Custom «International Relations Theory and Policy Makers» Essay Paper

Introduction

The scholarly study of international relations (IR) demonstrates that policy makers pay very little attention to IR theories. Otherwise, a lot of problems and conflicts could be avoided if policy makers were a bit more concerned about IR theories. The necessity of theories that could help in a difficult situation offering an effective solution is more than obvious. The unexpected situation may happen at any time, and no one is able to predict what it would be necessary to do. Policy makers may have to solve financial problems, rapid changes in the market, a terrorist threat or problems of global environment. All these situations may happen at any minute, and policy makers as official representatives of the authority in the country have to take a situation under control and propose solution that could help cope with the raised problem.

Nevertheless, in some cases, the usage of IR theories may bring more disadvantages than advantages to the policy makers. The invalid data may make a situation even worse, and, as a result, it will lead to new problems. According to this fact, there exist those policy makers who use the help of IR theories in their work and those who prefer to rely on their own experience and skills.

•  

  0

  Preparing Orders

•  

  0

  Active Writers

•  

  0%

  Positive Feedback

•  

  0

  Support Agents

 

Title of your paper

Type of service

Type of assignment

Number of pages

-

+

Academic level

Timeframes

Spacing

Currency

USD

• Total price

Continue to order

 

Types of Knowledge Required by Policy Makers

The decision taken by policy makers can be influenced by different types of knowledge. One of them is the usage of rough statistic data or pure facts. To this category of knowledge one may refer such simple questions as the size of the opponent, his/her strong and weak sides, the resources which are available for him/her, and his/her readiness to use them. In other words, it is information that can be received via initial observation. The second type of knowledge is the policy makers’ decision to use their own experience instead of study. The third type of knowledge is the specific traits, which policy makers use as empirical background for their decisions. Empirical law predetermines that there are some situations, which are observed in the same way at any conditions. For instance, two democratic countries cannot fight each other because it contradicts to the principles of democracy. However, if such situation really occurs, it means that one of these countries does not obey some principles of democracy; otherwise, there could not be a conflict. The last type of knowledge refers to the theories, which policy makers use to solve arisen problems. In fact, a theory is an explanation of a situation; it helps to understand the reasons that lead to this situation, why it occurs and what can be done to solve the consequences that were caused by the situation. Theories reflect the reality and make it more understandable. In other words, theories work like algorithms which solve the problem. Policy makers use them as a guideline because they can help to find a correct solution that will satisfy the majority of people.  

IR theories introduce an explanation of a situation on different levels including international cooperation, both economic and political; the spreading of ideas, values and norms; the likelihood of a conflict or even declaring a war. These theories offer the diversity of variables, which may explain a current situation. For instance, some of the IR theories explain the distribution of power among the states, while others – the financial flow or the volume of trade. On the other hand, there are also theories, which explain some regime types, some domestic organizations or foreign policy. Moreover, there is a special group of theories that embraces very individual issues, such as prevailing of one gender over the other in a state or discusses the issue relating to psychological specifics of individuals or groups in a society. However, there is also a group of theories that works on the global issues, such as collective ideas, social misunderstandings or generation gaps.

In order to develop an IR theory, a specialist should provide a study, which will reveal a wide range of statistic data, a deep analysis of a problem using hermeneutical approach for the research. As a result, a specialist gathers competing arguments, which could support or argue the issues that were raised in this theory (Berejikian & Early, 2013). Hence, a policy maker receives an opportunity to use a theory that has already been developed by a specialist and contains necessary information about the issue, which he/she has to solve. In this way, a policy maker does not have a need to spend his/her time making this research by himself/herself. In some situations, protraction is impossible; as a result, a policy maker has to take an immediate decision in order to prevent further development of negative consequences caused by a particular situation. For instance, it may be an environment disaster or a tanker with oil, which has a crash in the ocean. Hence, the importance of IR theories predetermines whether the actions taken by a policy maker will be effective and could achieve the targeted goal.

A Good Theory

A theory used by a policy maker should satisfy the list of demands. A policy maker cannot apply to a theory, which is not valid or use the false statement as main arguments. In order to estimate whether a theory is good or not, it should correspond to the following principles:

1. A good theory should be logically organized and contain the valid information and statistic data. All facts should be supported by evidences and cannot contradict to each other. Hence, a theory should be logically connected and must exclude any misunderstandings or controversies.
2. A theory should be complete, which means that it does not make one think whether it is rational to use the arguments provided by this theory or not. For instance, if a leader declares a war because it is the only acceptable variable and all other alternatives do not work, it explains the reason of this choice. However, it does not explain why a leader may or may not declare a war. In other words, there are no arguments or facts that could explain which conditions may make a leader start a war or what conditions decrease a possibility of war. Moreover, a theory cannot be considered as a good one if it does not identify the factors, which determine the outcomes (Brams, 2000). For instance, a statement that human nature is the main reason of all wars is valid, but it is not accurate because it does not explain how this human nature has caused the war in this particular case. However, this information does not help to understand the core reason because it is a very general explanation of a possible reason. According to this fact, it can be said that good theory should exclude any gaps and must include the accurate explanation of its statement.
3. A theory should have an explanatory power. An explanatory power predetermines that a theory is able to explain the things that were strange and ununderstandable before. A valuable theory should be able to illuminate the things that were viewed as unrelated or perplexing. For instance, it was strange to believe that if nations would not try to horde but improve the trade, it will make them richer. However, later, a theory of free trade could explain this statement and provide arguments that support the validity of this theory. Hence, the biggest advantage of a theory is to demonstrate the facts that seemed to be unconnected as a logical link of one chain. In other words, a theory explains the things that were not viewed as relative or had little connection with a particular phenomenon and make it more understandable, and, as a result, shows its connection with a theory.    
4. A theory should not explain only very important aspects or be a solution for a difficult puzzle. The majority of people believe that the theory is necessary to solve very important phenomenon, which has an impact on many people. However, scholars may disagree with such statement. According to their opinion, a good theory is the one which is able to fill the puzzle of little interest because a little puzzle composes a big one. If all little puzzles are completed, there will not be a necessity in a theory, which has to help understand some global issues.
5. A theory is useful if it proposes useful recommendations. A policy maker should be able to use a theory as leverage for his/her work. In other words, a good theory should be very flexible and simple for usage. A theory should explain a policy maker’s decision; for instance, a policy maker’s decision to start a war is explained as the only possible variable among all other alternatives. Hence, if the policy maker would choose another variable, it would have more negative consequences in future. However, one should understand that a theory should not give an opportunity for manipulation; a policy leader should use a theory to explain his/her actions, but not as a means of influence on people’s opinion.    

According to the presented requirements, one may compose a description of a good leader, which can be suitable for a policy maker. First of all, a good theory should be clear; a person who operates with this theory should absolutely understand what he/she wants to say. On the other hand, those arguments, which propose theory, should also be clear for those to whom this theory will be presented by a policy leader. Thus, a good theory is a simple theory, which is able to explain some difficult phenomena in a simple and coherent way.

The Contribution of Theory in Policy Makers’ Decisions

As it is known, policy and theory are interconnected; the main common task for all policy makers is analyzing and deciding on events that grab attention. In addition, they need to decide which events, issues, and items are not very significant and important and can be easily dismissed. The next mission of policy makers is to select goals and policy tools that will be highly needed in order to achieve the set objectives. Every step that was stated above is conducted by policy makers basing on a particular kind of theory that they believe is better for their policy. Here, one can see close interconnection between theory and policy.

Though theories have a great impact on a policy, when choosing a theory for his or her policy, any policy maker must remember that influence of theories may be both positive and negative. Therefore, the process of selection is very responsible and requires knowledge, experience and much attention. The word ‘interconnection’ is a key one in the relationship between policy and theory. While challenges that a policy maker may face become the spur for various innovations and improvements in theories, theories, in turn, is a good source of information for policy makers. Among all the ways, in which theory assists policy makers in creating a policy, one can identify four major ways. They are prediction, evaluation, prescription, and diagnosis.

Prediction is a way, in which theory helps policy makers to foresee some events and issues (Mowle, 2003). In other words, theories identify key forces at work and provide policy makers with a general picture of the world that helps them understand the sphere of their operations better and broader. This way is very useful for policy makers since with its help they can prevent some undesirable situations and avoid some problems that may occur in case policy makers are not foresighted enough.

Regarding evaluation, one can state that theory is extremely important in this aspect of policy development since all the decisions made by policy makers should be evaluated in a proper way. In order to understand if a policy is efficient and able to lead to the desired outcomes, policy makers need to identify some assessment criteria. Undoubtedly, such criteria are identified with the help of a theory that a policy maker chooses for his or her project. This aspect of theories’ aid analyzes whether any step that is taken for policy development is reasonable and assesses general efficacy of the policy.

