Advertisement

The Essence of Foreign Policy Analysis (I): Modeling the Foreign Policy-Making and Implementing Processes

  • Gunnar FermannEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

A defining characteristic of Foreign Policy Analysis (FPA) is the preoccupation with the study of policy-making and implementing processes. The FPA approach shed light on how (i) the global and domestic environments of the foreign policy-making state, (ii) the institutionalization of foreign policy-making processes, and (iii) attributes of individual decision-makers influence (iv) perceptions as to what is the scope for political maneuvring, (v) choice of foreign policy preferences and goals, (vi) choice of strategy and calibration of policy instruments (caveats included), (vii) material implementation of policies, and (viii) particular speech acts executed to justify foreign policies toward constituencies and target groups capable of influencing decisions and the political costs of policy implementation. On each step of the policy-making and implementing processes, it is discussed how insights from FPA may contribute to the study of the politics of caveats.

Keywords

Foreign policy analysis Foreign policy-making process Scope for political maneuvering Decision-making agency Foreign policy goals Foreign policy instruments Causal chain Strategic leadership Willingness to accept risk Justification of foreign policies 

References

  1. Aaberg, M. (2016). Kampflykjøp mellom barken og veden. En utenrikspolitisk analyse av beslutningen om å velge F-35 som Norges neste kampflyplattform. Master Thesis in Political Science, Trondheim, Department of Sociology and Political Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU). https://brage.bibsys.no/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/2419669/Aaberg%2C%20Magnar.pdf?sequence=1.
  2. Arntzen, T. (2010). Etterretning og staten. Forholdet mellom produsent og bruker. In G. L. Dyndal (Ed.), Strategisk ledelse i krise og krig (pp. 131–140). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.Google Scholar
  3. Auerswald, D. P., & Saideman, S. M. (2014). NATO in Afghanistan: Fighting Together, Fighting Alone. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Carlsnaes, W. (2002). Foreign Policy. In W. Carlsnaes, T. Risse, & B. A. Simmons (Eds.), Handbook of International Relations (pp. 331–349). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carlsnaes, W. (2004). Comparative Foreign Policy Analysis in a Historical and Contemporary Perspective. In M. Hermann & B. Sundelius (Eds.), Comparative Foreign Policy Analysis. Theories and Methods (pp. 36–63). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  6. Carlsnaes, W. (2008). Actors, Structures, and Foreign Policy Analysis. In S. Smith, A. Hadfield, & T. Dunne (Eds.), Foreign Policy: Theories, Actors, Cases (pp. 85–100). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Clarke, M. (1996). Foreign Policy Analysis: A Theoretical Guide. In S. Stavridis & C. Hill (Eds.), Domestic Sources of Foreign Policies: Western European Reactions to the Falkland Conflict (pp. 19–39). Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
  8. Clarke, M., & Brian, W. (1989). Understanding Foreign Policy: The Foreign Policy Systems Approach. Aldershot: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  9. Easton, D. (1965). A Framework for Political Analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  10. Fermann, G. (Ed.). (2013). Utenrikspolitikk og norsk krisehåndtering. Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademika.Google Scholar
  11. Foreign Policy Analysis. (2013). Journal. Oxford: Oxford Academic. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1743-8594/homepage/ProductInformation.html.
  12. Frost-Nielsen, P. M. (2011). Politisk kontroll av militær deltakelse i internasjonale operasjoner. Restriksjoner på bruk av norske kampfly i Afghanistan. Internasjonal politikk, 69(3), 359–385.Google Scholar
  13. Hermansson, H. (2010). Studie av norsk legitimeringsargumentasjon for deltakelse I NATO “Out-of-Area” operasjoner. Master thesis in Political Science, Trondheim, Department of Political Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU).Google Scholar
  14. Hermansson, H., & Fermann, G. (2013). Myndighetenes legitimering av norsk deltakelse I NATO-operasjoner I Bosnia, Kosovo og Afghanistan. In G. Fermann (Ed.), Utenrikspolitikk og norsk krisehåndtering (pp. 335–354). Oslo: Cappelen Akademisk Forlag.Google Scholar
