the agent-structure problem in international relations

7/28/2019 The Agent-Structure problem in international relations

1/37

The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations TheoryAuthor(s): Alexander E. WendtSource: International Organization, Vol. 41, No. 3 (Summer, 1987), pp. 335-370Published by: The MIT PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2706749 .

Accessed: 04/06/2013 01:41

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The MIT Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toInternational

Organization.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 202.92.128.28 on Tue, 4 Jun 2013 01:41:02 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mitpresshttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2706749?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2706749?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mitpress


2/37

Theagent-structureroblemininternationalelations heoryAlexander . Wendt

Two theories, eorealismnd world-systemheory,tronglynfluenceon-temporarycademicdiscourse bout nternationalelations. othclaim oprovide structural"xplanationsfhowstates ehave n the nternationalsystem. espite heir ommonommitmentostructuralnalysis, owever,theirnderstandingf ystem structure,"ndthereforef tructuralxpla-nation,s quitedifferent.eorealists efinenternationalystem tructuresinterms f theobservable ttributesf theirmembertates the distribu-tion fcapabilities"),ndas a result, hey nderstandheexplanatoryoleofthose tructuresn ndividualistermss constraininghe hoices fpre-existingtate ctors.World-systemheorists,n theother and, efinenter-national ystemtructuresnterms fthe undamentalrganizingrinciplesofthecapitalist orld conomywhich nderlie nd constitutetates, ndthus hey nderstandhe xplanatoryoleof tructuresn structuralistermsas generatingtate ctors hemselves. hesedifferences,nd theirmplica-tions,haveyet o be explicatednthe nternationalelationsiterature.1n

An earlier ersion f this rticlewas presentedtthe 1986meetingf the nternationalStudies ssociation.want othank ayward lker, ichard shley, aymonduvall,JeffreyIsaac, BrianJob,StephenKrasner, eterManicas,David Sylvan,JuttaWeldes, nd twoanonymousefereesor heir elpfulommentsndsuggestionsn previous rafts.1. There rea number f discussionsf themeaningsnduses of "structuralheory"nneorealismnd world-systemheory, ut s far s I know, one xplicitlyomparesrdiffer-entiates heneorealistnd world-systempproachesostructurend structuralnalysis. nneorealismee, for xample, ennethWaltz, heoryf nternationaloliticsReading, ass.:Addison-Wesley,979), ndRobert eohane, Theory f World olitics: tructuralealismandBeyond," inAda Finifter, d., Political Science: The State of theDiscipline Washington,D.C.: APSA,1983).The best ritiquefneorealism'sonceptionf tructures Richard sh-ley's "ThePoverty fNeorealism,"nternationalrganization8 Spring 984), p.225-86.Onworld-systemheoryee mmanuel allerstein,The Rise ndFuture emise f heWorldCapitalistystem: oncepts orComparativenalysis," omparativetudiesnSocietyndHistory6 September974), p. 387-415,ndChristopherhase-DunnndRichard ubinson,"Toward StructuralerspectiventheWorld-System,"oliticsnd Society (no. 4, 1977),pp. 453-76.The critique fworld-systemheory hat omesclosest o myconcernsn thisarticlesprobablyhedaSkocpol's Wallerstein's orld apitalistystem: TheoreticalndHistoricalritique," merican ournalf Sociology 2 March 977), p. 1075-90.InternationalOrganization41, 3, Summer 1987C) 1987 ytheWorld eaceFoundationnd theMassachusettsnstitutefTechnology

This content downloaded from 202.92.128.28 on Tue, 4 Jun 2013 01:41:02 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/37

336 Internationalrganizationthis rticle, want obegin o clarifynd contrast henature f structuralanalysisn each ofthese wo raditions. yprimarynterest,owever,stocritiqueheconceptionsfstructuralheoryound n eachofthem,ndtouse this ritiqueo motivatehedevelopmentf new pproacho structuraltheorizingbout nternationalelationsdapted rom hework f structura-tion heorists"nsociology.2his approachnd theresearchgenda t m-plies, in turn, equire foundationn realistphilosophy f science or"scientificealism"3),rguablyhe "new orthodoxy"n thephilosophyfnatural cience,but s yet argelynacknowledgedy political cientists.4As structuralheories finternationalelations, eorealismnd world-systemheory iffer,ndthusmightecompared,long numberfdimen-sions: substantivelaims, redictiveower, cope,and parsimony,mongothers.While hesedifferencesre important,hey re, I think, tronglyconditionedya more undamentalifferencefontology: eorealismm-bodiesan individualistntology,whileworld-systemheorymbodiesholistic ne. A usefulwayto capture he nature nd implicationsfthisdifferences to evaluate hetwo theoriesn terms f their nderlyings-sumptionsbout the relationshipf system tructureso human gents.Despite heir ommitmento "structural"atherhan agentic" heorizing,like llstructuralheories hey oth resupposeometheoryfwhat s being

2. The termstructurationheory" s sometimes arrowlydentifiedith hework f An-thony iddens,who has articulatedtsbasic problematicnhis Central roblemsn SocialTheory Berkeley: University fCalifornia ress, 1979) and The Constitution f Society:Out-line f heTheoryfStructurationCambridge,.K.: Polity ress, 984). n "OntheDetermi-nation f Social Action n Space andTime," Society ndSpace 1 (March1983), p. 23-57,however, igelThrift ses the termmorebroadly s a generic abel for group f socialtheories hich hare ertain undamentalssumptionsbout he gent-structureelationship;thisgroup ncludes, ut s not imited o, Pierre ourdieu, utline f a Theoryf Practice(Cambridge:ambridge niversityress,1977),Roy Bhaskar, hePossibilityfNaturalism(Brighton,.K.: Harvester ress, 979),ndDerek ayder, tructure,nteraction,nd SocialTheoryLondon:Routledge Kegan Paul, 1981). ince mypurpose n thispaper s less toadvanceGiddens'sdeas indeed, willrelymore n Bhaskar hanGiddens) han o demon-strateherelevancefthe verall roblematicor nternationalelationsheory,shall ollowThrift's orenclusive seofthe erm.3. Scientificealismor simplyrealism") s not elated o political ealism rneorealismninternationalelations.4. Whetherr notscientificealism s the"neworthodoxy"n thephilosophyfnaturalscience sundoubtedlycontentiousssue mong ealistsnd mpiricists,ut thas n ny asemade sufficientnroads hat he Minnesota enter or hePhilosophyfScience, ong nimportantastion fempiricism,eld a year-longnstituten 1985/86 hich, mong therthings, ocused xplicitlyn that uestion. mericanoliticalcientistsenerallyeem obeunawareforuninterestednthis ebate nd tspotentialmplicationsor oliticalcience. omyknowledge,heonlydiscussionsf scientificealismn nternationalelationsreBritish:JohnMaclean, Marxist pistemology,xplanationsfChangendthe tudy f nternationalRelations,"nBarry uzanand R. J.Barry ones, ds.,Changen the tudy f nternationalRelations:TheEvaded DimensionLondon:FrancesPinter, 981), p. 46-67,andRichardLittle, "The Systems Approach," in Steve Smith, ed., InternationalRelations: British ndAmericanerspectivesOxford: lackwell, 985), p.79-91.



4/37

Agent-structureroblem 337structured,uman rorganizationalgents, nd of their elationshipo so-cial structures.utmore enerally,ll social cientificheoriesmbody n atleast implicit olution o the "agent-structureroblem,"which ituatesagents nd socialstructuresnrelationo one another. hese solutions elpdetermine theory's nderstandingf, nd therelative xplanatorympor-tance t attaches o, structuralnalysis.Whilegeneratingerydifferentunderstandingsfstructuralheory, owever, shall rgue hat heneoreal-ist ndworld-systemolutions o the gent-structureroblemre, n at eastonerespect, ery imilar,ndthat his imilarityreates commonfunda-mentalweakness n thesetheories s "structural" pproaches o interna-tional elations. tructurationheory,n turn,s a response o this ommonweaknesswhich oth ubsumes nd points eyondneorealismnd world-system heory.InSection1, examine henature f the gent-structureproblem" ndbrieflydentifyheprincipal inds f olutions o t. arguenSection thatneorealismndworld-systemheory mbody wo of these solutions, hemethodologicalndividualistnd structuralistnes, respectively. espiteimportantifferencesetween hem, ach of these pproaches olves theagent-structureroblem y making ither tate gents r system tructuresontologicallyrimitivenits.Theresultingffect n neorealismndworld-system heorys an inabilityo explain hepropertiesnd causal powers ftheir rimarynits f nalysis, weaknesswhich eriouslynderminesheirpotential xplanationsf state ction.Thissituation anbe prevented yadoptingn approach o the agent-structureroblemwhichdoes not pre-clude a priorimaking othagents nd structuresproblematic"r "de-pendent ariables."In Section 3, I describe his third, tructurationistapproach, nd itsfoundationsnrealist hilosophyf science.Sincetheutilityf structurationheory s a meta-theoreticalrameworkor nterna-tional relations ltimately ependson its ability o enrich ubstantivetheorizingndconcrete mpiricalesearch,tsvalue annot e convincinglydemonstratedn a programmaticrticle uch as thisone. It is possible,however, o indicate omeof the hangeswhich structurationisterspec-tive uggestsrenecessarynthe ontemporaryesearch gendan nterna-tional elations. owards his nd, n Section4, I examine omegeneralepistemologicalnd theoreticalmplicationsfstructurationheoryor heexplanationf state ction. n the onclusion,returnosome mplicationsof scientificealism or ocialscientificesearch.1. The agent-structureroblemTheagent-structureroblem as its originsn twotruismsbout ocial ifewhichunderliemost social scientificnquiry: ) human eings nd their



