio n s o f and general recom m endations for present-day foreign policy

V A L E R IE

M. HUDSON

decision making can be made; (b ) innovative at-a-distance ind icators o f d o sed group/bureaucracy process can be developed, w hich a llo w fo r m ore specific expianation/prediction of

resultant foreign p olicy choice.

FPA work at the psychological level actu ally expanded during this tim e period , but work at
the societal level arguably contracted on som e research fronts. The reason fo r this bifurcation
in the genotype was m ethodological: psychology provided ready-m ade and effective tools
for the study o f political psychology, but p o litical science d id n o t o ffer th e fo reign p o licy ana
lyst the sam e advantage. To understand how the b roader socio-cu ltu ral-p olitical context
w ithin a nation-state contributes to its governm ental p o licy m aking (w h e th er dom estic or
foreign) is, perforce, the dom ain o f com parative politics. It is h o p efu lly n o t controversial to
aver that the theories and m ethods o f com parative politics in this p erio d w e re n o t qu ite as
highly developed as those o f psychology. The attem pt to graft 'scie n tific' statistical analyses of
variance onto the underdeveloped theory o f com parative p o litics o f th e 1970s and 1980s was
a failure. M o re successful w ere efforts to spin existing com p arative p o litics w o rk on a particu
lar nation to the cause o f explaining factors that contribute to th at nation's fo reig n p o licy- fo r
exam ple, borrow ing techniques from A m erican p olitics (such as p u b lic o p in io n surveys) to
study dom estic political im peratives in the USA on foreign p o licy issues. S till m issing w ere the
conceptual and m ethodological tools necessary to push past th e a rtificia l b a rrier between
com parative politics and international relations th at stym ied th e o ry d evelo p m en t. O n e o f the
greatest leaps forw ard in the present period o f FPA is th e in n o vative w o rk begun on concep
tualizing th e 'tw o-level gam e' (Putnam 1988).
As m entioned, C FP dw indled in the 1980s. Indeed, the ve ry term 'co m p arative fo reig n pol
ic y ' began to sound quaint and naive. M em bership o f th e C o m p arative Foreign P o licy Section
o f the In ternational Studies Association plum m eted. Pu b lic vivisectio n s to o k p lace, w hile
Rosenau-genotype-style scholarship becam e scarce. Bo th sym p ath etic an d unsym pathetic
criticism abounded (e.g. A shley 1976,1987; M unton 1976; East 1978; K egley 1980; Caporaso

eta/.

1987; H erm ann and Peacock 1987; Sm ith 1987). A t o n e p o in t, in exasp eration, Kegley

(1980: 12), him self a CFPer, chides, 'C FP risks being lab elled a c u lt o f m ethod ological

flagellomaniacs'.
This searing criticism and self-criticism revealed a n um b er o f in co n siste n cie s in th e CFP
approach, w hich needed to be sorted o u t b efo re a n y progress co u ld b e co n tem p lated . The
stum bling blocks includ ed th e fo llo w in g:

1. Vou

can't have your parsimony and eat it, too. Th e ten sio n

b etw ee n th e d esire o f

som e C FPers fo r a hard-science-like grand u n ified th e o ry an d th e assu m p tio n th a t

m icro-level d etail is necessary if o n e re ally w an ts to ex p lain an d p re d ict fo reig n p o licy
b ehaviour becam e u nb earab le. Rosenau's 'Pre-th eo ries a rtic le (R o sen au 1966), w hen
review ed from this vantage p oint, sets th e g en o typ e up fo r an in e vita b le d ilem m a
ab out parsim ony. To w h at should w e aspire: rich ly d eta iled , co m p re h e n sive ly
researched m icro-analyses o f a few cases, o r c o n ce p tu a lly ab stract, p arsim o n io u s
statistico-m athem atical renderings o f thousands o f eve n ts? O n e can see th e p rob lem
in desiring rich ly detailed , co m p reh en sively research ed m icro -analyses o f thousands
o f events: a lifetim e w o u ld be o ve r b efo re a th e o rist had co lle cte d en o u g h d a ta to d o
th e first big 'ru n'! B u t m any C FPers rejected th e case stu d y a p p ro a ch as u n scien tific
and to o m uch like the soft anecd o tal research o f th e 'tra d itio n alists' (K e g le y 1980).