  15. Hill, C. (2003). The Changing Politics of Foreign Policy. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  16. Holsti, K. J. (1995). International Politics: A Framework for Analysis. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  17. Hudson, V. M. (2007). Foreign Policy Analysis: Classical and Contemporary Theory. Boulder, CO: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  18. Johnsen, C. (2014). Kunsten å overbevise. Studie av norske myndigheters legitimeringsargumentasjon for militær deltakelse I Libya 2011. Master thesis in Political Science, Trondheim, Department of Political Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU).Google Scholar
  19. Kegley, C. W., & Wittkopf, E. R. (1997). World Politics: Trend and Transformation. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  20. Kubálková, V. (2001). Foreign Policy, International Politics, and Constructivism. In V. Kubálková (Ed.), Foreign Policy in a Constructed World (pp. 15–37). New York: M.E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  21. Kynø, S.-Fr. (2010). Strategisk etterretningsstøtte, suksesskriterier og forbedringsmuligheter. In G. L. Dyndal (Ed.), Strategisk ledelse i krise og krig (pp. 149–168). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.Google Scholar
  22. Levy, J. S. (1996). Loss Aversion, Framing, and Bargaining: The Implications of Prospects Theory for International Conflict. International Political Science Review, 17(2), 179–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Levy, J. S. (1997). Prospect Theory, Rational Choice, and International Relations. International Studies Quarterly, 41(1), 87–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Light, M. (1994). Foreign Policy Analysis. In A. J. R. Groom & M. Light (Eds.), Contemporary International Relations: A Guide to Theory (pp. 259–281). London: Pinter Publishers.Google Scholar
  25. Miller, G. J. (2005). The Political Evolution of Principal-Agent Models. Annual Review of Political Science, 8(1), 203–225.Google Scholar
  26. Neack, L. (2013). The New Foreign Policy: Complex Interactions, Competing Interests. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  27. Østerud, Ø. (1995). Statsvitenskap. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
  28. Radpey, A. (2014). Rettferdiggjøring av maktbruk. Kartleggingsstudie av norske myndigheters legitimeringsargumentasjon for deltakelse i luftkrig i Libya 2011. Master thesis in Political Science, Trondheim, Department of Political Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU). http://docplayer.me/47634637-Azita-radpey-rettferdiggjoring-av-maktbruk-masteroppgave.html.
  29. Reynolds, P. A. (1994). An Introduction to International Relations. New York, NY: Longman.Google Scholar
  30. Roberts, J. M. (2007). The New Penguin History of The World. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  31. Ruud, M. (2010). Simulering for systemforståelse og beslutningstrening. In G. L. Dyndal (Ed.), Strategisk ledelse i krise og krig (pp. 349–360). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.Google Scholar
  32. Singsaas, A. (2016). Argumentets kraft. Et klassifiserings- og kartleggingsprosjekt av norske myndigheters legitimeringsargumentasjon for norsk militær deltakelse i Irak 2014–2016. Master thesis in Political Science, Trondheim, Department of Political Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU).Google Scholar
  33. Snyder, G. H. (1984). The Security Dilemma in Alliance Politics. World Politics, 36(4), 461–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tangen, A. (2010). Politisk sikkerhetstjeneste. In G. L. Dyndal, (Ed.), Strategisk ledelse i krise og krig (pp. 149–168). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.Google Scholar
  35. Wallace, W. (1971). Foreign Policy and the Political Process. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Webber, M., & Smith, M. (2002). Frameworks. In M. Webber & M. Smith (Eds.), Foreign Policy in a Transformed World (pp. 7–104). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  37. Wendt, A. (1999). Social Theory of Internationational Politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. White, B. (2004). Foreign Policy Analysis and the New Europe. In W. Carlsnaes, H. Sjursen, & B. White (Eds.), Contemporary European Foreign Policy (pp. 11–31). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Norwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations