Social constructivist interpretation of «agency-structure» dilemma in the science of international relations
AbstractSocial constructivist explanation of the «agency-structure» correlation in the theory of international relations has been presented in the article. The «agency-structure» dilemma appeared in the focus of social constructivist researches at the end of the XX century, that researches have gained dominant positions among the theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of international relations. But despite this, the social constructivist interpretation of the «agency-structure» dilemma hasn’t got enough attention by Ukrainian scientists. The actuality of the paper is determined, firstly, by the necessity to describe the social constructivist conceptualization of the «agency-structure» dichotomy, secondly, to answer the key question of discussion about the nature of agency and structure, and thirdly, to determine the impact of social and inter-subjective factors on the interrelation of structural and subjective levels of the international system.The main aim of the research is to analyze the social constructivist interpretation of the «agency-structure» dilemma. Basic forms and characteristics of social constructivist research of «agency-structure» dilemma have been represented in the article. Essence of structures and actors’ subjectivity has been revealed. Moreover, separate fragments of social constructivism explanation have been given on the basis of its main peculiarities’ characterization.The influence of social and inter-subjective factors on the formation of structure and agents’ interdependence in the international environment has been considered in the article. The correlation of inherent and collective identities of agents and its significance for the «agency-structure» reciprocity has also been presented. Forms, features and consequences of agents’ socialization within international structures has been characterized.The significance of social constructivism in modern researches of «agency-structure» correlation has been substantiated in research by summarizing a considerable number of factual materials and use of general scientific methods, such as logical and systematic methods, analysis and synthesis.The scientific novelty of the article has been pointed out by accents, which allow making a comprehensive analysis and describing an alternative approach to the study of structural and subjective levels of the international system.
Gnatjuk, N., 2015. Mezhdunarodnaja politicheskaja sub’ektnost’ ES s v kontekste dihotomii agenta i struktury [International political subjectness of the EU in the context of the agent and structure dichotomy]. Vestn. Volgogr. gos. un-ta 1, 82–91 (in Russian).
Makarychev, A., 2010. Regionalizm glazami konstruktivizma: agenty, struktury, identichnosti [Regionalism through the eyes of constructivism: agents, structures, identities]. Neprikosnovennyj zapas. Retrieved from http://magazines.russ.ru/nz/2010/3/ma14-pr.html (in Russian).
Romanyuk, N., Senyuk, Y., 2015. Osoblyvosti sotsialkonstruktyvists’koho pidkhodu u doslidzhenni mizhnarodnykh vidnosyn [The features of social constructivist approach to the study of international relations]. Visnyk L’vivs’koho universytetu. Seriya mizhnarodni vidnosyny 37 (3), 108–114 (in Ukrainian).
Harkevich, M., 2008. Problematizacija gosudarstva kak aktora mirovoj politiki [Problematization of the state as an actor of the world politics]. Kosmopolis, 18–25 (in Russian).
Tsyfra, Y., 2014. Rol’ kul’turnoyi skladovoyi zovnishn’opolitychnoyi identychnosti derzhavy v protsesi formuvannya modernoyi systemy mizhnarodnykh vidnosyn [The role of cultural component of foreign policy identity of the state in the formation of the modern system of international relations]. Filosofiya i politolohiya v konteksti suchasnoyi kul’tury (8), 270–273 (in Ukrainian).
Tsyfra, Y., 2013. Smyslove pole zovnishn’opolitychnoyi identychnosti: kontsept fenomenu ta yoho sutnisnyy vymir [Semantic field of foreign policy identity: the concept of the phenomenon and its essential dimension]. Naukovyy visnyk Skhidnoyevropeys’koho natsional’noho universytetu imeni Lesi Ukrayinky. Retrieved from http://fmv-visnyk.pp.ua/wp-content/uploads/2016/2013-9/9.pdf (in Ukrainian).
Tsyfra, Y., 2013. Formuvannya zovnishn’opolitychnoyi identychnosti aktoriv mizhnarodnykh vidnosyn: konstruktyvist·s’kyy analiz [Formation of foreign policy identity of the actors of international relations: constructivist analysis]. Politychnyy menedzhment 1-2, Retrieved from http://www.ipiend.gov.ua/uploads/pm/p (in Ukrainian).
Shapovalova, O., 2015. Sotsial’ni struktury v mizhnarodnykh vidnosynakh: konstruktyvist·s’ka kontseptualizatsiya [Social structures in international relations: constructivist conceptualization]. Naukovyy visnyk Dyplomatychnoyi akademiyi Ukrayiny 22 (2), 144–155 (in Ukrainian).
Shapovalova, O., 2014. Transformatsiya zovnishn’oyi polityky derzhav u svitli sotsial’noho konstruktyvizmu [The transformation of foreign policy of the states in the light of social constructivism]. Visnyk NTUU «KPI». Politolohiya. Sotsiolohiya. Pravo (2), 149–155 (in Ukrainian).
Bjorkdahl, A., 2002. Norms in International Relations: Some Conceptual and Methodological Reections. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 9–23 (in English).
Griffiths, M., Roach, S. C., Solomon, M. S., 2009. Fifty key thinkers in international relations, London, New York: Routledge (in English).
Hurd, I., 2008. Constructivism. The Oxford Handbook of International Relations. Retrieved from http://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/~ihu355/Home_files/17-Smit-Snidal-c17.pdf(in English).
Joseph, J., 2007. Philosophy in International Relations: A Scientiic Realist Approach. Millennium: Journal of International Studies 35, 345–359 (in English).
O’Neill, K., Balsiger, J., VanDeveer, S., 2004. Actors, norms, and impact: Recent International Cooperation Theory and the Influence of the Agent-Structure Debate. The Annual Review of Political Science 7, 149–175 (in English).
Price, R., Reus-Smit, C., 1998. Dangerous Liaisons? Constructivism and Critical International Theory. European Journal of International Relations 4 (3), 259–294 (in English).
Wendt, A., 2003. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge University Press (in English).
Wendt, A., 1987. The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory. International Organization 41 (3), 335–370 (in English).
Wiener, A., Diez., T., 2009. European Integration Theory. Oxford university press (in English).
Zürn, M., Checkel, J., 2005. Getting Socialized to Build Bridges: Constructivism and Rationalism, Europe and the Nation-State. International Organization 59(4), 1045 – 1079 (in English).
O’Neill K. Actors, norms, and impact: Recent International Cooperation Theory and the Influence of the Agent-Structure Debate / K. O’Neill, J. Balsiger, S. VanDeveer. // The Annual Review of Political Science. – 2004. – № 7. – Р. 149–175.
Price R., Dangerous Liaisons? Constructivism and Critical International Theory / R. Price, C. Reus-Smit. // European Journal of International Relations. – 1998. – Vol. 4, № 3. – P. 259–294.
Wendt A. Social Theory of International Politics / A. Wendt. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. – 429 p.
Wendt A. The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory / Alexander E. Wendt // International Organization. – 1987. – Vol. 41, № 3. – Р. 335–370.
Wiener A. European Integration Theory / A. Wiener, T. Diez. – Oxford: Oxford university press, 2009. – 295 р.
Zürn M. Getting Socialized to Build Bridges: Constructivism and Rationalism, Europe and the Nation-State / M. Zürn, J. Checkel. // International Organization. – 2005. – Vol. 59, № 4. – Р. 1045 – 1079.