CHAPTER 1 THE HISTORY AND EVOLUTION OF FOREIGN POLICY ANALYSI

C FPers w a n te d to b e b e h a v io u ra lis ts a n d to b e s c ie n tific , a n d a h a llm a rk o f th is w a s
a g g re g a te e m p iric a l te s tin g o f c ro s s - n a tio n a lly a p p lic a b le g e n e ra liz a tio n s a c ro s s la rg e
v a lu e s o f N . A t th e s a m e tim e , th e y w e re fie rc e ly c o m m itte d to u n p a c k in g th e b la c k
b o x o f d e c is io n m a k in g , so th e d e ta il o f th e ir e x p la n a n s g re w , a n d w ith it th e ir re je c tio n
o f knee-jerk id e a liz a tio n o f p a rs im o n y . P u sh h a d to c o m e to s h o v e a t s o m e p o in t: C F P
m e th o d s d e m a n d e d p a rs im o n y in th e o ry ; C F P th e o ry d e m a n d e d n u a n c e a n d d e ta il in
m e th o d .
2.

To qu a n tify o r no t to q u an tify? A

c o r o lla r y o f larg e- N - siz e te s tin g is th e n e e d fo r m o re

p re c is e m e a s u re m e n t o f d a ta ; in d e e d , q u a n tific a tio n o f v a ria b le s is e s s e n tia l to lin e a r

re g re s sio n a n d c o r re la tio n te c h n iq u e s , a s w e ll as to m a th e m a tic a l m a n ip u la tio n s su c h
a s d iffe re n tia l e q u a tio n s . H o w e v e r, th e in d e p e n d e n t v a ria b le s o f C F P in c lu d e d su c h
n o n - q u a n tifia b le s as p e rc e p tio n , m e m o ry , e m o tio n , c u ltu re , h is to ry , e tc., a ll p la c e d in a
d y n a m ic a n d e v o lv in g s tre a m o f h u m a n a c tio n a n d re a c tio n th a t m ig h t n o t b e a d e q u a te ly
c a p tu re d b y a rith m e tic - b a s e d re la tio n s h ip s . T o le a v e su ch n o n - q u a n tifia b le e x p la n a to ry
v a ria b le s o u t s e e m s to d e fe a t th e v e ry p u rp o s e o f m ic ro - a n a ly sis ; to le a v e th e m in
b y fo rc in g th e d a ta in to q u a s i- in te rv a l le v e l p ig e o n h o le s se em s to d o v io le n c e to th e
s u b s ta n c e th a t C F P s o u g h t to c a p tu re . C F P e rs b eg an to ask w h e th e r t h e ir m e th o d s w e r e
a id in g th e m in a c h ie v in g th e ir th e o re tic a l g o a ls o r p re v e n tin g th e m fro m e v e r a c h ie v in g
th o s e g o a ls.
3.

