Advertisement

Introduction: Mistakes and Failures in International Relations

  • Andreas Kruck
  • Kai Oppermann
  • Alexander Spencer
Chapter

Abstract

This introduction firstly considers the concepts of ‘mistakes’ and ‘failures’ and reflects on ontological and epistemological perspectives on how to study mistakes and failures. We secondly turn to the question of what causes mistakes and failures and introduce a range of theories for explaining and understanding mistakes and failures. Part three examines the notion of responsibility attribution and considers why and how actors get blamed for mistakes and failures. In these three parts, we both summarize the state of the art and point out how the chapters in this volume add new insights and perspectives. Part four offers an overview of the chapters which are to follow and part five elaborates on the lessons learnt from these insights on mistakes and failures in international relations.

References

  1. Allison, Graham T. 1971. Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
  2. Allison, Graham T., and Philip Zelikow. 1999. Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. 2nd ed. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, Christopher J. 2000. Economic Voting and Political Context: A Comparative Perspective. Electoral Studies 19: 151–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aronczyk, Melissa. 2008. “Living the Brand”. Nationality, Globality and the Identity Strategies of Nation Branding Consultants. International Journal of Communication 2: 41–65.Google Scholar
  5. Badie, Dina. 2010. Groupthink, Iraq, and the War on Terror: Explaining US Policy Shift Toward Iraq. Foreign Policy Analysis 6 (4): 277–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boin, Arjen, Paul ‘t Hart, and Allan McConnell. 2009. Crisis Exploitation: Political and Policy Impacts of Framing Contests. Journal of European Public Policy 16 (1): 81–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bovens, Mark, and Paul ‘t Hart. 1996. Understanding Policy Fiascoes. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  8. ———. 2016. Revisiting the Study of Policy Failures. Journal of European Public Policy 23 (5): 653–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bovens, Mark, Paul ‘t Hart, and B. Guy Peters. 1998. Explaining Policy Disasters in Europe. Comparisons and Reflections. In Public Policy Disasters in Western Europe, ed. Pat Gray and Paul ‘t Hart, 195–214. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. ———. 2001. The State of Public Governance. In Success and Failure in Public Governance, ed. Mark Bovens, Paul ‘t Hart, and B. Guy Peters, 3–11. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brändström, Annika, and Sanneke Kuipers. 2003. From ‘Normal Incidents’ to Political Crises: Understanding the Selective Politicization of Policy Failures. Government and Opposition 38 (3): 279–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cyert, Richard M., and James G. March. 1963. A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  13. Dunleavy, Patrick. 1995. Policy Disasters: Explaining the UK’s Record. Public Policy and Administration 10 (2): 52–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Elman, Colin. 1996. Horses for Courses: Why Not Neorealist Theories of Foreign Policy? Security Studies 6 (1): 7–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gailey, Jeannine A. 2013. Attribution of Responsibility for Organizational Wrongdoing: A Partial Test of an Integrated Model. Journal of Criminology 4: 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gailey, Jeannine A., and Matthew T. Lee. 2005. An Integrated Model of Attribution of Responsibility for Wrongdoing in Organizations. Social Psychology Quarterly 68 (4): 338–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gallie, Walter B. 1955. Essentially Contested Concepts. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 56: 167–198.Google Scholar
  18. Gawronsky, Bertram. 2007. Fundamental Attribution Error. In Encyclopedia of Social Psychology, ed. Roy F. Baumeister and Kathleen D. Vohs, 368–369. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  19. Gerhards, Jürgen, Jochen Roose, and Anke Offerhaus. 2013. Die Rekonfiguration von politischer Verantwortungszuschreibung im Rahmen staatlichen Wandels. In Die Politisierung der Weltpolitik: Umkämpfte internationale Institutionen, ed. Michael Zürn and Matthias Ecker-Ehrhardt, 109–133. Berlin: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  20. Gray, Pat. 1996. Disastrous Explanations – Or Explanations of Disaster? A Reply to Patrick Dunleavy. Public Policy and Administration 11 (1): 74–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. ———. 1998. Policy Disasters in Europe. An Introduction. In Public Policy Disasters in Western Europe, ed. Pat Gray and Paul ‘t Hart, 3–20. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Hamilton, V. Lee. 1986. Chains of Command. Responsibility Attribution in Hierarchies. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 16 (2): 118–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Harnisch, Sebastian. 2012. Conceptualizing in the Minefield: Role Theory and Foreign Policy Learning. Foreign Policy Analysis 8 (1): 47–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Herrmann, Richard K., and Michael P. Fischerkeller. 1995. Beyond the Enemy Image and Spiral Model: Cognitive-Strategic Research After the Cold War. International Organization 49 (3): 415–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hill, Christopher. 2003. The Changing Politics of Foreign Policy. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  26. Hobolt, Sarah B., and James Tilley. 2014. Blaming Europe? Responsibility Without Accountability in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hobolt, Sarah B., James Tilley, and Susan Banducci. 2013. Clarity of Responsibility: How Government Cohesion Conditions Performance Voting. European Journal of Political Research 52 (2): 164–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hood, Christopher. 2002. The Risk Game and the Blame Game. Government and Opposition 37 (1): 15–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. ———. 2011. The Blame Game: Spin, Bureaucracy, and Self-Preservation in Government. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Howlett, Michael. 2012. The Lessons of Failure: Learning and Blame Avoidance in Public Policy-Making. International Political Science Review 33 (5): 539–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hülsse, Rainer. 2009. The Catwalk Power: Germany’s New Foreign Image Policy. Journal of International Relations and Development 12 (3): 293–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Iida, Keisuke. 1996. Involuntary Defection in Two-Level Games. Public Choice 89 (3/4): 283–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ingram, Helen M., and Dean E. Mann. 1980. Policy Failure: An Issue Deserving Analysis. In Why Policies Succeed or Fail, ed. Helen M. Ingram and Dean E. Mann, 11–33. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  34. Janis, Irving. 1982. Groupthink. Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. 2nd ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  35. ———. 1989. Crucial Decisions. Leadership in Policymaking and Crisis Management. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  36. Jervis, Robert. 1968. Hypotheses on Misperception. World Politics 20 (3): 454–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. ———. 1976. Perception and Misperception in International Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  38. ———. 1986. Cognition and Political Behavior. In Political Cognition, ed. Richard R. Lau and David O. Sears, 319–336. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  39. ———. 1988. War and Misperception. Journal of Interdisciplinary History 18 (4): 675–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. ———. 1994. Leadership, Post-Cold War Politics, and Psychology. Political Psychology 15 (4): 769–777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky. 1979. Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk. Econometrica 47 (2): 263–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Khong, Yuen Foong. 1992. Analogies at War. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  43. King, Anthony, and Ivor Crewe. 2013. The Blunders of Our Governments. London: Oneworld.Google Scholar
  44. Krebs, Ronald R. 2015a. Narrative and the Making of US National Security. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. ———. 2015b. How Dominant Narratives Rise and Fall: Military Conflict, Politics, and the Cold War Consensus. International Organization 69 (4): 809–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kruck, Andreas. 2016. Resilient Blunderers: Credit Rating Fiascos and Rating Agencies’ Institutionalized Status as Private Authorities. Journal of European Public Policy 23 (5): 753–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Levy, Jack S. 1986. Organizational Routines and the Causes of War. International Studies Quarterly 30 (2): 193–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. ———. 1994. Learning and Foreign Policy. Sweeping a Conceptual Minefield. International Organization 48 (2): 279–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Malhotra, Neil, and Alexander G. Kuo. 2008. Attributing Blame: The Public’s Response to Hurricane Katrina. The Journal of Politics 70 (1): 120–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Marsh, David, and Allan McConnell. 2010. Towards a Framework for Establishing Policy Success. Public Administration 88 (2): 564–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Marsh, Michael, and James Tilley. 2010. The Attribution of Credit and Blame to Governments and Its Impact on Vote Choice. British Journal of Political Science 40 (1): 115–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. May, Peter J. 1992. Policy Learning and Failure. Journal of Public Policy 12 (4): 331–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. McConnell, Allan. 2010. Policy Success, Policy Failure and Grey Areas In-Between. Journal of Public Policy 30 (3): 345–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. ———. 2016. A Public Policy Approach to Understanding the Nature and Causes of Foreign Policy Failure. Journal European Public Policy 23 (5): 667–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. McDermott, Rose. 2017. Emotions in Foreign Policy Decision Making. Oxford Research Encyclopedias. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.418.