5/37

338 Internationalrganizationorganizationsre purposefulctorswhose ctionshelpreproduce rtrans-formhesocietyn which hey ive; and 2) society s madeup of socialrelationships,hich tructurehe nteractionsetweenhese urposefulc-tors.Takentogetherhese truismsuggest hathuman gents nd socialstructuresre, n one wayoranother,heoreticallynterdependentrmutu-ally mplicatingntities. hus,the analysis f action nvokes n at leastimplicit nderstandingfparticularocial relationshipsor "rules of thegame") nwhich heaction s set-just as the nalysis f socialstructuresinvokes omeunderstandingfthe ctorswhoserelationships akeupthestructuralontext.t sthen plausible tep o believe hat hepropertiesfagents ndthoseof social structuresrebothrelevant o explanationsfsocialbehavior. nd nfact, lthoughnvery ifferentays,neorealismndworld-systemheoryousethepropertiesoth fstatespowers,nterests)andof ystemtructurespolarity,elationsfunequal xchange)oexplainstatebehavior. he "problem"with ll this s thatwe lacka self-evidentwaytoconceptualizehese ntitiesnd their elationship.his bsence fsingle,mmediatelyompellingonceptionftheagent-structureelationhas spawned variety f conceptualizationsf therelationshipcrossthesocial sciences,5 ach reflectinghe particularhilosophicalndpracticalcommitmentsf tsparent heoreticaliscourse. Myownadoption f thelanguage f "agents"and "structures,"herefore,s not theory-neutral.)Despitetheirmanydifferences,owever, he "agent-structure,"parts-whole,""actor-system,"nd"micro-macro"roblemsll reflecthe amemeta-theoreticalmperative-the eed to adopt,for thepurposeof ex-plainingocialbehavior, omeconceptualizationftheontologicalndex-

5. Theagent-structureroblem as, n various uises, ecentlymergeds somethingfcottagendustryhroughouthe ocial ciences. ora samplingf hiswork:ngeography,eeDerekGregory,HumanAgencyndHumanGeography," ransactionsfthe nstitutefBritish eographers(no. 1, 1981), p. 1-18, ndDerekGregoryndJohn rry,ds.,SocialRelations and Spatial StructuresLondon: MacMillan, 1985); in sociology, n additionto thework fGiddensndBhaskarlready ited, eeAlanDawe,"Theories fSocialAction,"nTom Bottomore and Robert Nisbet, eds., A History of Sociological Analysis (London:Heinemann,979), ndKarinKnorr-CetinandAaronCicourel, ds.,AdvancesnSocialTheory:Towardan Integration fMicroand Macro-Sociologies (London: Routledge& KeganPaul,1981);n socialhistory,eePhilip brams, istoricalociologyIthaca:Cornell niver-sity ress,1982), nd Christopherloyd,ExplanationnSocialHistoryOxford: lackwell,1986); nthephilosophyfsocial cience, eeJohn 'Neill, d.,Modesof ndividualismndCollectivismNewYork:St.Martins,973), ndDavid-Hillel uben, heMetaphysicsftheSocialWorldLondon:Routledge KeganPaul,1985);nMarxistheory,eeEdward homp-son's polemic nThePoverty f Theory nd OtherEssays (New York: MonthlyReviewPress,1978) gainsthe tructuralarxismfLouisAlthusser,ndthe ommentariesnthis ebatebyPerryAnderson, rguments ithin nglishMarxismLondon:Verso,1980), ndNicosMouzelis, ReductionismnMarxist heory," elos 5 Fall 1980), p. 173-85; nd n nterna-tional elations,ee Waltz,Theoryf nternationalolitics, ndJamesRosenau, BeforeCooperation:egemons, egimes,ndHabit-DrivenctorsnWorld olitics,"nternationalOrganization0 Autumn986), p.849-94.



6/37

Agent-structureroblem 339planatoryelationshipetween ocialactors ragentsin this ase, states)6andsocietal tructuresinthis ase, the nternationalystem).The agent-structureroblems really wo nterrelatedroblems, ne on-tological nd the other pistemological.hefirst,nd morefundamental,issue concerns henature f both gents nd structuresnd,becausetheyare in someway mutuallymplicating,ftheir nterrelationship.n otherwords,what ind f ntitiesrethese or, nthe aseof ocial tructures,rethey ntities t all?), and how are they nterrelated?here re two basicways o approach his uestion: ymakingne unit f nalysis ntologicallyprimitive,r by giving hem qual and thereforerreduciblentologicalstatus. epending n which ntitys madeprimitive,hese pproaches en-erate hree ossible nswers otheontological uestion,which willcallindividualism,tructuralism,nd structurationism.eorealism nd world-system heorymbody, espectively,hefirstwo f hese ositions,oth fwhich ltimatelyeduce ne unit fanalysis o theother. hus,neorealistsreduce he tructuref he tate ystem o thepropertiesnd nteractionsfits constituentlements, tates,whileworld-systemheoristseduce tate(and class) agents o effects f thereproductionequirementsf thecapi-talistworld ystem. he structurationistpproach, n theother and, riesto avoid what shall rgue re thenegative onsequences f ndividualismandstructuralismy giving gents nd structuresqual ontologicaltatus.Farfrom eing mindless ynthesisf he bestofbothworlds," owever,the tructurationroject equires very articularonceptualizationftheagent-structureelationship.hisconceptualizationorces storethinkhefundamentalropertiesf state) gents nd systemtructures.n turn,tpermitss to use agents nd structureso explain ome f hekeypropertiesof each as effects f the other, o see agents nd structuress "co-determined"r"mutually onstituted"ntities.The mannernwhich social theoryddresses heseontologicalssuesconditionstsapproach othe pistemologicalspectofthe gent-structureproblem,he hoice nd ntegrationfdifferentypes f xplanationsithintheories f ocialbehavior. hisproblemctuallyaises wo pistemologicalissues. The firsts the choice of the form f explanation orrespondingrespectivelyo agents nd structures.his choicedepends argelyn thekinds fpropertiesf gents ndstructureshat avebeendeemed ausally

6. Recent heoretical ork as conceptualizedhe tate oth s an agent nd s a structure;see, for xample, oger enjaminndRaymond uvall, The Capitalisttate n Context,"nRoger enjaminndStephen lkin, ds., TheDemocratictate Lawrence, ans.: UniversityofKansasPress, 985), p. 19-57.Forpurposes f his aper, assumewith eorealistshat hestate s an agent, movewhich an be ustifiednpart ecause he rganizingrinciplesf hestate ystemonstitutetates s individualhoice-makingnitswhich re responsibleor heiractions.My subsequentrgumentsbout heway n which ystemtructuresonstitutetatesas agents hould ot,however, e seen s excluding conceptionf he tate s a structurefpolitical uthorityn which overnmentalgents re n turn mbedded.



7/37

340 Internationalrganizationsignificant.hus,approaches o social nquiryhat onceive f human e-ingsas reflective,oal-directedubjects, uchas rational hoicetheory,generategent-explanationshat re,broadly peaking, interpretive"-that s,cast nterms fthegoals,beliefs, nd self-understandingsf gents.On the otherhand, pproaches hat onceive f human eings s nothingmore han omplex rganismsrocessingtimuli-such s behaviorism-generategent-explanationshat remoremechanisticallyausalin form.The situations similarwith espect o "structural"xplanations.ocialtheories hat reducesystem tructureso the properties f individualsusually onstrue he explanatoryoleof structuress one of constrain-ingthe hoices fpre-existinggents,while hose hat onceptualizeystemstructuress irreduciblentities nderlyinggents ypically nderstandstructuress generatingor explaininggentsthemselves. he secondepistemologicalssue concernsthe relative mportancef agent-expla-nationsnd structure-explanations,fwhateverype, n socialtheory.hisissue is of secondarymportancen this article ecause neorealistsndworld-systemheoristsgree hat nadequate nternationalelationsheorymust emore tructure-han gent-oriented.heyunderstandhis equire-mentnverydifferentays,however-a disagreementhich will atershow s linked o thewaythey pproach heontologicalimension f theagent-structureroblem.2. Reductionism nd reificationin international elations heoryInthis ection want o: 1) compare he onceptionsf "structural"heoryfoundnneorealismndworld-systemheory;nd2) showthat,despiteimportantifferences,hese onceptionshare commonpproach otheagent-structureroblem,nd that his pproach recludesnexplanationftheessential ropertiesftheir espective rimitivenits.This inabilityleads to assumptionsboutprimitivenits hat re withoutheoreticaloun-dation, movewhichnturn ndermineshe heories' xplanationsf tateactionn the nternationalystem. shall rgue hat his ommonimitationis a functionfthebasic assumptionsnd internalogicof eachtheory'sapproach o theagent-structureroblem,nd that hey hereforeannotovercomet within he erms f their asicontologicalndepistemologicalcommitments.

a. NeorealismOn the surface, t least,neorealists ave strong tructuralnd anti-reductionistommitments.n his discussion f thenature f systemicnd



8/37

Agent-structureroblem341reductionistheories, ennethWaltz defines he atter s theorieswhichexplain he oreignolicy ehavior f tates xclusivelynterms f ausesatthenationalevelof nalysis.7 enin's heory f mperialism,or xample,sreductionistecause itexplains xpansionist ehavior n terms f the ac-cumulationynamics fnationalapitalism.Waltz riticizesuchtheories,correctly think,or gnoringhe nterveningole playedby internationalsystem tructuresn thetranslationf domestic mperativesntoforeignpolicy ehavior. eorealists void his ype freductionismyadoptinghesystemicbut, shallargue,not "structural")ogic and conceptual p-paratus fmicro-economicheory.8 his movepermits eorealistso inte-gratewithin coherentheoreticalrameworkhe tate-centricpproach fclassicalpolitical ealismwith hesystemicpproach f nternationalys-tems heory,nd thus odevelop conception ftheagent-structureela-tionshipn nternationalelations hich ecognizes hecausal role of bothstate gents ndsystem tructures.Inviewofneorealists'esire o avoidmicro-leveleductionism,owever,it s ironic hat heirolution o the gent-structureroblems, n a differentanddeeper ense,reductionist.he kind f "reductionism" hich eoreal-istsoppose s defineds theory hich ries o explain ehaviorn terms fstrictlygent-levelroperties.hisrejectionfwhatmightecalled xplan-atoryreductionismoesnot n tself, owever,mpose nyparticularestric-tionon theontological issueofhowsystem tructureshould e defined,since noppositionoagent-levelxplanationss analyticallyndependentfhowsystem tructures,nce recognized s causally ignificant,hould etheorized. hus,neorealists'ndividualistefinitionf the structureftheinternationalystem s reducible o thepropertiesf states9-to hedistri-bution f capabilities-isperfectlyonsistent ith he mportantolethat

7. Waltz, Theory f International olitics, p. 18.8. Robert ilpin,War nd Change nWorld oliticsPrinceton:rincetonniversityress,1981);RichardAshley, Three Modes of Economism,"nternationaltudiesQuarterly7(December 1983), pp. 463-96; Robert Keohane, AfterHegemony: Cooperation and Discord inthe World olitical conomyPrinceton: rinceton niversityress,1984);Duncan nidal,"The Game Theory f International olitics," WorldPolitics 38 (October 1985), pp. 25-57.9. Ashley horoughlyritiqueshe ndividualistand mpiricist)oundationsf heneorealistconceptionf nternationalystem tructuren his "Poverty f Neorealism," specially p.238-42. t s mportanto keep nmind, owever,hatnTheoryf nternationalolitics,Waltzstarts utwith hree efiningeaturesfpoliticaltructures:) theprincipleccordingowhichthey re organized,) thedifferentiationfunits ndtheir unctions,nd 3) thedistributionfcapabilitiescrossunits. hisdefinitionan beused osupport generativepproacho struc-tural heorizing,s John uggie hows n hisDurkheimianeconstructionf Waltz n "Con-tinuityndTransformationn heWorld olity: oward Neorealistynthesis,"World olitics35 (January 983), p. 261-85.Despite hispromisingeginning,owever,Waltz nd otherneorealistsrgue hat he irstwo eaturesf his efinitionon't pply o nternationaloliticalstructures,eaving s npractice ith n ndividualistonceptionf tructures the istributionofcapabilities. oranargumenthatinks his esult o a lingeringeorealistommitmentopositivism,ee Little, TheSystems pproach."