A fin a l inconsistency centred in p olicy relevance. A s m e n tio n e d

e a rlie r, C F P h a d

re c e iv e d a la rg e a m o u n t o f m o n e y fro m th e g o v e rn m e n t to c re a te e v e n ts d a ta se ts. C F P
re s e a rc h e rs s u c c e s s fu lly a rg u e d th a t su ch an in v e stm e n t w o u ld y ie ld in fo rm a tio n o f u se
to fo re ig n p o lic y m a k e rs. S p e c ific a lly , ev e n ts d a ta w o u ld b e u sed to se t u p e a rly w a rn in g
sy ste m s th a t w o u ld a le rt p o lic y m ak ers to crises in th e m a k in g a ro u n d th e w o rld (a s if th e y
d o n o t a ls o re a d th e sa m e so u rc e s fro m w h ic h e v e n ts d a ta c o rn e l).
C o m p u te riz e d d e c is io n a id s a n d a n a lysis p ackag es w ith te llta le a cro n y m s b eg a n to a p p e a r
E W A M S (E a r ly W a rn in g a n d M o n ito rin g Syste m ); C A S C O N (C o m p u te r- A id e d S y s te m s fo r
H a n d lin g In fo rm a tio n o n L o c a l C o n flic ts ); C A C IS (C o m p u te r- A id e d C o n flic t In fo rm a tio n S y s
te m ); X A ID S (C ris is M a n a g e m e n t E x e cu tive D e cisio n A id s) (se e A n d rio le a n d H o p p le 1 98 1).
U n fo rtu n a te ly , th e s e c o u ld n e v e r liv e u p to th e ir p ro m ise : th e c o lle c te d e v e n ts c o u ld b e h a d
fro m o th e r s o u rc e s a n d so w e re n o th in g w ith o u t th e th e o ry to ex p lain a n d p re d ic t th e ir o c
c u rre n ce . T h e m e th o d o lo g ic a l p a ra d o x es e x p lica te d a b o v e re su lte d in th e o ry th a t w a s stu ck ,
b y a n d larg e, a t th e le v e l o f g lo b a lly a p p lic a b le b u t s p e c ific a lly va c u o u s b iv a ria te g e n e ra liz a
tio n s su ch as th a t 'la rg e n a tio n s p a rtic ip a te m o re in in te rn a tio n a l in te ra c tio n s th a n sm a ll n a
tio n s' (s e e M c G o w a n a n d S h a p iro 1973). A g a in , C F P fo u n d its e lf p u lle d in tw o o p p o s e d
d ire c tio n s : W a s th e re s e a rc h g o a l to say s o m e th in g p re d ic tiv e a b o u t a s p e c ific n a tio n a t a
sp e cific tim e in a s p e c ific se t o f c irc u m sta n c e s (w h ic h w o u ld b e h ig h ly p o lic y re le v a n t, b u t
w h ich m ig h t c lo s e ly re s e m b le th e o u tp u t o f a tra d itio n a l c o u n try e x p e rt)? O r w a s th e g o a l a
gran d u n ifie d th e o ry (w h ic h w o u ld n o t b e v e ry p o lic y re le v a n t, b u t w h ic h w o u ld q u a lify y o u
as a scie n tist a n d a g e n e ra lis t)? A tte m p ts to a cc o m p lish b o th w ith th e sa m e re sea rch led to
p ro d u cts th a t w e re u n s a tis fa c to ry in a sc h o la rly as w e ll as a p o lic y sense.
H in d sig h t is a lw a y s 20/20; it d o e s seem c le a r in re tro s p e ct th a t ch a n g e w as n ecessary. Le ft
b eh in d w e re (1 ) th e a im o f a g ra n d u n ifie d th e o ry, a n d (2 ) th e m e th o d o lo g ica l stra itja c k e t
im p o sed b y th e re q u ire m e n t o f a g g re g ate e m p iric a l testin g . In 1980, K eg ley sp o k e o f th e n ee d

VALERIE M. HUDSON
to com e dow n from the ra rifled a ir o f grand th e o ry to m id d le-rang e theo ry, and to capture
m ore o f th e p articular.
To succeed partially is not to fall co m p le te ly.. . . G oals (should b e) dow ngraded to better
fit capacities.

. This prescribes reduction In the level o f gen erality sought, so that more

contextually-qualified, circum stantially bounded, and tem porally/spatially-specrfied propo

sitions are tested. M o re o f the peculiar, unique, and p articular can be captured at a reduced

level o f abstraction and generality. (Kegley 1980:12,19)

To be fair, this was arguably Rosenau's o riginal aim , and th e C F P co m m u n ity had to reach a con
sensus to return to its founding vision. The con feren ce on N e w D irectio n s in th e Stu d y o f Foreign
Policy, held at O h io State U n iversity in M a y 1985, p ro b ab ly represents a fin alizatio n o f these
changes fo r the C FP group (see the resulting volum e, H erm an n

et al. 1987; see also G erner 1992).

