5.1: Constructivism

Constructivism is a modern theory in International Relations (IR) that contrasts with traditional approaches like realism and liberalism. It emerged as a significant alternative to explain global events, especially after the Cold War, an event that challenged realist and liberalist assumptions. Constructivism focuses on the social aspects of international relations, emphasizing that the world is shaped by ideas, identities, norms, and the relationships between states. It argues that material power and self-interest alone cannot explain state behavior—what truly matters are the shared meanings and values that arise from interaction between actors.

Social Construction of Reality

One of the fundamental principles of constructivism is that reality in international relations is socially constructed. This means that the international system is not an objective, material reality but is built through the interactions, beliefs, and perceptions of the states within it. According to Alexander Wendt, a leading figure in constructivist thought, the idea that "anarchy is what states make of it" reflects how states interpret their environment based on social contexts​. In this view, material factors like military power or geography gain significance only through the meanings that states assign to them.

For instance, the United States views 500 British nuclear weapons as less threatening than five North Korean nuclear weapons, not because of the physical danger posed but because of the social relationships between the countries​. Constructivism thus sees the identities and roles of states as critical to understanding their actions.

Identities and Interests

Constructivists argue that state identities and interests are not fixed or inherent but are shaped through interactions with other states. These identities are crucial because they influence how a state perceives its role in international politics and, therefore, its interests. For example, a small state like Bhutan might prioritize survival due to its perceived identity as a vulnerable actor, whereas a great power like the United States may focus on maintaining global influence​.

State behavior is guided by the alignment between its identity and its actions. A state cannot act in ways that contradict its identity, as this would challenge the legitimacy of that identity. This idea helps explain why post-World War II Germany, despite its economic power, embraced a pacifist identity and refrained from re-establishing itself as a military power​. Constructivists assert that identities are dynamic and subject to change based on evolving social interactions.

The Role of Norms

Norms are central to constructivism. They are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors with specific identities. Norms guide and shape state actions by creating expectations for how states should behave. For example, the prohibition of slavery or the use of nuclear weapons are norms that have developed through international consensus​.

Constructivism also introduces the concept of the "norm life cycle." A norm first emerges, gains acceptance, and eventually becomes internalized by the majority of actors, becoming an expected part of state behavior. The development of climate change mitigation policies, for example, reflects how norms can evolve over time, from initial advocacy by a few states to widespread acceptance across the international community​. This dynamic nature of norms highlights the potential for change in the international system.

Agency and Structure

Constructivism departs from traditional theories by emphasizing the mutual constitution of agency and structure. Agency refers to the capacity of actors (states or individuals) to make decisions, while structure encompasses the rules, norms, and institutions that shape international relations. Constructivists argue that structure is not static; it evolves through the actions and decisions of states​.

For example, while realists view anarchy as a fixed characteristic of the international system, constructivists argue that anarchy can be understood in different ways depending on how states interact and interpret it. States can reinforce existing structures or change them through their actions, depending on their beliefs and ideas​.