9/37

342 Internationalrganizationsystemtructureslay nneorealistxplanationsf state ehavior.ndeed,in both tsdecision- nd game-theoreticersions'0 eorealism,ikemicro-economics, s characterizedy "situational eterminism,"y a modelofactionnwhich ational ehaviors conditionedrevendeterminedythestructuref choice situations.11hepoints not hatneorealistsngagenexplanatoryeductionismwhichhey o not), ut atherhat heir efinitionof ystemtructures characterizedyontologicaleductionism.hisdefini-tioneads toan understandingfsystemtructuress only onstrainingheagency fpreexistingtates, ather han, s inworld-systemndstructura-tion heory,s generating tate gents hemselves.hisfollowsnevitablyfromts ontologically)eductionistefinitionfsystemtructure:ystemstructuresannotgenerategentsfthey re reduced o the propertiesfagentsn thefirstlace.Despite tsstronglyystemicocus, hen, eoreal-ism'sviewof he xplanatoryoleof ystemtructuressdecidedlytate- ragent-centric.t sees systemtructuresn themannernwhich hey ppearto states-as given, xternal onstraintsn their ctions-ratherhan sconditionsfpossibilityor tate ction.From heperspectivef nternationalelationsheory,hemostmportantweakness fneorealism'sndividualistpproach othe gent-structurerob-lem s that tfails o provide basis for evelopingn explicitheory fthestate. t is nothard o see why hismust e the case. Theorizingboutparticularind f ndividualnit,ike he tate, antake ither f woforms(orboth).Thefirst,reductionist"trategys to explain he ndividualnterms f its internalrganizationaltructure.12While hisapproachmayexplain ome ofthe causalpropertiesf the ndividual,tneglectshe r-reduciblyocialcontentfmany ndividual-levelredicates.'3hus,whilethe nternalhysiologicaltructuref capitalistmay xplain omedisposi-tions ndactions,we cannot xplain isorherbehavior s that fa "capi-

10. BruceBuenodeMesquita, he WarTrap NewHaven: Yale Universityress,1981);Snidal, TheGameTheoryf nternationalolitics."Despite mportantifferencesetweenthe woversions ver he onceptualizationf hoice ituationsn nternationalelations,othare basedon an individualistefinitionf the structuref the nternationalystems thedistributionfcapabilities.11. See SpiroLatsis, SituationaleterminismnEconomics," ritishournalor he hi-losophy fScience 3 August 972), p.207-45, ndthe eply yFritzMachlup,SituationalDeterminismn Economics," BritishJournalfor the Philosophyof Science 25 (September1974), p.271-84.12. Examples f uch n approachn nternationalelations ightnclude raham llision,Essence ofDecision Boston:LittleBrown, 971) nd John teinbrunner,heCyberneticTheory fDecisionPrinceton:rincetonniversityress,1974).13. Thisis probablyhe mostpersistentlyitedproblemn the ndividualistrogramfreducingll social cientificxplanationsothepropertiesf ndividualsr theirnteractions.See, for xample,MauriceMandelbaum,Societal Facts,"British ournal fSociology(1955); StevenLukes, "Methodologicalndividualismeconsidered," ritish ournal fSociology 9 June 968), p. 119-29;HaroldKincaid, Reduction,xplanation,nd ndivid-ualism," hilosophyfScience53 December 986), p.492-513.



10/37

Agent-structureroblem343talist"except n terms fthe ndividual'social relationso other gents.Thesecond pproach,hen, s to explicatendtheorizehese elationallyrstructurallyefined roperties,hat s, to developa social theory f thestate.Yet these repreciselyhepropertieshat eorealismbstractswayfromwhen t reduces ystemtructureso a distributionf propertiesfpreexistingndividuals. he neorealist'sndividualistonceptualizationfsystemtructures thereforeooweak osupport social heoryf he tate:systemtructuresannot enerategentsfthey redefinedxclusivelynterms f those agents n the first lace. The consequence f makingheindividualntologicallyrimitive,notherwords,s that he ocialrelationsin virtue fwhich hatndividuals a particularind f gentwith articularcausal properties ust emain oreverpaque and untheorized.Oneresponse o thismighte toargue, s Waltzdoes,"4hat hedevelop-ment fanexplicit heoryf the tate s not ntegralothedevelopmentfsystemicheories f nternationalelations. et clearly omemodel f thestate s necessary o build ystemicheories f nternationalelations,ndthismodel an stronglyffecthecontentf those heories. hus, o arguethat hestructuref the ndustrializedtates' nteractionith espect ointernationalrades ann-personteratedrisoner's ilemma,ndthat reetrade s thereforelwaysproblematic,equires certain nderstandingfthose tates nd theirnterestsnd powers.The ssue,then, s notwhethersome understandingfthestate s necessaryo build ystemicheoriesitis), butwhetherhatunderstandingollows rom theory,roundednacoherentetofpropositionsith ome orrespondenceoreality,rsimplyfrom setofpre-theoreticalssumptions,roundedn ntuitionr deology.Whatevertsadvantagesn terms f analyticalonvenience, reliance nuntheorizedssumptionsboutprimitiveermseavesus unable o ustifyparticularonceptualizationsf nteractionituationsnd eads, therefore,to an untenableas if"approach o systemicheory uilding.5 Thus,with-out an explicit heory fthe state'spowers nd interestsn internationaltrade,without theoryfthe"rulesofthegame," t cannot e determinedwhetherr not his ame eallys a Prisoner's ilemma atherhan, s some

14. "Reflectionsn Theory f nternationalolitics:A Response o MyCritics,"n RobertKeohane, d.,Neorealism nd ts CriticsNewYork: Columbia niversityress,1986), .340.15. The debate ver thevalidityf theories uilt n the ssumptionhat he ocialworldoperates as if" certain hings ere rue s a long ne, so my ayinghat uchreasonings"untenable"s, of course, ontentious.he terms fthedebatewerefirstefinedy MiltonFriedman'sThe MethodologyfPositive conomics,"n hisEssays n Positive conomics(Chicago:ChicagoUniversityress,1953), piecewhich nitiated lively ebatewith aulSamuelsonndothersnthepagesof heAmerican conomic eviewn the arly 960s. oraparticularlyogent rgumenthat as if" reasonings nconsistentvenwithhe ogicalmpiri-cistconceptionfscientificxplanationhat nformedriedman'seminal ontribution,eeTerryMoe, "On theScientifictatusof RationalModels," American ournal fPoliticalScience23 February979), p. 215-43.



11/37

344 Internationalrganizationneo-Marxists ightrgue, pure ooperation ame.6 And,without com-pelling rgumento that ffect, ecannot nowf failed redictionsduetoanerrornour ystemicheory r to a misspecificationf he pretheoret-ical) rules of thegame. Without theory f thestate, n otherwords,neorealists' ffortso build compellingystemic heories f internationalrelationsreseriously ompromised.Thisconsequencedoes not mean that he actual,micro-economic,s-sumptionseorealistsmake about the statearewrong r misleadingal-though think hey probably re)-just that they ack a theoreticalfoundation ith omedemonstratedorrespondenceoreality.he resultsa tendencyo arguethat tates ct "as if" theymaximize, or xample,power ndwealth,nd a correspondingnabilityo build redibleystemictheories f nternationalelations.Waltz's eparationf heoriesf he tateand of nternationalelations otwithstanding,fneorealists ant oavoidthese roblemsheymust ltimatelyevelop social heoryf he tate, hatis, theymustmakethestate heoreticallyproblematic." hiswouldre-quire n attempto theorize irectlybout hegenerativetructuresf theworld nddomestic olitical-economyhich onstitutetates s particularkinds f gentswith ertain ausalpowers nd nterests. eorealistslreadyhave an implicitheory f these ocialrelationsif hey id not, hey ouldnot ttributeny ausal powers r nterestso state gents), ut hey annotmake his heory xplicit, nd thereforealsifiable,s long s they reathestate s ontologicallyrimitive.ince thesocial relations hich onstitutestates s stateswillbepotentiallynobservablend rreducibleotheprop-erties fstates hemselves, owever, uch a theoreticaleorientationillrequire non-individualistnd non-empiricistnderstandingf systemstructuresnd structuralnalysis, n understandingfstructures some-thingmore han distributionfcapabilities.

b. World-systemheoryWorld-systemheoryffersuch nunderstandingf structurendthus,tleastwith espect o tsconceptualizationfstructurendstructuralnaly-sis, can be seen as a progressive roblemhift ver neorealism.n onecrucialrespect,however,world-systemheoristsuplicate he neorealist16.As far s I know,no neo-Marxistas usedgame-theoreticanguage o characterizeinternationalconomic elationsetween headvanced ndustrializedountries.ut clearly,because ftheir ery ifferentheoreticalnderstandingf he tate, eo-Marxistcholarsremuchess ikelyhan eorealistso see those elationsn mercantilist,ndthereforeoliticallyfragile,erms;ee, for xample, obinMurray,The Internationalizationf Capital nd theNation-State,"ewLeftReview 7 May-June 971), p. 84-109, ndJohnWilloughby,TheChangingoleofProtectionn heWorld conomy," ambridgeournalfEconomics June1982), p. 195-211. he ssue nthis rticle,f ourse, s notwhich iew s actuallyorrect,utrather owtodevelop n approach o the gent-structureroblem hichnsures t east hepossibilityfdetermininghich s correct,hat s,ofdeveloping theoryf statesn nterna-tional conomictructures.