Conclusion: contemporary FPA's research agenda

As FPA w as being lib erated from its inconsistencies in th e late 1980s, th e w o rld w as being
lib erated from th e chess m atch o f th e C old W ar. This w as a fe licito u s c o in c id e n c e fo r FPA, and
w as an added source o f vig o u r fo r its research agenda. T h e sig n ifica n ce o f th is tem p o ral coin
cid en ce can be u nderstood b y rem em bering w h a t types o f IR th e o ry w e re in ascen d an ce at
th e tim e: n eo realist system s structure th e o ry and ratio n al c h o ice m o d ellin g . In d eed , th e dom
in an ce was so o verw h elm ing th at on taking an IR th e o ry cou rse d u rin g th is tim e, o n e w ould
thin k these tw o w ere th e

summum bonum o f all th in k in g

in in te rn a tio n a l re la tio n s (a t least in

th e U SA ). This state o f affairs w as natural fo r A m erican thin kers: A m e ric a w a s o n e o f tw o poles

o f p o w er in th e C o ld W a r in tern atio n al system . A b ip o lar quasi-zero-sum riv a lry lends itself
re la tive ly w e ll to ab stract actor-general analysis focused p rim a rily o n th e m acro-constraints
im posed b y th e system . Furtherm ore, acto r- g e n e ra l th e o ry w as m o re p ra ctica l fo r scholars
d u rin g th e C old W ar, because so little w as know n o f th e b lack box o f th e clo se d So viet, Chi
nese, and Eastern B lo c foreign p o licy d ecisio n m aking bodies.
H ow ever, w h en th e b ip o lar system collap sed w ith th e fa ll o f th e S o v ie t b lo c regim es, an
im p o rtan t th e o retica l d isco very w as m ade:

it is impossible to explain or predict system change

on the basis of system-level variables alone.

A lo n g th e sam e lines, in a p e rio d o f g reat uncer

tain ty and flux, lack o f e m p irica lly gro u nd ed inp u ts to ra tio n a l c h o ic e eq u a tio n s is d eadly in
term s o f th e usefulness o f such analysis. O u r in tu itiv e u n d e rstan d in g o f th e co llap se involves
variables m o re to be fo un d in FPA : th e p erso n alitie s o f G o rb a ch e v, H a v e l, a n d W alesa; the
activities o f tran sn atio n al groups such as th e Lu th eran C h u rch an d th e G re e n M o vem en t; the
struggles b etw een vario u s d o m estic p o litica l p layers, such as th e m ilitary, th e Com m unist
Party, th e bureaucrats, etc.; th e ro le o f eco n o m ics an d so cie ta l n eeds in sp ark in g th e desire for
change, etc. W ith th e fall o f th e Iro n C u rtain , th e need fo r an 'a cto r- sp e cific' com p lem en t to
m ainstream IR th e o ry b ecam e stark in Its clarity.
FPA in th e post C o ld W a r era retains th e d istin ctiv e th e o re tic a l co m m itm en ts th a t dem ar
cated at its incep tio n . In clu d ed am o n g these are:

a commitment to look below the nation-state level of analysis to actor-specific

information;

CHAPTIR 1 fH I HISTORY AND EVOLUTION OP FOREIGN POLICY ANALYSIS

a

comm itm ent to b u ild middle- rnnop

rv as
th
_ r- g e n e ral.
" " n w th
''n
o ry
m e ina>ra
in te rfa cr<
e. b e tw e e n acto

theo ry and the com p lexity of the real w orld;

a com m itm en t to pursue
m u ltlca u ia l *exnlam
itinnc
nar.n
i lei___
, .
1
" I liiiirtu
o n s sp
an n ini
g m u ltip le
ve lso^f an alysis;
a com m itm en t to u tlllie th eo ry and findings from across the spectrum o f social science;
a com m itm en t to view in g th e process o f foreign p o licy decision m aking as im portant as
the o u tp u t thereof,
N everth eless, FPA has evo lved In the sop histication o f the questions asked, and in the
m eans o f an sw erin g th o se questions. Indeed, FPA's a b ility to ask n ew questions is perhaps
m ore p ro m ising In re la tio n to Its futu re th eo retical p otential than an y o th er indicator. Einstein
and In feld (1938) co m m en ted th at, '(t)h e fo rm u latio n o f a problem is often m ore essential
than its so lu tio n w h ich m ay be m erely a m atter o f

'/ skill. To raise n ew

questions, n ew possi

b ilities, to regard o ld prob lem s from a n ew angle, requires creative im agination and w orks
real a d va n ce in science*.
In o rd e r to see this ad vance, let us exam ine som e o f the n ew questions th at h ave evo lved
from th e o ld . A s a d eta iled o ve rvie w o f FPA scholarship from 1993 to th e present can be fo un d
in H ud so n (20 0 5 ,2 0 0 7 ), let us n o w turn to the m icro-levels o f analysis and then m ove tow ard
m acro-levels.

New questions
W h e n stu d yin g th e effects o f in d iv id u a l lead ers on foreign p o licy decision m aking, th e key
q u estio n is w h e th e r w e can extend o u r understanding o f h ow a leader's p erso n ality affects
fo reig n p o lic y th ro u g h d eterm in in g its effect on ch o ice o f advisors, p referen ce fo r issues,
p refe ren ce fo r ce rta in group processes, and so fo rth ? M oreover, can w e integrate d ifferen t
a n a ly tic a l sch em es fo r an alysin g lead er perso nality and its effects? W h a t are th e ram ificatio n s
o f n e w b reak th ro u g h s in n e u ro sc ie n c e fo r FPA ? H o w d o vario us lead er p erso n ality typ es
sh ap e th e stru ctu re and process o f groups serving th em ?
A t th e g ro u p le v e l, w e m ust then ask h o w problem s are actu ally recognized b y th e g ro u p ?
H o w a re situ a tio n s 'fram ed ' and 'rep resen ted '? H o w are o p tio ns d evelo p e d ? H o w d o es a
g ro u p c o m e to sh a re an in terp retatio n o f th e situ atio n ? H o w does a group chan ge an estab
lish ed in te rp re ta tio n ? H o w does a group learn ? H o w is th e group's p o ten tial fo r c re a tivity
en h a n ce d o r d a m p e n e d ? H o w d oes group m em o ry affect group a ctio n ? H o w d o groups b e
c o m e p la ye rs in th e 'tw o - le vel g am e'? H o w are group stru ctu re and process a fu n ctio n o f so
c ie ta l c u ltu re ?
A t th e le v e l o f s o c ie ty a n d p o litic a l c o m p e titio n , w e ex p lo re w h e th e r w e can u n co ve r
th e s o c ie ta l so u rce s o f c h a n g e in sh ared p e rce p tio n s? Fo r exam p le, h o w d o a ttitu d es o f
lea d ers a n d p u b lic s ch a n g e as co n te x t ch a n g es? C an n atio n a l ro le c o n ce p tio n b e re-co n fig
u red to se rve as th e th e o re tic a l in te rfa c e b etw ee n a so c ie ty and th e in d ivid u a l m em b ers o f
th a t s o c ie ty w h o c o m e to le a d it an d m ake its fo reig n p o lic y d e cisio n s? C an w e sp e cify th e
e ffe c t o n fo re ig n p o lic y o f d o m e s tic p o litic a l c o m p e titio n ? C an w e co m p le te th e th e o re tica l
c irc le an d sp e c ify th e e ffe c ts o n d o m e s tic p o litic s o f th e im p le m e n ta tio n o f a ce rta in fo reign
p o lic y c h o ic e ? H o w c a n w e d is ce rn cu ltu re 's in flu e n c e o n fo reig n p o lic y ? D oes ty p e o f p o
litic a l system im p a c t o n fo re ig n p o lic y ? W h a t is th e effect o f system ic ch an g e on fo reig n
p o lic y ?

