Realist Constructivism and Realist-Constructivisms

Abstract

“Realist Constructivism” (Barkin 2003) endeavored to make the case that classical realist theory and constructivist approaches to the study of international relations are not implacably opposed, as has been claimed by self-described realist and constructivist scholars of international relations theory. As such, the goal of the article was to create a set of permissive conditions for a realist constructivism (unhyphenated, understood as a general approach rather than as a specific theory)—that is, a footnote that future students of international relations could use rather than have to make the case themselves that the two are not incompatible. In creating a set of permissive conditions, my hope was that a variety of specific realist-constructivisms (hyphenated, understood as more specific theories of international relations within the general approach of realist constructivism) could be created, each suitable to particular research questions and each contributing to a broader conversation on realist constructivism in the study of international relations.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 46 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.