How to Identify and Assess a Foreign Policy by Jean-Frdric Morin Jonathan Paquin

How to Identify and Assess a Foreign Policy? by Jean-Frédéric Morin & Jonathan Paquin §

Class: IS401 Created Time: November 9, 2021 3:20 PM Database: Evergreen Database Last Edited Time: December 2, 2021 3:15 PM Provided Materials: How_to_Identify_and_Assess_a_Foreign_Policy_by_Jean-Frdric_MorinJonathan_Paquin.pdf Tags:#Article Type: Literature Notes URL: https://sci-hub.st/10.1007/978-3-319-61003-0_2

Segmentation of Policy Decision-Making Process §

• Segmentation in 6 Phases of decision making process that each correspond to a level of analysis which completes a circuit
  1. Framing: foreign policy issue would stay in limbo if not framed into a problem.
     • By ‘policy entrepreneurs’ making the problem intelligible by naming it, interpreting, and simplifying it.
  2. Agenda-Setting: is the capacity of non-state actors in mobilizing and convincing key people that an emerging issue must be in the list of political priorities,
     • These key people includes (civil servants, political advisors, who have access to leaders)
  3. Options: to call political authorities to look at the different policy options. What expert it involves, ministories, either security, economic, societal issue.
     • This is when experts, including civil servants, advisors, and scientists gradually replace the activists, reporters or lobbyist who initially framed the issue
  4. Decisions: makers are called to give opinion on a limited number of options. The option that is chosen relies on what type of decision-makers were picked in phase 3.
  5. Implementation: public administration is responsible for interpreting, implementing and making adjustments as needed
     • However, administrations doesn’t always have the material capacity to translate the decision into concrete results.
  6. Evaluation: is usually about the success of a policy, but is open to interpretation
     • Because the Cold War can, at the same time, be interpreted as a source of stability and a source of instability by different people.
     • Therefore, the people responsible for framing the problem in the first place will campaign in favor of maintaining, adjusting, or entirely reformulating the policy which starts the process over again.

A Linear, Cyclical or Chaotic Process §

• The decision making process is set in a cyclical pattern is because most FP problems are never permanently settled and will always have outrage, objections, and revivals later on.

  💡 Israel-Palestine conflict

  • Proliferation of WMD

  • Though issues are modified slightly each time through the cycle, new arguments, institutions, and strategy.

• A chaotic model of decision-making process is the Garbage can theory

  • Garbage can theory: decision-making is the result of random assembly of diverse elements divided into 4 different garbage can.
    1. Problem seeking solutions
    2. Solutions seeking problems to solve
    3. Political opportunities seeking a decision
    4. Public decision-makers searching for solutions to problems
  • Different actors reach into each garbage can according to their situation and independently of each other.
    • A leader may appeal to the public for an upcoming election by using a solution to solve a problem.

The Outcome of Foreign Policy §

How is a foreign policy measured to be a success or failure?

Measuring Effectiveness

Feedback Effect

Historical Institutionalism

Level of Analysis of FPD Making

Measuring Effectiveness §

• Problems:
  • Public development & diplomacy has long term-goals that is impossible to evaluate the impact of, whether it’s successful or not
  • Politics of dissuasion: terrorist attacks that are discouraged can’t be count
• Most existing literature on outcome of FP are on sanctions because they are
  • Frequently used enough to get precise statistical analyses
  • Put in place for specific reasons
  • Outside observers can easily see when and where, and how severe the sanction was put in place
• But ****According to studies: sanctions rarely achieve their goals
  • In the sample of 100 sanctions since 1914, their success rates was 35%
  • There were debates over this study though over the choice of case studies, misinterpretation of source of success/failure
  • By the end reviews and assessments said only 5% of sanctions achieved their goals

Feedback Effects §

• Another way to measure FP effectiveness
• Feedback: is the causal relationship of continuous feedback loop between an actor and its environment. the actor puts the FP, that will change the actors environment to affect it in either good or bad way, making the actor reverse, change, or adjust the policy in response to that feedback
• Feedback can be negative or positive
  • Negative feedback can be seen in the USSR & Afghanistan war
    • Where the US supported the mujahidin by imposing grain exports to the Soviet. It ended up unexpectedly affecting the price of the US’s cereal products negatively, resulting in the life of the embargo on the Soviet.
  • However if the feed back is Positive feedback helps explain the gradual strengthening of some foreign policies over time as they stay in place

Historical Institutionalism §

• is a theory that uses concept of feedback to explain FP

• Historical Institutionalism focuses on the phenomenon of path dependency

  • The constraints that past decisions impose on present decisions

  • Actors, when taken a path, is difficult to backtrack over time

  💡 Use of QWERTY keyboard even though it’s not the most optimal layout for speed typing, because changing would require too much effort

  • Similar for states picking sub-optimal paths and is forced to stick with it the longer they don’t change their decision

Explaining Effectiveness §

• Level of analysis

  • To economists: national level is important as it’s where sanctions show their effects (GDP)

    • Autocracies handles sanctions better, while democracies are more vulnerable

  • National context of instigating state and the National context of the target state

    • targeting complementary economies less effective than targeting competing economy

    💡 Ex: China and US had conflict in 1990s, but due to their interconnected economies, the threats of sanctions against each other was never taken seriously by either governments.

  • Perception Level:

    • If instigator and target states had good cooperative relationship before, the target state would trust the sanction will be lifted if demands are met.
    • But if its an antagonistic relationship, the target state would think a concession could be interpreted as weakness leading to more pressure and sanctions in the future.

  • International Level: third party states, a sanctioned country could turn to alternative economic partners which could affect effectiveness of sanctions.

  From the Puzzle to the Theoretical Explanations §

  • Debates on effectiveness of sanctions have turned to debates on identifying factors that explain sanction’s effectiveness
    • Methodological → Theoretical