VALERIK M. HUDSON

Methodologically speaking, there are ju st as m any key questions to be considered. These

include: Can events data be re-conceptualized to be o f use to co n tem p o rary FPA? Can FPA
utilize m ethods created to sim ulate hum an decision m aking as a m eans o f integrating complex
non-quantifiable d ata? Can w e think o f n o n-arithm etic w ays to relate va ria b les? C an rational
cho ice m odels be altered to accom m od ate actor-specific id io syn cracies w ith regard to utility,
ch o ice m echanism s, and ch o ice constraints? Can w e create m odels th a t w ill a llo w us to use as
inputs the actor-specific know ledge generated b y co u n try/regio n ex p erts? W h e n is th e detail
o f actor-specifics necessary, and w h en is actor-general th e o ry su fficie n t to exp lain and project
F P D M ? H o w could o n e instantiate a m odel o f the 'tw o-level g a m e ? C an d iscu rsive analysis or
interpretivism be used to introd uce the d ynam ics o f evo lvin g u n d erstan d in g in F P D M ?

An Atlantic divide?
W h ile th ere are n ew efforts to both catalo gu e and p ro m o te th e a n a ly tic a l stu d y o f foreign
p o licy in th e G lob al South (B ru m m er 2011; G iacalo n e 2011; Z h a n g 2011), a t th is p o in t such
study is p red o m in an tly o f A tlan tic origins. This raises th e q u estio n o f w h e th e r th e re are im
p o rtan t d ifferen ces in th e w a y such studies are co n d u cted in th e U S A co m p ared w ith Euro
pean cou n tries, to w h ich an affirm ative answ er can b e given. In a re ce n t o v e rv ie w o f such
d ifferen ces (H a d field and H udson 2011), th e authors p o in t o u t several d istin ctio n s betw een
FPA (A m e rica n ) and w h a t th e y term A FP (th e analysis o f fo reig n p o licy, Eu ro p ea n ). This issue
is o f in terest to th e readers o f this vo lum e, fo r a b o u t h alf o f its au th o rs a re A m erican and
a b o u t h a lf are European.
H ad field and H udson n o te a greater em phasis on co g n itive ly o rie n te d th e o rie s in FPA than
in AFP, as w e ll as th e m ore freq u en t use o f q u an tita tive m eth o d s b y A m e rica n s an d historical
process-tracing b y Europeans. T h ey also n o te a cle a r p refe ren ce fo r th e use o f A m erica n cases
b y A m erican scholars, w h ich , w h ile n o t unexpected and also u n d e rstan d a b le , also bears pre
d ictab le con seq uences fo r theory-b uilding. Fo r exam ple, Z h a n g (2 0 1 1) fin d s th a t in th e Chi
nese case, b ein g 'id e o lo g ica l' and bein g 'p ra ctica l' a re n o t o x ym o ro n ic term s, w h ereas in
A m erican-in sp ired theory, such p erso n ality o rien ta tio n s a re seen as p re c lu d in g o n e another.
H ad field and H ud so n also n o te a g reater sense o f c o m m u n ity a m o n g A m e ric a n FPA scholars,
w h ich th e y a ttrib u te to th e sm all n um b er o f g rad u ate p ro g ram m es tra in in g F P A scholars in
th a t co u n try; th e y a re all lik ely to kn o w o n e a n o th e r w ith in o n e o r tw o d eg rees o f separation.
Turning to th e Eu ro p ean context, th e re are alm o st n o g ra d u ate p ro g ram m es th a t em phasize
FPA/AFP, and so as y e t sch olars h ave n o t b een a b le to c re a te a c ritic a l s o c ia l m ass th a t is the
p rereq u isite fo r an ep istem ic com m u n ity. Fin ally, H ad fie ld an d H u d so n suggest th a t A FP is far
m o re th e o re tica lly in clu sive th an FPA has b een to d ate, e m b ra cin g n o t o n ly actor-specific
theo ries, b u t also grand th e o ry and co n stru ctivist a p p ro a ch es. F o r ex am p le, o n e is not likely
to see a referen ce to th e w o rk o f R o y Bhaskar in A m e rica n FPA lite ra tu re , w h ile such a refer
en ce m ight b e ve ry lik e ly in A F P w o rk.

