Decision Processes and Co-Operation in Foreign Policy
| DOI | 10.1177/002070209204700208 |
| Published date | 01 June 1992 |
| Date | 01 June 1992 |
| Author | Timothy J. McKeown |
| Subject Matter | Article |
TIMOTHYJ.
MCKEOWN
Decision
processes
and
co-operation
in
foreign
policy
Foreign
policy
can be
characterized
as
a
goal
directed
activity only
if govern-
ments
have
a
capability
for such
activity.
Whether
governments
have
this
capability
can
only
be
determined
by
a
theory
of
the
foreign
policy process.
Thus
the
study
of
foreign
policy
must
be
based
on
a
theory
of
the
policy
making
process.I
Descriptive
accuracy
at
the
micro-level
and
theoretical
power
at
the
macro-
level
go
together.'
[T]o
fully
flesh
out
a
rational
choice
model,
a
theory
of
preference
formation
is
required.3
The
case-studies
in
this
volume
have
tried
to
understand
foreign
policy
decisions
to
co-operate
with
other
governments
by
explor-
ing
how
decision-makers
frame
specific
problems.
We
have
examined
how
decision-makers
gather
information
about
the
sit-
uations
they
face,
how
they
evaluate what
they
have
learned,
and
how
these
evaluations affect
their
policy choices.
The
five
cases
provide descriptively
accurate
accounts
of policy-making pro-
cesses
across
a
range
of
international
economic
and
security
issues.
In
the
analysis
of
these
cases,
we
focused
on
a
specific
set
Associate Professor
of
Political
Science,
University
of
North
Carolina, Chapel
Hill,
North
Carolina;
co-author
of
Organizing
Business:
Trade Associations
with
America
and
Japan.
i
Paul
Anderson,
'Foreign policy
as
a
goal-directed
activity,'
Philosophy
of
the
Social
Sciences
14(June
1984),
159-81,
172.
2
Christopher
Achen,
'A
state
with
bureaucratic
politics
is
representable
as
a
unitary rational
actor,'
paper
presented
at
the
annual
meeting
of
the American
Political
Science
Association,
1988.
3
Frank
C.
Zagare,
'Rationality and deterrence,'
World
Politics
42(January
199o),
238-6o,
247.
International
Journal
xLvIl spring
1992
DECISION
PROCESSES
AND
CO-OPERATION
403
of questions
about
the
decision
process.
The
results
of
these
anal-
yses
provide
a
basis
for
a
qualitative
comparative
assessment
of
the ability
of
the
principal
theories of decision-making
to
explain
both
the
processes
leaders
used
and
the
choices
they
made.
This
chapter
attempts
to
assess
the
theoretical and
policy
implications
of
these
case-studies
for
a
broader
theory
of political
choice.
CONTRASTING
FRAMEWORKS
FOR
THE
ANALYSIS
OF
FOREIGN
POLICY
DECISIONS
Not
everyone
agrees
that
theories
of
decision-making apply
to
processes
of
decision
rather
than
simply
to
the
choices
that
are
made.
Some
analysts
argue
that
currently
dominant
models
of
rational
choice,
based
on
a
concept
of
'instrumental'
rather
than
'procedural' rationality,
make
claims
only
about
the
consistency
of
choices
with one
another
and
with
the
underlying
preferences
of
decision-makers;
they
make
no
claim
to
explain
decision
pro-
cesses.
4
Such
an
approach
has
been
common
among
advocates
of
rational
choice
models
at
least
since
the
time
of
Milton Fried-
man's
well-known
essay
on
positive
economics.5 We
do
not adopt
this
approach.
The
general
difficulties
created
by
'as
if
theorizing
have
been
extensively
discussed.
6
Beyond
these difficulties,
the
assumption
of
instrumental
rationality
unnecessarily
precludes
the
use
of
a
powerful
theory
of
decision-making
that,
for
all
of
its
well-known
weaknesses
as
a
theory
of
decision
processes,
nonetheless does
make distinctive
and
testable
claims
about
behaviour.
Obviously
human
beings
are
capable
of
thinking
about
political
choices
as
quasi-micro-economic problems
-
if
they could
not,
a
volumi-
nous
and
growing academic
literature
would
be
hard
to
justify.
Moreover,
decision-m
akers
do
sometimes
appear
to
behave
in accor-
4
Ibid,
238-60.
5
Milton
Friedman,
Essays
in
Positive
Economics
(Chicago
IL:
University
of
Chicago
Press
1953).
6
Timothy
J.
McKeown,
'The
limitations
of
"structural"
theories of commercial
policy,'
International
Organization
4o(winter
1986),
43-64.
To continue reading
Request your trial