Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Social Construction of Global Problems

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Social Construction of Global Corruption

Part of the book series: Political Corruption and Governance ((PCG))

  • 406 Accesses

Abstract

One of the key tenets of James Buchanan’s political thought was the centrality of the status quo, embodied in Buchanan’s frequently heard axiom that “we start from where we are.” There is practical political value in “starting from where we are,” because we are in fact there, and not someplace else. Buchanan’s normative concern is that starting from where “we are” means that changes are more likely to be voluntary, and therefore Pareto-improving. The history of this notion of the status quo in contractarian thought is developed briefly, and then a particular example, the Chilean Constitution and its problematic implementation, is discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The term social constructionism is usually used in sociology and the sociology of science, while in the field of IR the term constructivism has become more widely accepted after the seminal article of Onuf (1989). This book uses the terms interchangeably.

  2. 2.

    The etymological root of the word problem comes from the Greek verb προβάλλω, which means to highlight or to bring forward. Oxford Dictionaries, s.v. ‘problem,’ accessed October 22, 2017, http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/problem.

  3. 3.

    Problematization has a long pedigree of scholarly interest with one of the most prominent examples coming from Foucault (1985).

  4. 4.

    Mooney et al. (2011) single out three broader perspectives that have been the most influential on the study of social problems: (1) structural-functionalist; (2) value-conflict; and (3) symbolic interactionist perspectives. Other theories and approaches to the study of social problems can be taxonomically ordered around these three perspectives.

  5. 5.

    Blumer (1971) still considers, the study of the ‘objective makeup’ a valuable research agenda, but since the process of collective definition is ultimately politicized in his perspective, ‘the knowledge of the objective makeup of the social problem is of significance only to the extent that the knowledge enters into the process of collective definition’ and this is the process of ‘being seen and defined’ by society that ultimately determines the rise and demise of social problems in the public arena (305).

  6. 6.

    Spector and Kitsuse adopt a grassroots approach in which groups try to get governmental recognition and push a putative condition as a ‘formal part of an institutional agenda’ (154). The authors, however, recognize that this is simply one route for agenda-setting in society and quite often the initiative comes from governmental institutions that want to raise a condition to the status of a social problem. The difference between ‘initiator’ and ‘responder’ can be hard to discern, but the initiative in the construction of social problems can come from both grassroots movements and governmental institutions. The major indicator of the successful career of a social problem in both cases, however, remains the raising of an issue as part of an official agenda and the enactment of legislation.

  7. 7.

    Even the IMF calls for reform are limited to coordination not of labor market policies, but of fiscal and monetary policies to influence aggregate demand (Blanchard and Gali 2010).

  8. 8.

    The notion that the emergence of problems is always triggered by some objectively measured increase or worsening of the condition has been challenged by constructivist scholars. Epstein (2005), for example, argues for the explanatory weakness of material-based factors in the emergence of an international whaling regime by showing the causal irrelevance of the levels of endangerment of whales to the formation of the regime.

  9. 9.

    Hülsse (2007) places ontological persuasion as a prerequisite for normative persuasion. During the process of ontological persuasion, other actors with competing interpretations have to be convinced of the existence of the problem, its definitional parameters, as well as the causal connections between the claimed problem and other objectives on the agenda.

  10. 10.

    George and Bennett (2005), in a compendium of the same type of data sources, emphasize that classified sources require acquaintance with the wider social context through the reading of journalistic articles from the period corresponding to the archival material (97).