New attempts to bridge IR and FPA

A lso fa irly recen t in o rig in are sustained o rg an ized a ttem p ts to b rid g e th e d iv id e b etw een FPA
and IR . Th e tw o th a t w e w ill m en tio n in th is se ctio n a re n e o cla ssical re alism (exem p lified by
Lo b ell et al. 2009) and b eh avio u ral IR (ex e m p lified b y W a lk e r

et a i

2011; see also M in tz 2007).

CHAPTER 1 THE HISTORY AND EVOLUTION OF FOREIGN POLICY ANALYSIS

N eo cla ssica l realism a ttem p ts to cross th e d ivid e from the IR side to the FPA side, w h ile b e
h avio u ra l IR is m o vin g in th e o p p o site d irectio n .
N e o c la s s ic a l re a lis m is p rem ised on th e u n d erstan d in g that 'un it-level variab les constrain
o r fa c ilita te th e a b ility o f all typ e s o f statesgreat p o w ers as w e ll as lesser sta te s- to respond
to system ic im p e ra tiv e s (L o b e ll

et al.

2009: 4). W h ile th e p o w er d istrib u tio n w ith in a system

m ay b o u n d g ran d strategy, th e im p le m e n ta tio n o f this strategy through decisio n s by foreign

p o licy ex e cu tive s c o n c e rn in g th re a t assessm ent, risk, and m o b ilizatio n o f d o m estic resources,
in c lu d in g p u b lic su p p o rt, sim p ly c a n n o t be in ferred from th e 'grand' level. H isto rical p rocess
tra cin g is th e p re fe rre d m e th o d o lo g y o f th is school.
B e h a v io r a l IR , o n th e o th e r h an d , takes as its to u ch sto n e th e field o f'b e h a vio u ra l e co n o m
ics', a sso c ia te d w ith th e w o rk o f such sch olars as R ich ard Thaler. W a lk e r and his co-authors
d e fin e th e a p p ro a c h as 'a so cial- p sych o lo g ical analysis o f w o rld p o litics, w h ich em p lys a g en
e ral system s th e o ry [i.e. ro le th e o ry - e d .] to u n ify th e u nd erstan d ing o f actors, actio n s, and
re la tio n s th a t c o n s titu te fo re ig n p o lic y and in tern a tio n al relatio n s' (W a lk e r

et al.

2011: 5). In

o th e r w o rd s, b e h a v io u ra l IR seeks to in teg rate th e external w o rld o f even ts w ith th e in tern a l

w o rld o f b e lie fs b y e x a m in in g strateg ic m oves w ith in dyads. Th e o p era tio n a l cod es o f th e tw o
a cto rs a re d e c ip h e re d b y q u a n tita tive co n te n t analysis o f lead er texts, and th en a th e o ry o f
stra te g ic g a m e m o ves (T O M ) is em p lo yed to d eterm in e (a t an ab stract le ve l) th e next m o ve
th a t e a ch a c to r in th e d ya d w ill tak e and h o w th e ir gam e w ill reso lve o ve r seq u en tial m oves.
T h e u se o f a g a m e - th e o re tic lo g ic in fo rm ed b y unit-level ch aracteristics is an in terestin g
a m a lg am o f a cto r- g e n e ra l an d a cto r-sp e cific th e o riz in g w h ich , like n eo classical realism , a t
te m p ts to b rid g e th e d iv id e b etw ee n FPA and IR . N o tew o rth y, h ow ever, is th e fa ct th a t n e o
cla ssic a l re alism an d b e h a vio u ra l IR - re s e a rc h program m es w ith th e v e ry sam e b rid g in g
g o a la re w o rk in g in su ch d iv e rg e n t m e th o d o lo g ica l tra d itio n s th a t o n e w o n d ers if th e y co u ld
p o ssib ly c o m m u n ic a te w ith o n e an o th er. B u t th a t is a to p ic fo r th e fu tu re.
T h e se a re a ll e x c itin g n e w q u estio n s, issues, and ap p ro ach es to be ex p lorin g. D o u b tless
so m e o f y o u w ill b e in v o lv e d in th is w o rk . It is a w o n d erfu l tim e to b eco m e engaged in F P A - a
tim e o f n e w h o riz o n s.