12/37

Agent-structureroblem345approach o the gent-structureroblem: hey t least mplicitly akeoneentity rimitive,nthis ase the tructureftheworld ystem,nd then ryto reduce ther ntities, uch as state ndclass agents, o its effects.heresult fthis trategy,shall rgue, s thatworld-systemheoristseifyhestructuref theworld ystem nd thus,ikeneorealists,re unable ven nprincipleo explain ts ssential roperties. social tructures reified hen"it s treated s an object nalyticallyndependentf he ctions ywhich tisproduced.",17A solution othe gent-structureroblem,hen, ngagesnreificationhen tobjectifiesocialstructuresithoutecognizinghat nlyhuman ction nstantiates,eproduces,nd transformshose tructures.shouldmphasizehat eificationresupposest east n mplicitonceptionoftherelationshipfagents o social structures:tructuresavereproduc-tiverequirementshich, orwhatever eason, gents assivelymplement.The problemwith eification,herefore,oes notconcern he nclusion rexclusion f gents er e from ocialscientificheoriessince heymust eincluded), utrather heterms f theirnclusionnto hose heories.ImmanuelWallerstein'solution o the agent-structureroblem as thesamegeneral orm,nd thus he amestrengthsnd weaknesses, s LouisAlthusser'structural arxist olution.8 Like Althusser'snsistencen the"absoluteontological riorityf the wholeover theparts,"19 he core ofWallerstein'spproachs thepropositionhat heonlymeaningfulnit fanalysis n comparative r internationalolitical conomys the wholeworld ystem.Moreover, oth cholars ccept he oncept nddiscourse f"totality,"20f ocialwholes hat re rreducible,venby ompositionaws,to their onstituentlements. s a result,Wallerstein,ikeAlthusser,on-ceptualizes structure"n structuralistr generativeerms ather han ntermsftheobservable elations etween, r propertiesf,primitivendi-viduals. hat s, ncontrasto theneorealistefinitionf ystemtructures17. DouglasMaynardndThomasWilson,On theReificationf ocialStructure,"nScottMcNall and Gary Howe, eds., CurrentPerspectives in Social Theory,vol. 1 (Greenwich,Conn.:JAIPress,1980), . 287.18. The structural arxist pproach o theagent-structureroblems discussednLouisAlthusserndEtienne alibar, eading apital London:NewLeftBooks,1970), p.180-81,and n Steven mith, eadingAlthusserIthaca:Cornell niversityress, 984), p.192-200.It should e noted,however,hatdespite hesimilaritiesetweenworld-systemheoryndstructuralarxism ith espectotheir nderstandingsf he gent-structureelationship,heydiffern mportantays n otherssues, uch s the onceptualizationf he apitalist ode f

production.ee, for xample,GaryHoweandAlanSica, "Political conomy,mperialism,andtheProblemfWorld-Systemheory,"nMcNallandHowe,CurrenterspectivesnSocial Theory, p. 235-86.19. Smith,Reading Althusser, . 177.20. Theydisagree, owever,bout heexactmeaningf this erm, hats, aboutwhethertotalitiesre"expressive" r "structured."nthese ifferences,eeMichael urawoy,Con-temporaryurrentsn Marxist heory,"n ScottMcNall,ed., TheoreticalerspectivesnSociologyNewYork: t. Martins, 979), p. 16-39, ndHarvey aye, Totality:tsApplica-tion o HistoricalndSocialAnalysis yWallersteinndGenovese,"Historical eflections(Winter979), p.405-19.



13/37

346 Internationalrganizationthedistributionfcapabilitiescrosspreexistingtates,world-systemheo-ristsdefine hestructurefthe world ystemn terms ftheunderlyingorganizingrinciplesftheworld conomy,nd nparticularfthe nterna-tional ivision f abor,which onstitutergeneratetate ndclassagents21Theexistencend dentityfagents s agents,ndthereforeftheir ausalpowers ndrealinterests,s produced,nd thereforexplained, y theirrelation o the otalityfthe apitalist orld ystem. hus, tate gents reeffectsf the structurefthe world ystemn much he same sense thatcapitalistsreeffectsf he tructuref he apitalist ode fproduction,rslavesareeffects fthe tructurefmaster-slaveelationships.

This generativeeading f world-systemheoryresupposes n ontolog-ical andexplanatoryistinctionetween internal" nd "external"rela-tions.22nternalelationsrenecessary elationshipsetween ntitiesn thesensethat he ntitiesepend pon he elationor heir ery dentity.tan-dardexamplesof internal elations re parent-childnd master-slave;neitherntitysconceivablewithouthe xistence fthe ther. his mpliesthat n internalelation annot e reduced o thepropertiesr nteractionsof itsmember lements; n thecontrary,herelationshiptself xplainsessential ropertiesfeachentity,nd thus hecharacter ftheirnterac-tion.External elations, n theother and, recontingentelationshipsrinteractionsetweenntities,achofwhich an existwithouthe ther. hefact hat wo tates oto warorsign peace,for xample,s not ssentialotheirdentitys states.External elationsre mportantor xplaining hathappens o entitiesnthe ourse ftheirnteraction,ut hey o not xplaintheessential haracteristicsf those ntities hemselves.Generative tructures re sets of nternal elations.To adopta generativeapproach otheorizingbout he tructuref he nternationalystem,here-fore,s tounderstandhe tate s an effectf ts nternalelationso otherstatesand social formationsn theworldpolitical-economy,ather hanpurely s an untheorizedause of internationalvents.The strengthfagenerative pproach o structuralheorizing,hen, s that n contrasto

21. Mygenerativeeadingfworld-systemheory'sonceptualizationf tructures charac-teristicnly f the "qualitative"and at this oint,pparentlyheminority)chool fworld-system heoristsepresented,or xample, yWallersteinndTerenceHopkins. ctually,herecent ebatebetween ualitativend quantitativeorld-systemheoristss an interestingexample f quite xplicitension ithin single esearchommunityetween cientificealistand empiricistonceptionsf the ontologyndmethodologyf structuralnalysis.On thisdebate ee, for xample, ichard ittle, The Systems pproach,"n SteveSmith, d., nter-national Relations, British nd American Perspectives Oxford,U.K.: Blackwell, 1985), pp.71-91, nd PeterTaylor, The Povertyf nternationalomparisons:omeMethodologicalLessonsfromWorld-Systemsnalysis" DepartmentfGeography,niversityfNewcastle-upon-Tyne,985).22. Useful iscussionsf his istinctionnclude ertell llman, lienation: arx'sConcep-tion fManin Capitalist ocietyCambridge:ambridge niversityress,1976), p.26-40,and Bhaskar, The PossibilityofNaturalism, pp. 53-55.



14/37

Agent-structureroblem 347neorealism'sndividualistpproach t is able, in principle,o explain hecausalpowers nd nterestsf tate ndclassagents, o make hese heoreti-cally ndempiricallyroblematic.A generativepproach o structuralnalysis oes not,however, equirethat ystemtructurese reified.World-systemheoristsegin o reify o-cial structureshenthey ssert, r implyntheir oncrete esearch, otonly hat ertainocialrelationsre rreduciblend constitutehe tate ndclass agentswhich re their lements, ut that heserelations re analyt-icallyndependentf, ndontologicallyrioro, hose gents. uch view simplied y thetendency f world-systemheoristso followAlthusserntreatingtate nd class agents s no more hanpassive "bearers" of sys-temicmperatives, tendency hichmanifeststselfna reliance n func-tional explanations f state behavior.23 unctionalisms evident,forexample,nworld-systemheorists'xplanationf generalwarsdirectlynterms f hereproductionequirementsf heworld-system,24equirementswhich ecome ranslatedor translatehemselves)nto ellicose tate nter-ests, s well as inthe nterpretationftheriseof socialist tatesn suchaway that t is consistent ith hereproductionequirementsf the worldsystem.25his s notto saythatworld-systemheorists ould onsciouslyarguethatthe reproductionf the world-systemccurs without tateagency-theyprobablywouldnot.Butnonethelessnmany xplanationstheworld ystemn effecteems o callforthtsownreproductiony tates;this uggestshat tleast ntheir oncrete esearch, orld-systemheoriststreat heworld-systems at some eveloperatingndependentlyfstateaction,hat npracticehey eifyheworld-system.hile his esultmay eunintended,do not hinkt s accidental. nthe ontrary,tfollowsnevita-bly romhe undamentalremisefWallerstein'solism-thathewhole sontologicallyrior oitsparts.The principal eakness fa structuralistolution otheagent-structureproblems that,becauseitcannot explain nythingutbehavioralon-formityo structuralemands,'6 itultimatelyails oprovide basis forexplaininghepropertiesfdeepstructureshemselves.tmaybe,for x-ample, hat he division ftheworld ystemnto hree istincttructural

23. This endencysone of hemost ersistentlyited riticismsf t east he arlyworknworld-systemheory. ee, for xample, obert uplessis, FromDemesne o World-System:A Critical eview ftheLiteraturen theTransitionrom eudalism o Capitalism," adicalHistory eview Fall1976), p. 3-41, ndSkocpol,Wallerstein's orld apitalistystem."24. Christopherhase-Dunn nd JoanSokolovsky,Interstate ystems,World-EmpiresandtheCapitalistWorld-Economy: Response oThompson,"nternationaltudiesQuar-terly 7 September 983), p. 357-67.25. Christopherhase-Dunn, SocialistStates n the CapitalistWorld-Economy,"n hisSocialist States in theWorld-SystemBeverly Hills: Sage Publications,1982), pp. 21-56.26. DerekLayder, Problemsn Accountingor he ndividualn Marxist-Rationalistheo-reticalDiscourse," BritishJournalof Sociology 30 (June1979), p. 150.



