国際政治
Online ISSN : 1883-9916
Print ISSN : 0454-2215
ISSN-L : 0454-2215
対外政策の概念について
高木 誠一郎
著者情報
ジャーナル フリー

1981 年 1981 巻 67 号 p. 125-141,L5

詳細
抄録

The lack of conceptual clarity has been one of the major difficulties in the development of the scientific study of foreign policy. Attempts to define and operationalize the concept of foreing policy often ended up aggravating the confussion. Amore useful approach would be to identify distinctive aspects of foreign policy and to evaluate analytical framworks relevant to each of them. This research note is meant to be a preliminary step in this direction.
One way to identify difference among foreign policies is to classify them according to issue areas. The notion of issue area was first developed in the study of domertic politics. It was introduced in the study of foreign policy by Rosenau and Lowi and was elaborated by Zimmerman. Brewer tried to use some of those classification schemes in an empirical study of the U. S. foreign policy. These studies makes clear that the issue area refers to variables which explain different patterns of policy-making process or the difference in the relationship between input into and output from the process.
The characterizations of foreign policy as the object of explanation mostly deal with it as the accumulation of discrete external actions of the states. This approach provided the foundation for the several large scale projects to collect foreign policy event data such as WEIS, DON, COPDAB and CREON. Several theories were also proposed to explain the external behavior of the states observed this way, such as Rummel's social field theory and the prototheory of lateral pressure developed by North and Choucri. However, there is a subtle but clear difference between what the issue area approach addresses to and the foreign policy behavior described by event data. The former deals with the foreign policy as the plan of external action whereas the latter is the action itself. The recognition of this gap leads to the examination of the literature on policy implementation.
The organizational aspect of implementation was dealt with by Allison in his study of the Cuban missile crisis. The farmwork was expanded to incorporate the political process within governmental bureaucracy by Allison and Halperin, and then by Halperin. The recognition of the gap, however, does not necessarily imply the existence of policy prior to the externl actions of the states. From this perspective, the potential usefulness of nondecision-making approach of Bachrach and Baratz was suggested and the contribution of Steinbruner's cybernetic model was noted.
Finally another distinction was noted between foreign policy output and its outcome in terms target nations and the international system.

著者関連情報
© 一般財団法人 日本国際政治学会
前の記事 次の記事
feedback
Top