Key points

Foreign policy analysis takes as its theoretical ground the human decision makers, acting singly and
in groups, who make foreign policy.

Three paradigm atic works laid the foundation of FPA-Richard Snyder and colleagues on decision
making, Jam es Rosenau on comparative foreign policy, and Harold and Margaret Sprout on the
psycho-social milieu of foreign policy decision making.

Several emphases, corresponding to levels of analysis in FPA, began to emerge from this
foundation, including work on small/large groups, events data, political psychology of leaders,
cultural effects on foreign policy, the effects of domestic political contestation on FPDM, and the
influence o f national attributes and systemic characteristics on FPB.

FPA retains its emphases on actor-specific theory, multicausal explanations, interdisciplinanty. and
the explanations of foreign policy processes, as well as foreign policy outcomes

Current FPA scholarship explores linkages between the levels of FPA analysis, and combines that with
a search for new methodologies that are more appropriate for actor-specific theoretical investigation.

VALERIE M. HUDSON

Questions
1. W h at are the key hallmarks o f FPA?
2. W hat is the difference between foreign policy and foreign policy behaviour?
3. W hat are the prim ary levels of analysis examined in FPA?
4. W hat did Richard Snyder and his colleagues contribute to FPA's foundations?
5. W hat did Jam es Rosenau contribute to FPA's foundations?
6. W hat did Harold and M argaret Sprout contribute to FPA's foundations?
7. W hat is events data and how is it used in FPA?
8. W hat is com parative foreign policy (C FP)?
9. W h y did FPA enter a period of self-reflection in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and w hat was the result?
10. W h at kinds of questions are being asked in FPA research today? H ow effective and/or necessary are
'bridging techniques' between IR and FPA?

1 * Further reading
C ap o ra so , J.A ., H e rm a n n , C.F., an d K e g le y, C .W . (1 9 8 7 ), 'T h e C o m p a ra tiv e S tu d y o f Fo reig n Policy:
P e rs p e c tiv e s o n th e F u tu re ',

International Studies Notes, 1 3 :3 2 - 4 6 .

This is an interesting piece, from a historical point o f view, as it attem pts to engage international
political econom y (IP E ) w ith FPA.
G arrison, J. (e d .) (2 0 0 3 ), 'Foreign P o licy A nalysis in 20/20',

International Studies Review, 5:156-163.

This special issue o f ISR features a variety o f FPA scholars discussing the future prospects of FPA as a
field o f study.
G e rn e r, D .J. (1 9 9 2 ), 'F o re ig n P o lic y A n a ly sis: E x h ila ra tin g E c le c tic is m , In trig u in g En ig m as',

International Studies Notes, 1 8 (4 ).

Gerner's piece is an excellent sum m ary o f FPA scholarship up until the end o f the Cold War.
H u d so n , V .M . (2 0 0 7 ),

Foreign Policy Analysis: Classic and Contemporary Theory (N e w

York:

R o w m a n a n d L ittle fie ld ).

This textbook not only covers the history o f FPA, but also seven levels o f analysis, as w ell as a
discussion o f integrative efforts in the field.
N e ack , L , H e y J.A ., a n d H a n e y , P .J. (1 9 9 5 ),

Second Generation (E n g le w o o d

Foreign Policy Analysis: Continuity and Change in Its

C liffs, N J: P re n tic e H a ll).

Thts ed ite d vo lu m e served as a tex tb o o k in m an y FPA classes fro m 1995 to 2005, an d includes chapter
o n n e a rly all levels o f an alysis, as w e ll as su b jects such as e ve n ts d ata.

the Online Resource Centre that accompanies this book for more information:

www.oxfordtextbooks.co.uk/orc/smith_foreign/