The method of prescription that is enhanced to the process of creating a policy is a so called prompt for policy makers, which shows them what specific actions and steps must be taken in order to succeed in their aims (Redd & Mintz, 2013). Besides, this way helps policy makers to recognize the conditions, in which this or that policy tool works better or worse. This will obviously save time and efforts of a policy maker and help him or her make the process of policy development faster and easier. Moreover, it also gives policy makers an opportunity to realize how and for what reasons the policy that is created might fail. In fact, this is extremely important because any undertaking should be analyzed in terms of its reasonability and conditions, in which it might not succeed. Finally, policy makers need to know what they will endeavor in case the policy really fails.

The fourth major way, in which theory helps policy makers, is diagnosis. With this aspect, theory helps policy makers identify what specific information they must work with and show, which sort of information can be and even should be rejected.

The Impact of Theories on Policy Makers’ Decisions

IR theories introduce useful information that can help policy makers perform their obligations better using valid theories to prove their point of view. Despite the numerous benefits that theories give to policy makers, the last ones do not always recognize theories as an effective tool in their work. As a result, they prefer to use their own experience, knowledge and skills rather than using available theories. The reason why policy makers refuse to use IR theories is quite simple. The theories proposed by IR specialists are developed to solve some very specific issues (Van Eerd, Wiering & Dieperink, 2014). Policy makers prefer to observe a situation as a general phenomenon. According to this fact, the theories proposed by an IR specialist are not always viewed as a good opportunity to support a policy maker’s statement.

Nevertheless, policy makers do not always refuse from IR theories and in some situations they use them as the only credible attempt to justify a decision or an action. IR theories may have both positive and negative effect on the decision making by a policy maker who uses a particular theory. As it was mentioned above, IR theories are developed according to the client’s demands. For instance, a situation in a society is quite complex, the level of unemployment has increased and a policy maker has to take some actions to calm people and ensure that everything is under control. He/she asks to make a survey that will prove that in the nearest future the level of unemployment will decrease and people should not worry about it. A specialist may identify that such tendency will be really possible in the nearest future (Lepgold, 1998). In this case, a theory used by a policy maker will work effectively because his/her words will be supported by a theory, and, as a result, everything will happen as he/she said. Nevertheless, a specialist may identify that the level of unemployment will not decrease because of some economic difficulties, which the country experiences today. In this case, a specialist faces a dilemma: if he/she does not provide the desired theory, then his/her client will not be satisfied and he/she will fail the task. On the other hand, he/she could demonstrate the facts in a more positive light and help a policy maker to achieve his/her goal. However, if a theory used by a policy maker does not turn to be valid, a society may lose its trust in him/her.

According to this example, it can be said that a theory may have both positive and negative effect on a policy maker’s decision. On the one hand, a theory may help a policy maker make a decision that will enlarge his/her power; on the other hand, a theory, which does not reflect the valid information or introduces only some relevant facts, may destroy the policy maker’s reputation and show him/her as an irresponsible person. Thus, when policy makers make decisions, they try to choose only those theories, which will help them explain a situation and avoid those theories, which seem doubtful to them.

Conclusion

In their work, policy makers often apply to IR theories, which help them explain their decisions from the theoretical point of view. A good theory should contain a list of features: it must be clear, understandable and explain those things that were not viewed so important before. However, one should remember that an IR specialist who works on the development of theories does not reflect his/her own interests. Such specialists cannot make their own survey, but they can be hired by an organizational institution to develop a theory. Thus, a theory will always reflect the interest of a client who required the development of this particular theory. An IR specialist faces a dilemma because, on the one hand, he/she has to provide a good theory that will correspond to the demands of a standard theory, but on the other hand, he/she cannot let his/her client down and leave him/her unsatisfied.

In fact, it is one of the major reasons why policy makers do not often use IR theories to support their decisions. The decisions introduced by policy makers should reflect their own ideas, and they should have an opportunity to use a theory as a lever of their power. However, if a theory is not valid or was developed according to the requirements of another policy maker, it may make a situation only worse. Thus, IR theories may be relevant to the policy makers’ decision if they really reflect their ideas and provide the total support of their statements.