What explains foreign policy choice? States with similar structural positions in the international system, and facing similar constraints, often implement strikingly different foreign policies. It would appear that such similar states have different conceptions of their national goals and interests, and that these differences, in turn, shape policy choices. In this chapter, I discuss the nature and origin of ideas about the purpose(s) of different policies. Specifically, I argue that the relative strength of different frames – ways of thinking about a particular issue – has a major impact on policy outcomes.

I develop the theoretical model in three stages. The first part of the chapter briefly reviews the role of preferences and ideas in the international relations literature. Much of the conventional literature has tended to emphasize structures and constraints, while paying insufficient attention to the preferences of actors, and to the origins of those preferences. Next, I develop a model of frames and their implications for the definition of interests and policy goals, and argue that the constraints and structures emphasized in realist and liberal models can be understood as restrictions on the salience of different frames. The third part of the chapter applies the model to foreign aid policy. It derives predictions regarding the origins of frames for aid and their evolution over time, and discusses how the theoretical model allows us to overcome the problems of overdetermination and inconsistent findings that have plagued the literature. Finally, I generate some general hypotheses connecting different frames to predictions about the quality, volume and distribution of official development assistance.