15/37

348 Internationalrganizationpositionscore, emi-periphery,eriphery)sfunctionalor he eproductionofcapitalism, ut thisdoes notexplainwhythesystem eveloped hatparticulartructure,ordoesitguaranteehat hat tructure ill ndure.27Because of heir assive onceptionf tate ndclass agency,world-systemtheoristsend ofall nto nhistoricaleterminismhich, y gnoringtherpossiblehistoricalrajectories,mplicitlyssumes hat heevolution f theworld ystem ould nothave turned utanyotherway. Thelimitationsfworld-systemheory'solution o the gent-structureroblem,nd also itssimilaritiesothat fstructuralarxism,re nthis espect o more ppar-ent hannWallerstein'sxplanationf fundamentaltructuralhangeikethetransitionrom eudalismocapitalism.28 ithout recognitionftheontological ependencefsystemtructuresn state nd classagents,Wal-lersteinsforcednto nexplanationf hat ransitionnterms f xogenousshocks nd theteleologicalmperativesfan immanentapitalistmodeofproduction.hisexplanationpposesRobert renner'smore r ess struc-turationistne,whichdescribes he transitionn terms f a dialectic fendogenouslass strugglend structuralonditioning.29hisexplanationreflectsifficultiesemarkablyimilar othose tructuralarxists avehadintheorizinghetransitionrom nemodeofproductionoanother.30World-systemheorists,hen,ikeneorealists,reat heir rimitivenits,inthis ase the tructureftheworld ystem,s given ndunproblematic.Thistreatmenteads them o separate he operation f systemtructuresfromhe ctivitiesfstate ndclass agents-inotherwords, o reifyystemstructuresn a waywhich eads to staticndevenfunctionalxplanationsfstate ction.Theworld ystems not reated s anhistoricallyontingent,andthereforeontinuouslyroblematic,reationndrecreationf tate ndclassagents. think hegreaterttention allerstein'saterworkgives oproblemsfagency ndicates n awareness f thisdifficulty,31ndtheseeffortsavehelped omoveworld-systemheory wayfrom heexcessivefunctionalismvidentnhis early ontributionsnd,perhaps,nmy por-

27. EmileDurkheim akes xactlyhis ointn TheRules fSociologicalMethodChicago:Chicago niversityress, 938), . 90,when e says hat to showhow fact susefulsnot oexplain ow toriginatedrwhy t s what t s. Theuseswhicht erves resupposehe pecificpropertiesharacterizingt,butdo not reate hem. he needwe haveof things annot ivethem xistence, or an tconferheirpecific ature pon hem.t s to causesof notherortthat hey we their xistence."28. See,for xample,Wallerstein,heModernWorld-System(NewYork:Academic ress,1974), specially hap.1.29. Brenner,The Origins fCapitalist evelopment: Critique fNeo-Smithianarx-ism,"New LeftReview 04 July-August977), p. 25-92.30. See, for xample, tephenResnick nd RichardWolff, The Theory f TransitionalConjuncturesnd theTransitionromeudalism oCapitalism," eview fRadicalPoliticalEconomics 1 Fall 1979), p. 3-22, ndthe esponsenthe ame ssuebyHerbert intis, OntheTheory fTransitionalonjunctures,"p.23-31.31. See,for xample,. Wallerstein,hePolitics ftheWorld-EconomyCambridge:am-bridge niversityress,1984), p. 112-46.



16/37

Agent-structureroblem349trayal fworld-systemheory.ndeed, ncontrasto the omplete eglectfgenerativetructures y neorealists, orld-systemheoristseem to beawareoftheneedto arrive ta solutiono the gent-structureroblem hatintegratesenerativetructuresnd state nd class agency.World-systemtheory'svolutionowards greater ocuson agency hus,n someways,parallelshedevelopmentfstructuralarxismnthe aterwork f NicosPoulantzas.32swith oulantzas, owever,t s difficulto seehow gencycan be broughtnan ontologicalndexplanatoryarwith ystemtructureswithoutxplicitlyettisoninghe strictholism nd structuraleificationwhich haracterizehe structuralistpproach o theagent-structurerob-lem. Nonetheless,f onlybecause t at least recognizeshe existence ndexplanatoryole ofgenerativetructures,heworld-systemolutiono theagent-structureroblems considerablyloser othat f tructurationheorythans theneorealistolution.

c. SummaryIn this ection, have tried o dentifymportantifferencesetweenheneorealist nd world-systemnderstandingsf "structural"xplanation,and to ink hesedifferenceso their ifferentocialontologies.havealsoattemptedo show that,despite hesedifferences,eorealismndworld-systemheoryhare common,nderlyingpproach othe gent-structureproblem:hey oth ttemptomake ithergents rstructuresnto rimitiveunits,which eaves each equallyunable o explain hepropertiesfthoseunits, ndthereforeo ustifyts theoreticalndexplanatorylaims boutstate ction.The obvious mplicationf this rguments thatneithertateagents or hedomesticnd nternationalystemtructureshichonstitute

themhould e treatedlways s given rprimitivenits; heories f nter-national elations houldbe capableofprovidingxplanatoryeverage nboth.Thisdoes notmeanthat particularesearchndeavor annot akesome hingss primitive:cientificractice as to start omewhere.tdoesmean,however,hatwhat sprimitivenoneresearch ndeavormust e atleastpotentiallyroblematicor functions a "dependent ariable") nanother-that cientists eed theories f their rimitivenits.Notwith-standingheir pparent spirationo be general heories f internationalrelations,he ndividualistnd structuralistntologies f neorealismndworld-systemheoryrecludehedevelopmentf uch heories.n contrast,a structurationistpproach othe gent-structureroblem ouldpermitstodevelop heoreticalccounts f both tate gents nd system tructureswithoutngagingneither ntologicaleductionismrreification.32. State,Power, Socialism (London: Verso, 1978); see also Bob Jessop,Nicos Poulantzas:Marxist Theory nd Political Strategy New York: St. Martins,1985).



17/37

350 Internationalrganization3. Analternativepproach o the gent-structureroblemStructurationheorys a relationalolutionothe gent-structureroblemthat onceptualizes gents nd structuress mutuallyonstitutedr co-determinedntities.What hismeanswillbecomemore pparentater, utfirstwant o considerhephilosophicaloundationsf tructurationheorynscientificealism,ndthe urrentebate fthe atter ith mpiricismnthephilosophyf cience.Thisdigressions importantomy rgumentecauseof thecontinuingegemonyfempiricistiscourse n social scientists'conceptualizationf"science,"and therealpossibilityhat kepticsmightusethat iscourse owrite ff tructurationheory's enerativepproach ostructuralheorizings "metaphysical."33ncontrastoempiricism,cien-tific ealisman, nprinciple,allanontologyscientific"ven f t ncludesunobservable enerativetructures. hile cientificealism oes notman-date uch nontologyor ocial ifeor,for hatmatter,ny ther olutionothe gent-structureroblem),t sa necessary onditionor heontologyfstructurationheory.

a. ScientificealismThe philosophyf science ommunityscurrentlyn themidst f wide-ranging ebatebetween mpiricistsnd scientificealists boutwhatmightbe calledthe theory fscience."34 t ssue n thedebate refundamentalquestions f ontology, pistemology,nd the rationalustificationfre-search racticesnboth henatural ndsocial ciences.Ratherhan ttemptto review he entire ebate, willconcentraten contrastinghe "hard33. Thiskind f dismissals an old ndividualistove; ee, for xample,May Brodbeck'sjuxtapositionf methodologicalndividualismith metaphysical" olism n her "Method-ological ndividualisms:efinitionnd Reduction,"n O'Neill, Modes of ndividualismndCollectivism,p. 289-90.More ecently,analytical arxists" averesurrectedhis rgumenttomotivatereconstructionfMarxistheoryn"micro-foundations";ee Jon lster,MakingSenseofMarxCambridge:ambridge niversityress, 985), p.3-8. In thisatterontext,tis perhapsworth oting hat number f social scientificealists ave argued hatMarxisttheorysbestunderstoodnrealist, atherhan mpiricist,ermsnd hereforeoesnotneed obe reconstructedn microfoundationso be "scientific";ee RussellKeat and JohnUrry,Social Theorys Science London:Routledge KeganPaul, 1982), p. 96-118, nd JamesFarr, Marx's Laws," Political tudies 4 June 986), p. 202-22.34. The terms empiricist" nd "scientificealist" re the abels theparticipantsn thisdebate,most fwhom rephilosophersfnaturalcience, se todescribe hemselves.omeof

the mportantontributionsnd overviews re HilaryPutnam,Mathematics, atter, ndMethodCambridge: ambridge niversityress, 1975);Bas vanFraassen,TheScientificImage Oxford: larendonress, 1980); an Hacking, epresentingndInterveningCam-bridge: ambridge niversityress, 983);Richard oyd, On theCurrenttatus f he ssueofScientificealism," rkenntnis9 May 1983), p. 45-90;Jerroldronson, Realist hilos-ophy fScienceNewYork:St.Martins, 984);Jarretteplin, d.,ScientificealismBerke-ley: Universityf Californiaress, 1984);Wesley almon, cientificxplanationnd theCausalStructureftheWorldPrinceton:rincetonniversityress, 984); ndPaulChurch-landand Clifford ooker,eds., Images of Science:Essays on Realism nd Empiricism(Chicago:ChicagoUniversityress,1985).