References

  • Abbott, Kenneth W., and Duncan Snidal. 2000. “Hard and Soft Law in International Governance.” International Organization 54 (3): 421–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abdelal, Rawi, Mark Blyth, and Craig Parsons, eds. 2010. Constructing the International Economy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Acharya, Amitav, ed. 2016. Why Govern? Rethinking Demand and Progress in Global Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avant, Deborah D., Martha Finnemore, and Susan K. Sell, eds. 2010. Who Governs the Globe? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, Andrew. 2006. The Group of Seven: Finance Ministries, Central Banks and Global Financial Governance. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barkin, J. Samuel. 2003. “Realist Constructivism.” International Studies Review 5 (3): 325–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2011. Realist Constructivism: Rethinking International Relations Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, Michael, and Emanuel Adler. 1998. Security Communities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, Michael, and Raymond Duvall. 2005. Power in Global Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, Peter L., and Thomas Luckmann. 1966. The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. New York: Anchor Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, Steven. 2004. “Legitimacy in Global Environmental Governance.” Journal of International Law and International Relations 1: 139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, Steven, and Benjamin Cashore. 2007. “Can Non-state Global Governance Be Legitimate? An Analytical Framework.” Regulation & Governance 1 (4): 347–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Best, Joel. 1993. “But Seriously, Folks: The Limitations of the Strict Constructionist Interpretation of Social Problems.” In Reconsidering Social Constructionism: Debates in Social Problems Theory, edited by J. Holstein and G. Miller, 129–147. Rutgers, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2009. Images of Issues: Typifying Contemporary Social Problems. Rutgers, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biermann, Frank, and Philipp Pattberg. 2008. “Global Environmental Governance: Taking Stock, Moving Forward.” Annual Review of Environment and Resources 33 (1): 277–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———, eds. 2012. Global Environmental Governance Reconsidered. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanchard, Olivier, and Jordi Gali. 2010. “Labor Markets and Monetary Policy: A New Keynesian Model with Unemployment.” American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics 2 (2): 1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanchard, Olivier, Florence Jaumotte, and Prakash Loungani. 2013. Labor Market Policies and IMF Advice in Advanced Economies During the Great Recession. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund, Research Department.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blumer, Herbert. 1971. “Social Problems as Collective Behavior.” Social Problems 18 (3): 298–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boghossian, Paul. 2006. Fear of Knowledge: Against Relativism and Constructivism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Büthe, Tim, and Walter Mattli. 2011. The New Global Rulers: The Privatization of Regulation in the World Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cashore, Benjamin. 2002. “Legitimacy and the Privatization of Environmental Governance: How Non-State Market-Driven (NSMD) Governance Systems Gain Rule-Making Authority.” Governance 15 (4): 503–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CES/CRC(97)16. Council Resolution on the Classification and Declassification of Information, Adopted by the Council at the 906th Session on 10 July 1997 (29 August 1997). OECD Archives, Paris Headquarters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook-Gumperz, Jenny. 2006. The Social Construction of Literacy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutler, A. Claire, Virginia Haufler, and Tony Porter, eds. 1999. Private Authority and International Affairs. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, Robert Alan. 1957. The Concept of Power. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubash, Navroz K., and Ann Florini. 2011. “Mapping Global Energy Governance.” Global Policy 2 (1): 6–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, Charlotte. 2005. The Power of Words in International Relations: Birth of an Anti-Whaling Discourse. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fearon, James D., and David D. Laitin. 2000. “Violence and the Social Construction of Ethnic Identity.” International Organization 54 (4): 845–877.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finnemore, Martha, and Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change.” International Organization 52 (4): 887–917.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Florini, Ann, and Benjamin K. Sovacool. 2009. “Who Governs Energy? The Challenges Facing Global Energy Governance.” Energy Policy 37 (12): 5239–5248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, Michel. 1985. Discourse and Truth: The Problematization of Parrhesia. Edited by J. Pearson. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freudenburg, William. 2000. “Social Constructions and Social Constrictions: Toward Analyzing the Social Construction of ‘the Naturalized’ as Well as ‘the Natural’.” In Environment and Global Modernity, edited by G. Spaargaren, A. P. J. Mol, and F. H. Buttel, 103–119. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • George, Alexander L., and Andrew Bennett. 2005. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Girling, John. 1997. Corruption, Capitalism and Democracy. East Sussex: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • GlobeScan. 2011. “Unemployment Rises as ‘Most Talked-About’ Problem: Global Poll.” Accessed November 10, 2017. http://www.globescan.com/news-and-analysis/press-releases/press-releases-2011/94-press-releases-2011/126-unemployment-rises-as-qmost-talked-aboutq-problem-global-poll.html.

