The Waltzian ordering principle and international change: A two-dimensional model
| Author | Ryan D. Griffiths |
| Published date | 01 March 2018 |
| Date | 01 March 2018 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/1354066117700478 |
E
JR
I
https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066117700478
European Journal of
International Relations
2018, Vol. 24(1) 130 –152
© The Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1354066117700478
journals.sagepub.com/home/ejt
The Waltzian ordering
principle and international
change: A two-dimensional
model
Ryan D. Griffiths
University of Sydney, Australia
Abstract
In his work on structural realism, Kenneth Waltz developed a theory of international
order that is admired for its parsimony but criticized for its simplicity. Using his
ordering principle as a foundation, I critique and extend his theory by constructing a
model of international order with two dimensions: one of political centralization and
the other of segmentary/functional differentiation. The resulting map locates different
configurations of order and highlights four ideal-types: mechanical anarchy, organic
hierarchy, mechanical hierarchy and organic anarchy. I then use the two-dimensional
map and related ideal-types to outline two different processes of international change
— a classical path and a modern path — that were invisible in the Waltzian model. This
article is thus a contribution to the developing literature on conceptualizing different
forms of international order and the dynamics of international change.
Keywords
Anarchy, heteronomy, hierarchy, international change, international order, Waltz
Introduction
International Relations scholars have had a long-running interest in the tension between
anarchy and hierarchy. Although this interest is quite old, it was given a specific framing
in the theoretical work of Kenneth Waltz and in the subsequent research debating the
merits of the Waltzian model (Baldwin, 1993; Barkdull, 1995; Keohane, 1986; Waltz,
Corresponding author:
Ryan D. Griffiths, Department of Government and International Relations, 332 Merewether (H04),
University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
Email: ryan.griffiths@Sydney.edu.au
700478EJT0010.1177/1354066117700478European Journal of International RelationsGrifths
research-article2017
Article
Griffiths 131
1979). This discourse has been lent further context by theories related to globalization
and economic integration (Elazar, 1998; Held and McGrew, 1999; Snyder, 2013), by
studies of unipolarity and empire (Cooley, 2005; Doyle, 1986; Ikenberry, 2001; Jervis,
2009; MacDonald, 2014; Monteiro, 2014; Nexon and Wright, 2007), and, more recently,
by an interest in historical examples of international order (Acharya, 2014; Buzan and
Little, 2000; Donnelly, 2012b; Kang, 2010; Phillips, 2011; Phillips and Sharman, 2015;
Ringmar, 2012; Spruyt, 1994). The connecting theme in these studies is the view that
international order is complicated, that it can take different forms and that, for many, the
Waltzian model is oversimplified. The challenge in these studies is to construct theoreti-
cal models that retain a measure of Waltz’s parsimony and yet provide a more detailed
understanding of international order and the dynamics of international change.
I contribute to the study of international order by offering a critique and expansion on
Waltz’s (1979) model. Some scholars will see this as an odd starting point and think that
expanding on Waltz is unproductive and that the discourse has moved on. I argue, how-
ever, that the dominant trends in the study of international order remain firmly grounded
in Waltzian terminology (Donnelly, 2015). His tripartite model is not just a reference
point; it provides the theoretical origins and base lexicon for the current research on this
topic. Consider the following two visions of political order that began as critiques of
Waltz. First, the heteronomy literature emphasizes the diversity of political forms in dif-
ferent state systems over time, but it started with John Ruggie’s (1998) criticism of Waltz
(Buzan and Albert, 2010; Donnelly, 2012a, 2012b; Hobson and Sharman, 2005; Phillips
and Sharman, 2015; Spruyt, 1994). Second, the hierarchy literature holds, contra Waltz,
that hierarchical relations have existed in supposedly anarchical space and that these
hierarchies can be decomposed (Barder, 2015; Cooley, 2005; Cooley and Spruyt, 2009;
Donnelly, 2009; Lake, 1999, 2009; Mattern and Zarakol, 2016; Milner, 1993; Ringmar,
2012; Sharman, 2013; Watson, 1992). These overlapping visions of political order have
a common origin: Waltz’s theory of structural realism. Barry Buzan and Matthias Albert
(2010: 316) have highlighted the need for a model that combines the concepts found in
both literatures, arguing that such a model would help us to understand change in the
international system.
I propose a two-dimensional model that builds from that same starting point. To do
so, I return to an early dialogue between Waltz and Ruggie, and to Emile Durkheim, in
whose work Waltz’s model is grounded theoretically (Durkheim, 1984; Keohane,
1986). I begin with one of the core objections in the preceding critiques: Waltz’s impo-
sition of a dichotomous ordering principle obscures the gradualness of political cen-
tralization and functional differentiation in international space. I contend that in his
appropriation of Durkheim’s thought, Waltz posited an equality between anarchy and
mechanical solidarity, and between hierarchy and organic solidarity. That move is
problematic because it stretches Durkheim’s theory without sufficient explanation, and
it forces an equality between two distinctions (anarchy–hierarchy; mechanical–
organic) that are best treated separately.
My critique enables me to construct a two-dimensional model of international order
in which the anarchy–hierarchy and mechanical–organic distinctions can be mapped as
two dimensions that are orthogonal to one another. The resulting map is useful for locat-
ing different configurations of order based on the degree of political centralization and
To continue reading
Request your trial