18/37

Agent-structureroblem 351core" empiricistndrealist ositions n two ssuesthat rerelevantotheagent-structureroblem nd to structurationheoryn particular: ) thelegitimacy f ascribing ntological tatusto unobservablentitiesikegenerativetructures,nd 2) thenature f ausal claims nd scientificxpla-nation. f therealistpositions n these ssues seemupon reading o beunexceptionable,hat s becausethey re:one of heprincipalrgumentsorscientificealismsthattclaims o make etterense han mpiricismf heactual esearch ractices fnaturalnd,to a lesser xtent,ocialscientists.Inotherwords, ealists ssume hat cientists,ot hilosophers,rethe inalarbitersfwhat s "scientific." hiscontrasts ith he mpiricistosition,whichs quite xplicitlynartificialeconstructionfwhat cientistsre orshouldbe doing. ndeed, t could be argued hatneorealistsndworld-systemheoristsre,at east n somerespects, closet" scientificealists.35Theexplicitmetatheoreticaltatementsfboth emainwithinn empiricistdiscourse,36owever, nd thus their esearchpracticedoes notfollowthroughn themethodologicalmplicationsf thescientificealistmodel.Thisfailureuggests nironicwist n theoldbehavioralrgumenthat hesocialsciences re"immature"ecausethey re not scientific"nough:realistmight rgue hat, arfrom eing art f thesolution, heempiricistconceptionfnaturalcience ponwhichmainstreamocial ciencesbasedis part fthe ause of tstheoreticalmpoverishment.Thefirstxis ofdebatebetweenmpiricistsndrealistss the ntologicalstatus funobservables.mpiricistsend o"equatethe ealwithhe xpe-rientiallynowable" n the ensethat hey reunwillingosaythat ntitiesexist fwe cannot, t least nprinciple,ave direct ensory xperiencefthem. hey rgue hatwe should emain, tmost, gnostic bout he xis-tence funobservablentitiesike uarks, tilities,rgenerativetructures,and thatwe should nsteadnterprethetheoreticalerms escribinguchentities,ndthetheoriesnwhich hose ermsreembedded,instrumen-tally" atherhan realistically."37heoriesndtheoreticalerms reuseful35. Neorealistsmight e seen as scientificealistso the xtent hat hey elieve hat tateinterestsrutilitiesrerealbut nobservable echanismshich eneratetate ehavior, hileworld-systemheoristsould e realists othe xtenthat hey elieve hathe tructuref heworld-systemsa realbutunobservablentity hich eneratesgents.36. Themost xplicitecent iscussion f he hilosophyf cience nderlyingeorealismfwhich am aware s the ymposiumround ruceBuenodeMesquita's Toward ScientificUnderstandingf nternationalonflict: Personal iew," nternationaltudies uarterly9(June 985), p. 121-36.Buenode Mesquita'smphasis ndeductivenalysisnd ogical roof,ratherhan he dentificationfpotentiallynobservableausalmechanisms,s the oundationof scientificxplanationisplays clearlympiricistpistemologicalrientation.heexplicitstatementsnphilosophyfscience y at least he uantitativechool fworld-systemheo-rists how similar eliance n empiricistrguments;ee,for xample, hristopherhase-Dunn, The Kernel f heCapitalistWorld-Economy:hreeApproaches,"nThompson,d.,ContendingApproaches, pp. 55-78.37. The bestrecent efensef nstrumentalismndempiricismore enerallys vanFraas-sen, The Scientificmage.



19/37

352 Internationalrganizationinstrumentsor rganizingnd predictingxperience, ut here stoo muchepistemicisk fpositing alse ntitieso ustifyn "abductivenference,"38an nferencehat heoreticalerms efero realbutunobservablentitiesndprocesses.Empiricists,hen, n effect ubordinatentology o epistemol-ogy-what exists s a function f whatcan be known xperientially.39ncontrast o empiricists'ejection f abductivenference,cientificealistsargue hat uch nferencesre, n principle,ustifiedf he ntitynquestioncanproduce bservableffects,40r f tsmanipulationermitss to nter-vene with ffectntheobservableworld.41hus,thefact hatwe can usetheoriesboutthe unobservable)nternaltructuref atoms obuildnu-clearweaponswhich an destroy ities s a goodreasonfor herealist obelieve hat uch tructuresxist, s we understandhemoday.Thisthesisis importanto structurationheory ecause, n contrasto empiricism,alkofunobservablend rreducibleocial structuresan be scientificallyegiti-matenthis iew.Aslong s they aveobservable ffectsraremanipulablebyhumangents,we can, nprinciple,peakmeaningfullybout he real-ity"ofunobservableocial structures.Generativetructure,"n otherwords, s a (potentially)cientificather hanmetaphysicaloncept.Scientificealists ommonlydduce twobasic argumentsnfavor fab-ductivenferencend,more enerally,fthe ntologicaltatus funobserv-ables.42Proponentsfthe"indispensabilityrgument"rgue hat realistconstrualf theoreticalermss necessaryomake ense ofthe ctualre-search ractices fnatural nd social cientists.4hysicists ouldnotpositandbuild ests round uarks, ndsocial cientists ouldnotposit ndbuildtestsaroundutilitiesr modes of production,f they houghthat heseentities, espite eing nobservable, erenotreal nd causally fficacious.Proponents f the "miracle rgument,"n turn, o one stepfurtheryarguinghatnotonly s scientificealism ecessary omake cientificrac-tices ationallyntelligible,ut t s also necessaryo explain he nstrumen-

38. Abductionsalsoknown s "retroduction."seful iscussionsf bductionrefoundnNorwood anson, RetroductionndtheLogicofScientificiscovery,"nLeonardKrimer-man, ed., The Nature and Scope of Social Science (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts,1969), p. 73-83, nd Boyd, On theCurrenttatus fScientificealism," specially p.72-89. An unusually etailedndexplicitllustrationf bductiveeasoningn the ocial ciences(and thus upporting y arlieruggestionhat ome ocial cientistsrepracticingcientificrealists)s foundn ElinorOstrom's An Agenda or he tudy f nstitutions,"ublicChoice48 no. 1,1986), . 19.39. Aronson,A Realist Philosophyof Science, p. 261.40. Bhaskar, The Possibility f Naturalism,p. 16.41. Hacking,Representingnd Intervening;homasCook and DonaldCampbell, TheCausal AssumptionsfQuasi-Experimentalractice," ynthese8 July 986), specially p.169-72.42. AlisonWylie, ArgumentsorScientific ealism:The Ascendingpiral,"AmericanPhilosophicalQuarterly 3 (July1986), pp. 287-97.43. Bhaskar, hePossibilityfNaturalism,. 22. Geoffreyellman, Realist rinciples,"Philosophyof Science 50 (June 1983),especially pp. 231-32.



20/37

Agent-structureroblem 353tal successofscience n controllingheworld.44fmaturecientificheoriesdid notat leastpartially orrespond o thedeep structuref reality, hesuccessofsciencewouldbe anunexplainablemiracle."Certainlyoth fthesearguments ependon "mature heories" ortheir orce, nd thusmight e less convincingn the social thannatural cientificontextal-thoughmicro-economicheory nd Marxistheorymight e candidates orsuch status). uttherelative eakness fextant ocial scientificheoriesdoes not eopardize he cientificealist's asicpoint: t s a well-establishedandperfectlyegitimatecientificractice o positunobservablentities oaccount or bservable ehavior. cceptancefthis ractice oes not mplythat ny posit s a good one; scientistsmust till dduce direct rindirectevidence or he validity f their ntologicallaims, nd this vidence salwaysrevisable.But by the same token, cientists, ot philosophersfscience, re the rbitersfthat vidence.The differencesetween mpiricistsndscientificealists verontologyfueldebate on a second axis, the nature nd requirementsf scientificexplanation. raditionally,here ave beentwo competingdealsof scien-tific xplanation:heempiricistr "nomothetic"iewthat xplanationn-volves he ubsumptionf phenomenonnder lawlike egularity;ndtherealistr "retroductive"iew hat t nvolveshe dentificationf heunder-lying ausalmechanisms hich hysicallyeneratedhe henomenon.45heresurgencen recentyearsof the scientificealist iew coincideswith e-newed ttacks n theHumeanmodel fcausation,which upportshe m-piricistccount f xplanation.46n theHumeanmodel, causalrelations a''constant onjunction" f temporallyequencedobservedeventsthatstands n a relation f logical necessity o certain nitial onditionsndlaws.47 n theHumean iew, ur nabilityo experienceausalmechanismsdirectlyreventssfrommputingnynatural ecessityo causalrelations.Scientific ealists riticize his modelbecauseconstant onjunctionsndgeneralizationsre not their wn explanation,nd argue nstead hat o

44. See, for xample, utnam, atter,Mathematics,nd Method; oyd, On theCurrentStatus fthe ssue ofScientificealism";Richard chlagel, A Reasonable eply o Hume'sSkepticism," BritishJournalforthe Philosophyof Science 35 (December 1984), pp. 359-74.45. See ErnanMcMullin,Two IdealsofExplanationnNaturalcience," nPeter rench,et al., eds., Causation nd Causal TheoriesMinneapolis: niversityfMinnesota ress,1984), p. 205-20, ndthethree-wayebatebetween hilipKitcher, as van Fraassen, ndWesley almon n "Approaches o Explanation," heJournal fPhilosophy2 (November1985), pp. 632-54.46. RomHarre ndEdwardMadden, ausalPowersTotowa,N.J.:RowmanndLittlefield,1975); Salmon, Scientific xplanation; Schlagel, "Hume's Skepticism."47. Hencebehavioralocial cientists'mphasis n quantitativenalysis odiscoveraw-likeregularities,atherhan ualitativenalysis ndtheoryo dentifyausalmechanisms.n theempiricist odel,wecannot avesciencewithoutrelatively)constant" onjunctions.or ausefulmore r ess realist ritique f hismodel f ausation s itrelates o social cience, eeDanielHausman, Are ThereCausal Relations mong ependent ariables?" hilosophyfScience50 March 983), p. 58-81.



