Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T23:24:02.304Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The ‘second state debate’ in International Relations: theory turned upside-down

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 August 2001

Abstract

This article argues that conventional understanding of how IR theory conceptualizes the state is in need of revision. By relocating IR theories of the state within the ‘second state’ debate, we find that neorealism underestimates the power of the state in world politics, while neoliberal institutionalism exaggerates its power. Moreover, liberalism, constructivism, Marxism, postmodernism, and ‘second-wave’ Weberian historical sociology, all endow the state with greater degrees of agential power in the international realm than does neorealism. The significance of the second state debate will be not merely to reconfigure our understanding of how IR theory conceptualizes the state, but to turn conventional understanding of IR theory upside-down.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2001 British International Studies Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)