Advertisement

International patron-client relationships: A conceptual framework

  • Christopher P. Carney
Development Research

Abstract

Dependency theory has cast new light on the workings of the international political economy, and on the relations between more and less developed countries. Insofar as dependency theory aims at specifying generalsystemic constraints on the behavior of Third World states, its ability to explain/predict how particular Third World states respond to these constraints is limited.

Our concern is with the foreign policy responses of the LDCs. The comparative foreign policy approach to this question has attempted to account for cross-national variation in foreign policy responses of LDCs with variation in theirdomestic features, i.e., attributes, capabilities, and regime types. Here we suggest that an understanding of the foreign policies of the LDCs can be enhanced by adding an explicitly dyadic perspective to dependency and comparative foreign policy approaches, conceptualized as a form of patron-cliency.

Keywords

Foreign Policy Comparative International Development Dependency Theory American Political Science Review Compliant Behavior 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. AMIN, S. 1976Unequal Development: An Essay on the Social Formation of Peripheral Capitalism. New York: Monthly Review Press.Google Scholar
  2. ARMSTRONG, ADRIENNE 1981 The Political Consequences of Economic Dependence.Journal of Conflict Resolution 25: 401–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. BANERJEE, SANJOY 1987 Explaining the American ‘Tilt’ in the 1971 Bangladesh Crisis: A Late Dependency Approach.International Studies Quarterly 37: 201–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. BROWN, S., PRICE, D., and RAICHUR, S. 1976 Public Good Theory and Bargaining Between Large and Small Countries.International Studies Quarterly 20: 393–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. CARDOSSO, F.H. and FALETTO, E. 1979Dependency and Development in Latin America. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  6. DOLAN, M. and TOMLIN, B. 1984 Foreign Policy in Assymetrical Dyads: Theoretical Reformulation and Empirical Analysis, Canada-United States Relations, 1963–1972.International Studies Quarterly 28: 349–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. DUNCAN, G. and SILVERSON, R.M. 1982 Flexibility of Alliance Partner Choice in a Multipolar System.International Studies Quarterly 26: 511–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. DUVERGER, MAURICE 1954Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in the Modern State. Translated by North and North: New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  9. EISENSTADT, S. and RONIGER, L. 1984Patrons, Clients, and Friends. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. FEINBERG, RICHARD 1983The Intemperate Zone; The Third World Challenge to U.S. Foreign Policy. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  11. FOSTER, GEORGE M. 1967 The Dyadic Contract: A Model for Social Structure of a Mexican Village. InPeasant Society: A Reader, pp. 213–230. Edited by J. Potter, M. Diaz, and G. Foster. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  12. FROLICH, N. and OPPENHEIMER, J. 1970 I Get By With a Little Help From My Friends.World Politics 23: 104–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. JENTLESON, BRUCE W. 1987 American Commitments in the Third World: Theory vs. Practice.International Organization 41: 667–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. JOHNSON, ROBERT H. 1985 Exaggerating America’s Mistakes in Third World Conflicts.International Security 10: 32–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. KEY, V.O. JR. 1952Politics, Parties, and Pressure Groups. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell.Google Scholar
  16. — 1956American State Politics: An Introduction. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
  17. KNORR, KLAUS 1975The Power of Nations. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  18. LANDE, CARL C. 1973 Networks and Groups in Southeast Asia: Some Observations on the Group Theory of Politics.American Political Science Review 67: 103–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. — 1983 Political Clientelism in Political Studies, Retrospect and Prospects.International Political Science Review 4: 435–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. LASWELL, HAROLD D. 1951 Factions.Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. 6th ed.: 51.Google Scholar
  21. LEMARCHAND, R. and LEGG, K. 1972 Political Clientelism and Development, A Preliminary Analysis.Comparative Politics 4: 149–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. LISKA, GEORGE 1978Career of Empire: America and Imperial Expansion Over Land and Sea. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  23. MAIR, LUCY 1961 Clientship in East Africa.Cahiers d’Etudes Africaines 2: 315–326.Google Scholar
  24. MOON, BRUCE 1983 The Foreign Policy of the Dependent State.International Studies Quarterly 27: 315–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. NEUBAUER, D. and KASTNER, L. 1969 The Study of Compliance Maintenance as a Strategy for Comparative Research.World Politics 21: 629–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. RAPKIN, D. and AVERY, W. 1986 World Markets and Political Instability Within Less Developed Countries.Cooperation and Conflict 21: 99–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. RICHARDSON, N. 1976 Political Compliance and U.S. Trade Dominance.American Political Science Review 70: 1098–1109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. RICHARDSON, N. and KEGLEY, C. 1980 Trade Dependence and Foreign Policy Compliance, A Longitudinal Analysis.International Studies Quarterly 24: 191–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. SCOTT, JAMES C. 1972 Patron-Client Politics and Political Change in Southeast Asia.American Political Science Review 66: 91–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. SHOEMAKER, C. and SPANIER, J. 1984Patron-Client State Relationships. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  31. SINGER, MARSHALL R. 1972Weak States in a World of Powers: The Dynamics of International Relationships. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  32. SMALL, M. and SINGER, J. 1973 The Diplomatic Importance of States, 1816–1970.World Politics 25: 577–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. SNYDER, GLENN H. 1984 The Security Dilemma in Alliance Politics.World Politics 36: 461–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. SPIEGEL, STEVEN L. 1972Dominance and Diversity. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  35. TUCKER, ROBERT W. 1968Nation or Empire?: The Debate Over American Foreign Policy. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  36. WATERBURY, JOHN 1977 An Attempt to Put Patrons and Clients in Their Place. In Gellner and Waterbury, eds.,Patrons and Clients, 329–341. London, Gerald Duckworth and Co. Ltd.Google Scholar
  37. WOLF, ERIC 1966 Kinship, Friendship, and Patron-Client Relations. In M. Banton, ed.,The Social Anthropology of Complex Societies, 3–27. New York: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  38. ZARISKI, RAPHAEL 1960 Party Factions and Comparative Politics: Some Preliminary Observations.Midwest Journal of Political Science 4: 27–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher P. Carney
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of Nebraska-LincolnLincoln

Personalised recommendations