21/37

354 Internationalrganizationmakea true xplanatorylaim, t is necessary o identifyhe underlyingcausal mechanisms hichmake n event aturallyecessary. he disagree-ment ereultimatelyinges n the egitimacyfabductivenference. eal-ists rgue hat fwe can explain hephysical ispositionsndcausal powersof unobservablentities,we can make a legitimatebductivenferenceabout heexistence f naturally ecessary elations etween ause and ef-fect, ndtherebyranscend ume's skepticismbout ausation.48n effect,therealist's ocus n causal mechanismss an attempto explain he mpiri-cist'sconstantonjunctions.hesedifferentodels f ausation,hen, en-erate ery ifferentodels fscientificxplanation.Whereashe mpiricistexplains y generalizingboutobservable ehavior, herealist xplains yshowing owthe often nobservable)ausal mechanisms hichmakeob-servable egularitiesossiblework.The scientificealist, n otherwords,argues hat answers o why-questionsequire nswers o how- nd what-questions."49I want o conclude his riefverview fthe mpiricist/realistebatewiththree oints bout ts mplicationsor tructurationheorynd,more ener-ally, or ocial scientificesearch ractice. irst, cientificealismttemptstomakesense ofwhatpracticingatural nd social scientistsn factdo,ratherhan rescribingn the egitimacyf ertain esearchractices ersusothers.Abductionnd the de factopositingf unobservable ausalpro-cesses andentities, hetherhose requarks, tilities,r modes fproduc-tion,go on constantlyn scientificesearch,nd scientificealists ee noreason owrite hispractice ff s unscientific.or this eason, ndthis sthesecondpoint, n contrast o empiricism,cientificealism an makescientificenseofunobservableenerativetructures,f structureshat reirreducibleoandgenerateheir lements. his outflankskeymotivationforndividualism,amelyhat tructuralheorizingf hegenerativearietyisnecessarilymetaphysical"r "unscientific."inally, lthoughhere reimportantroblemsn translatingheprotocols nd discourse f naturalscientificractice irectlyothesocial sciences-whatRoyBhaskar alls"limits o naturalism"0-the basicrealist dea that cientificxplanation48. Some realistccounts fcausation,nd particularlyhe ccount f Harre ndMadden,havebeen ccusedof mplyingn Aristotelianessentialism"the explanationfobservablephenomenan terms foccult nd mpenetrableessences"; see,for xample, avid Miller,"Back to Aristotle,"BritishJournalfor he PhilosophyofScience 23 (February 1972),pp. 69-78, and FredWilson,Harre nd Madden n Analyzing ispositionaloncepts," hilosophy

of Science52 (December 985),pp. 591-607.Other ealists, owever, mphasize hat hisobjectionanbe vitiatedyexplainingausal powersn terms fthephysical ropertiesndsocialrelations hich nderliehem; chlagel, Hume'sSkepticism."49. RussellKeat and JohnUrry, ocial Theorys Science London:Routledge KeganPaul, 1982), . 31.50. Perhapshemost ifficultroblemsn makinghis ranslationoncernhe ole fhumanmotivationsndself-understandingsnsocialscientificxplanations,nd the mbiguityfthenotionf ausal"mechanisms"n ocial ife. or sample f he ecent ebate mongcientificrealists n the imits f naturalismn the social sciences, ee Bhaskar,The PossibilityfNaturalism,and Keat and Urry,Social Theory s Science, especiallythepostscript.



22/37

Agent-structureroblem355consistsn the dentificationfunderlyingausal mechanismsatherhanngeneralizationsbout observable egularitiesoes apply o the socialsci-ences, and itsadoption herewould have importantmplicationsortheexplanation fsocial action.Moreover,nd perhapsmoreprovocatively,this dea suggests hat ocial scientificracticemustbe "critical"to be"scientific." he rest f his aper egins o considerhenaturend mplica-tions f thispointwithin specificallytructurationisterspectiven theagent-structureroblem.

b. Structuration heoryScientificealism rovides philosophicalasisfor generativepproachto structuralheorizingn the ocialsciences, nd n so doing,tprovidesfoundationorworkingut the mplicationsf one ofthe ntuitionsboutsocial ifewithwhich opened hediscussion fthe gent-structurerob-lem: hat he apacitiesndeven xistence fhumangentsre nsomewaynecessarilyelated oa social structuralontext-thathey re nseparablefrom uman ociality. he implicationsf this nsight, owever, an beworked ut nat least twodifferentays-one reifieshesocialrelations

that onstitutegents,ndonedoes not. argued arlierhatworld-systemtheorymbodies structuralistpproacho the gent-structureroblemhatis prone o reificationnd determinism.tructurationheoryttemptsopreservehegenerativend relationalspects f structuralismhile akingexplicit onceptualnd methodologicalteps o preventhe nalyticalep-aration fgenerativetructuresromheself-understandingsndpracticesofhumangents opreventtructuraleification.Itmaybe useful o preface hediscussionwith omecommentsnwhatstructurationheory,s a theory,s about.Structurationheorysan "ana-lytical" ather han substantive"heory,nthesensethat t s abouttheanalysis atherhan he ubstance f he ocialworld.51tructurationheorysays omethingboutwhatkinds fentitieshere re n the ocialworldndhowtheir elationshiphould e conceptualized,ndas such tprovidesconceptual rameworkrmeta-theoryor hinkingboutreal world ocialsystems, ut t does nottellus whatparticularindsofagents r whatparticularinds f structuresoexpectnanygiven oncreteocial ystem.Structurationheory, hen,does notcompete irectly ithneorealismrworld-systemheory, ut nsteadwith heir ndividualistnd structuralistapproaches o theagent-structureroblem-thats, with heir ocialon-tologies.As a social ontology, owever, tructurationheory oes have

51. IraCohenmakes hisparticularistinctionn"The Status fStructurationheory:AReply o McLennan,"Theory,ulture,ndSociety (no. 1, 1986), p. 123-34.NigelThriftmakes similar oint, rguinghat tructurationheorys moremeta-theoryhan heoryn"Bear andMouseor BearandTree? Anthony iddens'Reconstitutionf SocialTheory,"Sociology 19 (November 1985),pp. 609-23.



23/37

356 Internationalrganizationimplicationsor thepotential ontent f substantiveheoriesbout real-world ocialsystems,nd for hemethodologyhat ocial scientistshoulduse fo study hose systems. hese implicationsn turn efine researchagendafor ocial nquiry. shallsuggestn Section howneorealismndworld-systemheory elate o thisresearch genda, nd indicate omeofthegaps n contemporarynternationalelationsesearchhat merge romthis omparison.In keeping ith tructurationheory'sharacters a conceptualpproachratherhan substantively-definedheory,hegroup f "structurationheo-rists" s also quitediverse nd, ndeed,mayonlybe recognizables suchfrom utside he tructurationistroblematic.hrift,or xample,dentifiesfivemajor ocial theoristsPhilipAbrams, oyBhaskar, ierre ourdieu,Anthony iddens, ndDerekLayder) s structurationists,ven houghmostofthesewouldprobablyesist he tructurationistabel perhaps ecause tis Giddens's).52Despitetheir nternal ifferences,owever,hey ll sharefour asicanalyticalbjectiveshat an be seen s defininghe hard ore"ofthe tructurationesearch rogram.53

1) In opposition oindividualists,hey ccept herealityndexplana-torymportancef rreduciblend potentiallynobservableocialstructureshat enerategents.

2) In opposition o structuralists,hey pposefunctionalismnd stress"theneedfor theory f practical eason ndconsciousnesshatcanaccount orhuman ntentionalitynd motivation."543) These oppositionsre reconciledy oininggents nd structuresna "dialectical ynthesis" hatovercomes he subordinationf oneto theother,which s characteristicfboth ndividualismndstruc-

turalism.554) Finally, hey rgue hat ocialstructuresre nseparablerompatialandtemporaltructures,nd that ime ndspacemust hereforeeincorporatedirectlynd explicitlynto heoreticalnd concrete o-cialresearch.5652. Thrift,On theDeterminationf SocialActionn Space and Time,"p. 30.53. Adapted rombid.,pp.28-32.54. Ibid.,p. 30.55. This synthesisequireshedevelopmentf mediatingonceptshat anlink tructureand agencyn concrete ituations,ndas such s probablyhekey ource fdisagreementamong tructurationheorists.utwhetherhis inkages establishedhrough "position-practiceystem"Bhaskar), "habitus" Bourdieu),ra "system-institution"exus Gid-dens), heyllserve he ame heoreticalunctionnconcreteesearch, amely,indinggentsandstructuresntomutuallymplicatingntologicalndexplanatoryoles.56. Thispoints more han ritual dmonitionor ocialscientistso be sensitiveothehistoricalndgeographicalontextf heir ubjects:ubstantivesocialtheories ust eaboutthe ime-spaceonstitutionf ocial tructuresightromhe tart." Thrift,OntheDetermi-nationf SocialAction," . 31, talicsn original.)



24/37

Agent-structureroblem357Thefollowingiscussion laborates hesepoints y first iscussinghena-ture f ocial tructures,hen f gents, ndfinallyf heirnterrelationship.Myaccount eliesprimarilyn Bhaskar'swork,which fthefive heoristsdisplays hemost xplicitlycientificealist rientation.S7Structurationheorists tartout much ike structuralistsy defining"structure"ngenerativeerms s a setof nternallyelated lements.58heelements f a socialstructureouldbe agents, ractices, echnologies,er-ritories-whateveran be seen as occupying positionwithin social or-ganization. he fact hat heseelementsre internallyelatedmeans hatthey annot e defined revenconceivedndependentlyftheir ositionnthe tructure.hus, ncontrast o theneorealistefinitionf nternationalsystem tructuress consistingf externallyelated,preexisting,tateagents, structurationistpproach o thestate ystemwould ee states nrelationalerms s generatedr constitutedy nternalelationsf ndividu-ationsovereignty)nd,perhaps, enetrationspheres f nfluence).notherwords,tates re not ven onceivable s states part rom heir ositionnglobal structuref individuatednd penetratedolitical uthorities.henature nd configurationf the internal elations hat omprise socialstructure,nturn, efine setofpossible ransformationsr combinationsfitselements. s a set ofpossible ransformations,ocial structuresre,bydefinition,otreducible o therelationshipsetween structure'slementsthat re observed n a givenconcrete ontext. tructures ake a givencombinationr instantiationf elements ossible,butthey re not ex-hausted y whateverarticular anifestations actual.Structurationheoristsrgue hescientificealist hesis hat ecauseso-cial structuresenerate gents nd their ehaviorin thesense that heymakethe atter ossible), hatbecause socialstructuresave observableeffects, e can potentiallylaimthat hey re real entities espite eingpossibly nobservable. his thesis aisesthe ssue ofwhenwe can legiti-matelylaim hat social structurexists.Thekeyweakness fabductiveinferencesthedangerfcirculareasoningndself-confirmation;eassertthat structurexistsbecause thas theobserved ffects hichwepositedfor he tructurenthefirstlace.Thisweaknesss,I think,t theheart f57. In his Profiles nd Critiques n Social Theory Berkeley: University fCalifornia ress,1982),Giddens ndicatesp.14)thathe also accepts realist onception fscience, uthisrealismsgenerallyess explicitnd thusmore ttenuatedhanBhaskar's.A moremportantreason or elyingn Bhaskar atherhanGiddens, owever,s the atter's eakeronceptionof ocial tructures rules ndresources atherhan s a setofrealbutunobservablenternalrelations, conception hich s arguably ltimatelyoluntaristn its mplications;ee forexample, lexCallinicos,Anthony iddens: Contemporaryritique," heoryndSociety14 March 985), p. 133-66.58. See, forexample, Bhaskar, The Possibility f Naturalism,especially pp. 47-56; PeterManicas, "The Concept of Social Structure,"Journal or theTheory f Social Behavior 10(July 980),pp. 65-82; Keat and Urry, ocial Theory s Science,p. 121; Andrew ayer,Method in Social Science: A Realist Approach (London: Hutchinson,1984), pp. 80-87.



