Structural Power: The limits of neorealist power analysis

DSpace/Manakin Repository

Show simple item record GUZZINI, Stefano 2012-09-11T10:43:21Z 2012-09-11T10:43:21Z 1993
dc.identifier.citation International Organization, 1993, 47, 3, 443-478 en
dc.identifier.issn 1531-5088
dc.identifier.issn 0020-8183
dc.description (The article is an earlier version of Chapters 5 and 6 of the author's EUI PhD Thesis, 1994.) en
dc.description.abstract Realism explains the ruling of the international system through the underlying distribution of power among states. Increasingly, analysts have found this power analysis inadequate, and they have developed new concepts, most prominently structural power. The usage of structural power actually entails three different meanings, namely indirect institutional power, nonintentional power, and impersonal power. Only the first, however, is compatible with the current neorealist choice-theoretical mode of explanation. This is the basic paradox of recent power approaches: by wanting to retain the central role of power, some international relations and international political economy theory is compelled to expand that concept and to move away from the very theory that claims to be based on power. Neorealism does not take power seriously enough. At the same time, these extensions of the concept are themselves partly fallacious. To account simultaneously for the different meanings of structural power and to avoid a conceptual overload, this article proposes that any power analysis should necessarily include a pair or dyad of concepts of power, linking agent power and impersonal governance. Finally, it sketches some consequences of those concepts for international theory. en
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf
dc.language.iso en en
dc.rights info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.title Structural Power: The limits of neorealist power analysis en
dc.type Article en
eui.subscribe.skip true

Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record