  56. Mearsheimer, John J. 2007. Structural Realism. In International Relations Theories. Discipline and Diversity, ed. Tim Dunne, Milja Kurki, and Steve Smith, 71–88. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Oppermann, Kai, and Alexander Spencer. 2013. Thinking Alike? Salience and Metaphor analysis as Cognitive Approaches to Foreign Policy Analysis. Foreign Policy Analysis 9 (1): 39–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. ———. 2016. Telling Stories of Failure: Narrative Constructions of Foreign Policy Fiascos. Journal of European Public Policy 23 (5): 685–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Powell, G. Bingham, Jr., and Guy D. Whitten. 1993. A Cross-National Analysis of Economic Voting: Taking Account of the Political Context. American Journal of Political Science 37 (2): 391–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Putnam, Robert D. 1988. Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games. International Organization 43 (3): 427–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rittberger, Berthold, Helena Schwarzenbeck, and Bernhard Zangl. 2017. Where Does the Buck Stop? Explaining Public Responsibility Attributions in Complex International Institutions. Journal of Common Market Studies 55 (4): 909–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Rudolph, Thomas J. 2003. Institutional Context and the Assignment of Political Responsibility. Journal of Politics 65 (1): 190–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sagan, Scott D. 1985. Nuclear Alerts and Crisis Management. International Security 9 (4): 99–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Simon, Herbert A. 1957. Models of Man: Mathematical Essays on Rational Human Behavior in a Social Setting. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  65. Smith, Steve. 1984. Policy Preferences and Bureaucratic Position: The Case of the American Hostage Rescue Mission. International Affairs 61 (1): 9–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. ———. 1985. Groupthink and the Hostage Rescue Mission. British Journal of Political Science 15 (1): 117–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Smith, Martin A. 2008. US Bureaucratic Politics and the Decision to Invade Iraq. Contemporary Politics 14 (1): 91–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Steinbruner, John D. 1974. The Cybernetic Theory of Decision. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  69. ‘t Hart, Paul. 1993. Symbols, Rituals and Power: The Lost Dimensions of Crisis Management. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management 1 (1): 36–50.Google Scholar
  70. Tilley, James, and Sara B. Hobolt. 2011. Is the Government to Blame? An Experimental Test of How Partisanship Shapes Perceptions of Performance and Responsibility. The Journal of Politics 73 (2): 316–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Tsebelis, George. 2002. Veto Players. How Political Institutions Work. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Tuchman, Barbara W. 1984. The March of Folly. From Troy to Vietnam. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
  73. Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman. 1982. Judgment Under Uncertainty. Heuristics and Biases. In Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases, ed. Daniel Kahneman, Paul Slovic, and Amos Tversky, 3–20. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Van Ham, Peter. 2002. Branding Territory: Inside the Wonderful Worlds of PR and IR Theory. Millennium 31 (2): 249–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Weaver, R. Kent. 1986. The Politics of Blame Avoidance. Journal of Public Policy 6 (4): 371–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Wohlstetter, Roberta. 1962. Pearl Harbor: Warning and Decision. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  77. Yetiv, Steve A. 2003. Groupthink and the Gulf Crisis. British Journal of Political Science 33 (3): 419–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Ziv, Guy. 2013. Simple vs. Complex Learning Revisited: Israeli Prime Ministers and the Question of a Palestinian State. Foreign Policy Analysis 9 (2): 203–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andreas Kruck
    • 1
  • Kai Oppermann
    • 2
  • Alexander Spencer
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Social Sciences and HistoryOtto-von-Guericke University MagdeburgMagdeburgGermany
  2. 2.Department of PoliticsUniversity of SussexBrightonUK

Personalised recommendations