25/37

358 Internationalrganizationthefrequentlyeard omplaintf mainstreamocial scientists, ho claimthatMarxist nd other tructuralheoriesn socialscience re, n principle,"non-falsifiable."he appropriateesponse o thisproblems tofind vi-dencefor structure'sxistence r workingshat re independentfthe-particularbservationsrom hich he tructureas abduced,59nd torec-ognize nd attempto control or heradical penness f social systems.60This is, of course,whatnatural cientificractices all about:scientistsworkbackward rom n observed henomenono a postulatedntity rcausal mechanism,nd then hey ry odevelop ests n closed systemsodeterminendependentlyhether he nferences justified. learly uchindependentvidence s hardero obtainnthe ocial ciences, ut his oesnot nvalidate hebasic idea of usingunobservabletructuresnd causalmechanismso account or ocialbehavior.ndeed, nviewofthe ndivid-ualist's ejection fgenerativetructuress "metaphysical,"t sironichatthegenerativepproachsmuch loser o the onceptualizationf tructureinmathematicsndthenaturalciences hansthe ndividualist'sefinitionas a distributionfunit-levelroperties.61Upto this oint,he tructurationistnderstandingf tructuresidenticaltothe tructuralist's.ach conceives f structurencombinatorialermssanirreduciblentityhat generates"tselementsnd their ossible rans-formations.tructurationheoristsiverge rom tructuralists,owever,narguinghat ocial tructuresiffernat east wo undamentalespectsromnaturaltructures,ndthat recognitionfthesedifferencess essentialoavoidthereificationf socialstructuresharacteristicfstructuralism.hefirstifferences that social structures,nlikenaturaltructures,o notexist ndependentlyftheactivitiesheygovern."62While tmaymakesense osaythat naturaltructureasanexistence part romhebehavior

59. Keat and Urry, ocial Theorys Science, ostscript.60. Anopen ystems one n whichnvariantonstantonjunctionso not btain. lthoughthe omplexityndopen-endednessfopen ystemsimit hepossibilitiesor ecisive ests fsocial cientificlaimssee Bhaskar, hePossibilityfNaturalism,p. 164-65), his roblemafflictsotonly hose heorieswhich efer o unobservablentities. oran interestingndexplicitlyealist rgumentbouthowopen ystemsmight,n some ases, be studiedn a waythatwouldpermit elativelyontrolledests, ee Cook and Campbell, Quasi-ExperimentalPractice."61. On thedefinitionf structuren mathematicsee,for xample,MarcBarbut,On theMeaning ftheWordStructure'n Mathematics,"n M. Lane, ed., Structuralism:Reader(London:Jonathan ape, 1970),MichaelResnick,Mathematicss a ScienceofPatterns:Ontologynd Reference,"Nous 15 (November 981),pp. 529-50,and Stewart hapiro,"Mathematicsnd Reality," hilosophyf Science 0 December 983), p. 523-48.Modernphysics,nturn,s basedon group heorythemathematicalheoryfbinaryystems), hichsexplicitlyombinatorialndpossibilisticn tsview f tructure.should robably ote, ow-ever, hat lthough emphasizehis imilarityn social and natural cientificonceptionsfstructure,amnot ayinghat ocial cience hould e socialphysics. amonly ryingoustifya certain ind fthinkingndexplanationn social cience ypointingut hat tpervadeshenaturalciences s well.62. Bhaskar, hePossibilityf Naturalism,p.48-49; onthedifferencesetween aturaland ocial tructures,ee also Giddens, tudies nSocial andPolitical heoryLondon:Hutch-inson, 977), p. 118-19.



26/37

Agent-structureroblem 359of tselements, ocial structuresre only nstantiatedythepractices fagents.The deep structuref thestate ystem, or xample, xists nly nvirtue f the recognitionf certain ules and the performancef certainpractices y states; f states eased suchrecognitionfperformances,hestate ystems presentlyonstituted ould utomaticallyisappear. ocialstructures,hen, re ontologicallyependent pon although hey re notreducible o) their lementsn a way thatnatural tructuresre not. Thesecond ifferences that social structures,nlike aturaltructures,o notexist ndependentlyf he gents' onceptionsfwhat hey redoing ntheiractivity."63n otherwords, ocial structuresave an inherentlyiscursivedimensionnthe ense that hey re nseparable rom hereasons nd self-understandingshat gentsbring o their ctions.This discursive ualitydoes notmean hat ocial structuresre reducible o what gents hink heyare doing, ince agentsmaynot understandhe structuralntecedentsrimplicationsftheir ctions.But t does mean hat he xistence ndopera-tion f social structuresre dependent ponhuman elf-understandings;talso means hat ocial structurescquire heir ausal efficacynly hroughthemedium f practical onsciousness nd action.Just s social structuresre ontologicallyependent ponandthereforeconstitutedythepractices nd self-understandingsfagents, he causalpowers nd nterestsfthose gents,n theirwnturn,reconstitutedndthereforexplained y structures.he structureshat onstitutegents reoftwodistinctinds: xternal,rsocial, tructures;nd nternal,rorgani-zational, tructures.ach type xplains distinctet of thecausalpowersandinterests f agents-social and intrinsicnes, respectively.hus,allagents ossessthreentrinsicapacities r powersnvirtue ftheirnternalorganizationaltructurer "anatomy":64 ) to have a theoreticalnder-standinghowever naccurate) f its activities,n the sensethat t couldsupply easonsfor tsbehavior; ) to reflexively onitorndpotentiallyadapt tsbehavior; nd3) tomakedecisions.These causal powersdiffer-entiate gents rom henon-sapientlementshat omprise atural truc-tures, ndtotheextent hat tates an be considered oal-directednits faction, hey an be considered gents y thisdefinition.nternalrganiza-tional tructuresrealso mportant,owever,or xplaininghe ubjectivelyperceivednterestsf gents.ndividualndorganizationalecision-makingpathologiesnthestate, or xample,maybe crucial ordeterminingowsocial structuralr objective mperativesorcompetenttatepractice-a state's "real interests"-translatento subjective nterests nd actualperformance.65

63. Bhaskar, ThePossibility f Naturalism,pp. 48-49.64. AdaptedfromGiddens, The Constitutionf Society, pp. 5-6.65. Structurationheoristsave yetto tackle n a sustained aythenature ndrole ofinterestsnsocial cientificxplanations. lthoughome f hemorematerialisticallynclinedstructurationheorists ighteject he xplanatoryse of nterestsltogether,am nclinedo



27/37

360 InternationalrganizationThe importancef their nternal rganizationaltructuresotwithstand-ing,however, ther ausalpowers ndthe eal nterestsf gents redepen-

dentuponand thusexplainable nlyby the external r social structuralcontextn which hey reembedded. or example, he causalpowers fcapitalistsfor xample, o nvest nddisinvestapital, oextract surplusfromabor) nd their eal ntereststo maximize rofits,ndsoforth)re afunctionf theorganizingrinciples fthe capitalistmode ofproductionwhichdefine heir osition nd interestss a capitalist's. imilarly,hecausal powersof thestate-to maintainontrol vertheresources ndviolence otentialna given erritory,o act n an nternationalnvironmentfree f egalcompulsion,ndso on-are conferredpon tbythedomesticand nternationalocialstructuresnvirtue fwhicht s a state nthefirstplace. These structuralelationsmaybe as general s theorganizingrinci-plesof the nterstateystemfor xample, overeignty,enetration)hichconstitutetates s such, rtheymay onsist fthemoreocalized rganiz-ingprinciplesf concretenternationalystems,ike hebalanceofpower,which efine articularinds f tates. hus, he balancer" na balance-of-power ystem,ra core state nthecapitalist orld conomy, as certainpowers, esponsibilities,nd nterestshich tpossesses nlynvirtue f tssocial tructuralosition.66ocial structures,hen, onstitutehe onditionsof existence fstates nd state ction; ndeed,without ocial structuringprinciplesne couldnottalkmeaningfullyboutthefundamentaluildingblocksof nternationalelations: states," "state powers,""foreign ol-icy," andso forth.ut n another ay, nternationalnddomestictructuresgeneratehe"rulesofthegame" (broadly efined o include tate gentsthemselves) ithin hich tates nteract.Structurationheory,hen, onceptualizesgents nd structuress mutu-ally onstitutiveet ntologicallyistinctntities. ach is insome ense neffect f theother; hey re "co-determined."ocial structuresre theresultf he ntendedndunintendedonsequencesfhuman ction,ust asthose ctions resuppose rare mediated y an irreducibletructuralon-text. hisunderstandingfthe gent-structureelationships madepossibleby conceptualizingach from he tart s ontologicallyependent pon heother, yconceptualizinggentsntermsf he nternalelationshat efinethem s such,and by conceptualizingocial structuress existing nlythroughhemedium fthe gents nd Dracticeshat hey onstitute.his sthinkhat heirgent-structurerameworkresupposest east n mplicitistinctionetween"subjective" nd "real" interests. hebest overview f the various onceptualizationsf"interest," ndof thedifficultiesn explainingnterests,s probablytillWilliam onnolly's"InterestsnPolitics,"n hisbook,TheTerms f PoliticalDiscoursePrinceton:rincetonUniversityress,1974), p.45-84.66. For a discussionfthebalance fpower hats consistentn ts ubstance,fnot n tsphilosophicalationale, ith he nterpretationsuggest,ee Ashley,ThePovertyfNeoreal-ism,"pp. 276-79.



28/37

Agent-structureroblem361whatGiddensmeans by the "dualityi f structure,"hat"the structuralpropertiesf social systems re both hemediumnd outcome ftheprac-ticeswhich onstitutehose ystems."7 Structurationheorys thereforemore han nattempto ntroducegreateralance f tructurendagencyinsocial theoryhan s foundn ndividualismndstructuralism.ts socialontology adically econceptualizeshefundamentalropertiesf agentsandsocial structuresnsuch wayto make hem ntologicallynterdepen-dent, nd it s onlyvirtue f thisreconceptualizationhat he "errors"ofreductionnd re

the agent-structure problem in international relations

Documents