Book Review Forum: Scenarios and Science in International Relations/International Political Economy
| Author | Anna Leander |
| DOI | 10.1177/0010836708096884 |
| Published date | 01 December 2008 |
| Date | 01 December 2008 |
Cooperation and Conflict: Journal of the Nordic International Studies Association
Vol.43(4): 447–468. © NISA 2008 www.nisanet.org
SAGE Publications,Los Angeles, London, New Delhi and Singapore
www.sagepublications.com
0010-8367. DOI: 10.1177/0010836708096884
BOOK REVIEW FORUM
Scenarios and Science in International
Relations/International Political Economy
ANNA LEANDER
• Heikki Patomäki, The Political Economy of Global Security:War,Future
Crises and Changes in Global Governance. London and New York:
Routledge, 2008,292 pp. ISBN 978–0-415–41672–6.
Heikki Patomäki has written an impressive book. The scope of ideas and
knowledge used is remarkable. Social theory, contemporary International
Relations (IR) theories/concepts and political economy are not only
‘covered’ but integrated in a consistent argument. Furthermore, Patomäki
shows a detailed and nuanced understanding of the history of the First
World War, contemporary financial markets, interstate politics and global
civil society activities. Patomäki’s book is a real thought-provoker, substan-
tively contributing to a number of core debates in IR/IPE. The discussion
here concentrates on one of these, namely the idea that in IR/IPE we
should strive to model the future; that ‘instead of trying to predict the
future, peace and security studies should be concerned with the conditions
of generating possible futures and modelling them in terms of scenarios and
stories’ (p. 24).The idea of scenario-building is one of the most radical and
innovative ideas in this book. Patomäki has worked with and published
about it over the past 10 years,1but generally thinking about the future,let
alone modelling it, is a marginal activity in IR/IPE. Beyond an under- or
unspecified notion of assumed circumscribed path dependence, most
scholars treat scenario-building and modelling much as they do soothsaying,
crystalbulbs, tarot-cards or tealeaves. Patomäki’s book makes a strong case
against this. So strong that I am almost swayed to think scenario-building
merits to be placed at the centre of IR/IPE. However, in the end I remain
uncertain. This review explains why.
At a general level Patomäki’s argument regarding the desirability of gen-
erating and modelling scenarios is convincing. Patomäki goes beyond the
normative point that prediction would be desirable in security and peace
studies for the obvious reason that — if well carried out — it could limit
war, violence, destruction and injustice. Instead, he insists on the open
nature of history and social processes, and hence the scope for action.This
moves us from prediction to scenarios in the plural, since action can really
To continue reading
Request your trial