  • Goode, Erich, and Nachman Ben-Yehuda. 2009. Moral Panics: The Social Construction of Deviance. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, Nelson. 1978. Ways of Worldmaking. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gopalan, Sandeep. 2008. “A Demandeur-Centric Approach to Regime Design in Transnational Commercial Law.” Georgetown Journal of International Law 39 (2): 22–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grande, Edgar, and Louis W. Pauly, eds. 2007. Complex Sovereignty: Reconstituting Political Authority in the Twenty-First Century. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grint, Keith. 2005. “Problems, Problems, Problems: The Social Construction of ‘Leadership’.” Human Relations 58 (11): 1467–1494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hacking, Ian. 1999. The Social Construction of What? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hale, Thomas, David Held, and Kevin Young. 2013. Gridlock: Why Global Cooperation Is Failing When We Need It Most. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, Rodney Bruce, and Thomas J. Biersteker. 2002. The Emergence of Private Authority in Global Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harman, Sophie, and David Williams, eds. 2013. Governing the World? Cases in Global Governance. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helleiner, Eric. 2014. The Status Quo Crisis: Global Financial Governance After the 2008 Meltdown. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofferberth, Matthias, and Christian Weber. 2015. “Lost in Translation: A Critique of Constructivist Norm Research.” Journal of International Relations and Development 18 (1): 75–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holstein, James, and Gale Miller. 1993. Reconsidering Social Constructionism: Debates in Social Problems Theory. Rutgers, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopf, T., ed. 2002. Social Construction of International Politics: Identities & Foreign Policies, Moscow, 1955 and 1999. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hülsse, Rainer. 2007. “Creating Demand for Global Governance: The Making of a Global Money Laundering Problem.” Global Society 21 (2): 155–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahler, Miles, and David A. Lake. 2003. Governance in a Global Economy: Political Authority in Transition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kingdon, John W. 2010. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krasner, Stephen D. 1982. “Structural Causes and Regime Consequences: Regimes as Intervening Variables.” International Organization 36 (2): 185–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latour, Bruno, and Steve Woolgar. 1979. Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lesage, Dries, Thijs Van de Graaf, and Kirsten Westphal. 2016. Global Energy Governance in a Multipolar World. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, David L., and Peter John Newell. 2005. The Business of Global Environmental Governance. Cambridge, MA and London: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Love, Maryann Cusimano. 2010. Beyond Sovereignty: Issues for a Global Agenda. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCoy, Jennifer L., and Heather Heckel. 2001. “The Emergence of a Global Anti-corruption Norm.” International Politics 38 (1): 65–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGrew, Anthony, and David Held, eds. 2002. Governing Globalization: Power, Authority and Global Governance. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, John W., and Ronald L. Jepperson. 2000. “The ‘Actors’ of Modern Society: The Cultural Construction of Social Agency.” Sociological Theory 18 (1): 100–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mills, C. Wright. 1959. The Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mooney, Linda A., David Knox, and Caroline Schacht. 2011. Understanding Social Problems. Toronto: Nelson College Indigenous.

    Google Scholar 

  • Najam, Adil. 2005. “Developing Countries and Global Environmental Governance: From Contestation to Participation to Engagement.” International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics 5 (3): 303–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Onuf, Nicholas G. 1989. World of Our Making: Rules and Rule in Social Theory and International Relations. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierre, Jon. 2000. Debating Governance: Authority, Steering, and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, Eric, and Jack L. Goldsmith. 2002. “Moral and Legal Rhetoric in International Relations: A Rational Choice Perspective.” Journal of Legal Studies 31 (1): 115–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ronit, Karsten, and Volker Schneider. 1999. “Global Governance Through Private Organizations.” Governance 12 (3): 243–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenau, James N. 1995. “Governance in the Twenty-First Century.” Global Governance 1 (1): 13–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenau, James N., and Hongying Wang. 2001. “Transparency International and Corruption as an Issue of Global Governance.” Global Governance 7 (1): 25–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruggie, John Gerard. 1998. “What Makes the World Hang Together? Neo-Utilitarianism and the Social Constructivist Challenge.” International Organization 52 (4): 855–885.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, Andreas Georg, Guido Palazzo, and Dorothée Baumann. 2006. “Global Rules and Private Actors: Toward a New Role of the Transnational Corporation in Global Governance.” Business Ethics Quarterly 16 (4): 505–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senturia, Joseph. 1931. “Corruption, Political.” In Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, Vol. 4, 448–452. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spector, Malcolm, and John Kitsuse. 1973. “Toward a Sociology of Social Problems.” Social Problems 20: 407–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1975. “Social Problems and Deviance: Some Parallels.” Social Problems. 22: 584–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2009. Constructing Social Problems. 4th ed. Rutgers, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Underhill, Geoffrey R. D., and Xiaoke Zhang. 2008. “Setting the Rules: Private Power, Political Underpinnings, and Legitimacy in Global Monetary and Financial Governance.” International Affairs 84 (3): 535–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Graaf, Thijs, and Jeff Colgan. 2016. “Global Energy Governance: A Review and Research Agenda.” Palgrave Communications 2. https://doi.org/10.1057/palcomms.2015.47.

  • Väyrynen, Raimo. 1999. Globalization and Global Governance. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, Thomas G., and Rorden Wilkinson, eds. 2014. International Organization and Global Governance. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wendt, Alexander. 1992. “Anarchy Is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics.” International Organization 46 (2): 391–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1995. “Constructing International Politics.” International Security 20 (1): 71–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, Michael C. 2004. “Why Ideas Matter in International Relations: Hans Morgenthau, Classical Realism, and the Moral Construction of Power Politics.” International Organization 58 (4): 633–665.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolgar, Steve, and Dorothy Pawluch. 1985. “Ontological Gerrymandering: The Anatomy of Social Problems Explanations.” Social Problems 32 (3): 214–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, Oran R., ed. 1997. Global Governance: Drawing Insights from the Environmental Experience. Cambridge, MA and London: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Braunschweig University of Technology, Braunschweig, Germany

    Elitza Katzarova

Authors
  1. Elitza Katzarova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elitza Katzarova .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Katzarova, E. (2019). The Social Construction of Global Problems. In: The Social Construction of Global Corruption . Political Corruption and Governance. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98569-5_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation