Strange, Susan. Economies et Sociétés 34, no. 4 (1998): 3-24.
This is slightly revised version of 'Political Economy and International Relations' (1995).
Keywords: Political Economy; Structural Power, Power; Theory; International Relations
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Political Economy, Structural Power, Power, Theory, 1990's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1998
Strange, Susan. New Left Review 230, July/August (1998): 91-114.
An extract from Mad Money (1998) in which Strange focuses on the problems of international indebtedness in the 1990s including the Mexican, Brazilian and Asian debt crises and a discussion of central and Eastern European issues. She suggests that the key problem has not been the indebtedness of poor states itself, but the sorts of credit historically extended and the timidity of the solutions to the problems that have arisen. Noting the missed opportunity of a new Marshall Plan for Eastern Europe, she notes not only is there little agreement on the causes of problems but also little consensus about 'what is to be done'.
Keywords: Money and Finance
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Money and Finance, 1990's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1998
Strange, Susan. Journal of Common Market Studies 36, no. 1 (1998): 101-114.
Building on the argument of Robert Reich that the location of economic activity (in a state) was more important for its competitiveness than the ownership of companies (whose production was carried out abroad), Strange suggests that unless European policy recognises the importance of society based competitiveness rather than firm-based competitiveness, Europe's economic problems cannot be overcome. Strange then discusses European trade policy (which needs to be more predictable), investment policy (which should be more open), European Monetary Union (which while stabilising may have little effect on inward investment from non-European investors), and welfare issues (which need to continue to cushion technological-unemployment). Strange concludes that while states (and the European Union) cannot directly intervene in markets successfully, they can act as 'good landlords' to encourage the location of activities on their territory, and by doing so gain the benefits which Reich suggests are possible.
Keywords: Europe; Money and Finance; Production; Trade; European Integration
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Europe, Money and Finance, Production, Trade, 1990's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1998
Strange, Susan. Current History 96, no. 613 (1997): 365-369.
Strange briefly revisits the globalisation debate and suggests those who argue that as the state still exists, globalisation can be ignored are very mistaken. She then goes on to outline three dilemmas of globalisation: the economic, in that increasingly there is no political authority able to govern and control market relations; the environmental, while on one hand market actors are driven by the profit motive to use up environmental resources, countervailing power is largely absent; the political, there is a major democratic deficit in the governance structure of the global system. Strange then links these aspects of globalisation to technical change and increased mobility of capital. However, a concentration on the state misses the 'new diplomacy' between firms and other non-state actors as well as states themselves as outline in Rival States, Rival Firms: Competition for world market shares (with John M. Stopford and John S. Henley, 1991) . She then restates briefly her argument from The Retreat of the State (1996). The Diffusion of Power in the World Economy (1996), the state is losing its authority due to: the decline in importance of war-making and security; its inability to control the value of the currency; and its increasingly lack of credibility as a provider of welfare. Thus, to deny the decline of the state is to deny that something needs to be done about it unless big business is to come to rule the international system.
Keywords: Authority; Globalization; Markets; States; Authority vs Markets
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Authority, Globalization, Markets, States, 1990's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1997
Strange, Susan. Global Society 10, no. 3 (1996): 303-305.
In Strange's reply to May's article (Strange Fruit: Susan Strange's theory of Structural-Power in the International Political Economy Global Society 10, 2 (May 1996): 167 -189), she engages with two criticisms made of her theory of structural power. Firstly she suggests that the knowledge structure itself is not necessarily prior as is suggested it might be considered to be if her process of agenda setting power is regarded as central. Furthermore my reworking of the knowledge structure while suggestive was overly dependent on a de-contextualised reading of Schumacher, whom she knew personally and whose views are misrepresented. Secondly, while agreeing with the criticism that she lacks a general theory of change she asserts that such a general theory is not possible, noting that she is however sensitive to particular forms of change. Finally, she concludes by agreeing that Paul Feyerabend's 'methodological anarchism' is helpful in giving epistemological grounds for her eclectic approach.
Keywords: Knowledge; Structural Power, Power; Theory
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Knowledge, Structural Power, Power, Theory, 1990's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1996
May, Christopher. Global Society 10, no. 2 (1996): 167-189.
Keywords: Structural Power, Power; Theory Knowledge
Contributor(s): Christopher May Keywords: Theory, Structural Power, Power, Knowledge, Strange-Influenced Works, 1990's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1996
Strange, Susan. International Studies Quarterly 39, no. 3 (1995): 289-295.
After briefly discussing the history of the ISA, Strange points out that it is the International Studies Association, despite the current domination of International Relations. Once again Strange argues for the constructive engagement with other discipline interested in the international system, from political geographers to business economists. Strange points to the relative decline of state-state violence relative to civil and local violence, the increasing interest in the environment, and the dangers stemming from the financial markets, as reasons for widening the ISA's implicit agenda. Stressing that in the post-Cold War world there is only one superpower, Strange argues that for millions America is a common second-country. This is a very powerful position to be in, but it also requires the US. to remain part of the world system - not to flee into isolationism. The ISA as an embryonic epistemic community can do a lot to ensure this does not happen.
Keywords: Global Governance; Hegemony; Theory
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Global Governance, Hegemony, Theory, 1990's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1995
Strange, Susan. Journal of Common Market Studies 33, no. 1 (1995): 1-25.
Contrasting European and American proposals for the perceived difficulty of setting up foreign owned subsidiaries in Japan, Strange argues that this is a central issue for any nascent European foreign policy initiative. She argues that it may now be beyond any nationally elected government (even in the US.) to re-impose its hegemonic intent on other states. But some co-ordinated pressure from Japanese and European policy bodies may support the reintroduction into global politics of a more interdependent (and less free-market) approach to commercial and financial diplomacy. This would be to adopt the policy of 'gaiatsu' (pressure from foreigners) to encourage a less disruptive US. foreign policy in these areas. Also published as EUI Working Paper RSC No.94/10.
Keywords: Europe; Japan; Interdependence
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Europe, 1990's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1995
Strange, Susan. Daedelus 124, no. 2 (1995): 55-74.
Strange argues that while states remain superficially important as major actors within the global system, the underlying power relations have hollowed out their authority. This authority has in some cases flowed 'upwards' to international institutions, and in other cases flowed down to markets (and also more localised organisations). These movements have led to an asymmetry of structural authority in the global system. Strange also makes some comments regarding the state-centric nature of the discipline of International Relations and suggests a new research agenda based around her conception of structural power and the importance of non-state actors in the functioning of authority. Thus while competition between states continues in some sense, it has been joined by other fields of competition that the disciplines of International Relations and International Political Economy need to contend with if they are to remain relevant to the global political economy.
Keywords: Corporations; International Institutions; States; Structural Power, Power; Transnational Corporations
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Corporations, International Institutions, States, Structural Power, Power, 1990's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1995
Strange, Susan. Government and Opposition 30, no. 3 (1995): 291-311.
Originally delivered as a lecture at the LSE this article finds Strange explicitly engaging with the notion of globalisation. For Strange globalisation is: the development of products for explicitly global and transnational markets; the decline of barriers and distinctions between national economies; the emergence of at least partial labour mobility in addition to the more recognised capital mobility; and the speeding up of transport and communications. While these trends have changed the balance between authority and markets over outcomes in the international political economy, they have also led to an increasingly globalised but asymmetrical array of structural power.
Keywords: Authority; Globalization; Markets; Theory; Structural Power, Power; Authority vs Markets
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Authority, Globalization, Markets, Theory, Structural Power, Power, 1990's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1995
Strange, Susan. Review of International Studies 20, no. 4 (1994): 407-410.
In this short review of P.J. Cain and A.G. Hopkins British Imperialism (2 vols) (London: Longman 1993), Strange again emphasises the structural characteristics of US power in the global system and suggest that Britain's structural power was more long lasting than is sometimes presumed, with clear implications for the continuing power of the US in the global economy.
Keywords: Hegemony; Money and Finance; Structural Power, Power; United Kingdom
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Hegemony, Money and Finance, Structural Power, Power, United Kingdom, 1990's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1994
Strange, Susan. Review of International Political Economy 1, no. 2 (1994): 209-219.
Strange offers a criticism of Krasner's realist position, drawing on her recent work and an understanding of structural power. She also offers brief critiques of political and economic liberalism as being essentially internally inconsistent, before suggesting that it is they rather than the 'societal' approaches that are having theoretical problems with recent developments in the international political economy. Realism and liberalism lack the heuristic power of her own (and others) structuralist approach. She concludes by arguing that all the many different groups of actors/interests in the international system must be recognised and analysed not just states.
Keywords: Global Governance; Theory; Structural Power, Power; Realism; Global System
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Global Governance, Theory, Structural Power, Power, 1990's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1994
Strange, Susan. Hitotsubashi Journal of Law and Politics Special Issue (1994): 5-17.
Starting from Strange's response to Waltz's (in)famous London School of Economic lecture (see Millennium 22/2 - Summer 1993) in this article she first argues for a wider reading of politics – not just what states do. She then briefly summarises her arguments regarding structural power before discussing the roles states have historically played as producers of security, credit, market relations and environment. The power over finance and environment has moved to centre stage, but states have been losing relative power over these areas. But this is not to agree with the America-in-decline writers. Rather Strange argues that the US. retains structural power, which the non-US Group of Seven states, through joint action need to encourage Americans to recognise. This will enable the US. to once again act as hegemon for the general good. America's ability to supply market public goods needs to be matched by its will to do so, through diplomatic pressure. This is one of the few pieces where Strange makes her underlying prescriptive stance on the need for American leadership completely explicit. Reprinted in: Authority and Markets: Susan Strange’s Writings on International Political Economy, edited by Roger Tooze and Christopher May. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002.
Keywords: Hegemony; States; Structural Power, Power; Theory; United States
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Hegemony, States, Structural Power, Power, Theory, United States, 1990's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1994
Strange, Susan. International Affairs 68, no. 1 (1992): 1-15.
This article in a brief summation of Rival States, Rival Firms: Competition for world market shares (with John M. Stopford and John S. Henley, 1991) outlining the central argument of the book concerning the diplomacy between firms and states, and discusses some areas for further research. This represents a useful entry to the book picking out the salient points from the longer work, without the empirical elements. Reprinted in: Authority and Markets: Susan Strange’s Writings on International Political Economy, edited by Roger Tooze and Christopher May. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002.
Keywords: Theory; Markets; States; Structural Power, Power; Technology
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Theory, Markets, States, Structural Power, Power, 1990's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1992
Strange, Susan. Millennium: Journal of International Studies 20, no. 2 (1991): 245-250.
Strange argues in this short piece that TNCs should be placed at the centre of IPE analysis along with the state and should not be left on the periphery. She also argues for an outside-in understanding of TNCs, putting them into the context in which they operate to understand them. This context is being transformed by changes in the production and financial structures, while she implicitly also argues for the centrality of changes in the 'knowledge' structure.
Keywords: Corporations; Knowledge; Structural Power, Power; Theory
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Corporations, Knowledge, Structural Power, Power, Theory, 1990's, Susan Strange Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1991
Strange, Susan. Review of International Studies 16, no. 3 (1990): 259-274.
Strange discusses the difference between American structural power and Japanese relational power in the financial structure. In addition she discusses the impact of communications technology changes on the operation of international financial markets, which represents an illuminating case study of how two structures interact with each other to bring about changes in the international political economy, in this case the financial and knowledge structures. In addition Strange notes that at least part of American structural power is derived from the privileged position of the 'American-English' language in the knowledge structure. Reprinted in: Authority and Markets: Susan Strange’s Writings on International Political Economy, edited by Roger Tooze and Christopher May. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002.
Keywords: Knowledge; Money and Finance; Structural Power, Power; Theory; Knowledge Production
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Knowledge, Money and Finance, Structural Power, Power, Theory, 1990's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1990
Strange, Susan. Liberal Education 75, no. 3 (1989): 20-24.
Strange uses the work she was co-ordinating with John Stopford, later published as Rival States, Rival Firms: Competition for world market shares (with John M. Stopford and John S. Henley, 1991) to launch a critique of the separation of International Relations, International Economics and the research carried out in business schools. She argues that her approach, foregrounding structural power, requires analysis from all three directions and therefore there needs to be much better contact and co-operation between the three fields. Here Strange is again expressing her frustration, which first surfaced in 'International economics and international relations: a case of mutual neglect' (1970) and continued to produce recommendations for the breaking down of disciplinary boundaries throughout her subsequent career. Reprinted in: Authority and Markets: Susan Strange’s Writings on International Political Economy, edited by Roger Tooze and Christopher May. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002.
Keywords: Political Economy; Theory
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Political Economy, Theory, 1980's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1989
Strange, Susan. Journal of Peace Research 25, no. 3 (1988): 273-277.
In this review of Robert Gilpin's Political Economy of International Relations, Strange again argues against 'Hegemonic Stability Theory', see 'The persistent myth of lost hegemony' (1987), but has started to develop a theory of transnational empire to explain the structural power of the United States. Part of this argument is the increasing non-territoriality of structural power, which is developed in a number of works below.
Keywords: Hegemony; Structural Power, Power; Theory; Trade
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Hegemony, Structural Power, Power, Theory, Trade, 1980's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1988
Strange, Susan. Journal of International Affairs 42, no. 1 (1988): 1-17.
Strange argues that increasingly power in the international political economy is not territorially defined, and what has emerged is an empire that is not territorially based, and secondly is controlled by information-rich US corporations. However while she call this the 'American Empire' her argument is (self-avowedly) close to an international Gramscian 'historical bloc' analysis. Thus the controlling bureaucracy of this empire while based on American values and culture is not necessarily staffed by Americans. This argument is carried further in 'Towards a Theory of Transnational Empire' (1989).
Keywords: Hegemony; Knowledge; Structural Power, Power; Knowledge Production; Transnational Corporations
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Hegemony, Knowledge, Structural Power, Power, 1980's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1988
Strange, Susan. International Organisation 42, no. 4 (1988): 751-752.
In reference to (1987) there was a brief methodological exchange in the pages of International Organisation which while essentially inconclusive, offered a brief clue to Strange's attitude to empirical evidence. Though she originally cited empirical data, in response to the criticism from Milner and Snyder that this evidence left her arguments unproved, Strange answered that the real evidence to prove her argument empirically would be too difficult to collect, though in theory it could be possible to compile. What seems clear from this exchange, is that Strange is not dealing with 'evidence' in its strict form and has a permissive view towards its acceptability.
Keywords: Hegemony; Structural Power, Power; Theory
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Hegemony, Structural Power, Power, Theory, 1980's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1988
Strange, Susan. International Organisation 41, no. 4 (1987): 551-574.
Strange's classic attack of the 'declinist school' in international relations. Once she has discussed the more 'sociological' reasons for American academics holding this view (of which the most powerful/cynical is that it is essentially a convenient denial of responsibility by Americans for their effect on the international system), Strange goes on to elaborate the four structures of power in IPE. This exposition closely parallels (though in a brief form) the arguments that appear in States and Markets (1988). Strange again identifies the American domestic political process (and constitutional structure) as being the root of many of international problems. Strange suggests that the domestic and international cannot be separated analytically, and her structural analysis of power explains the effects of American domestic politics on the international political economy. An earlier version was given in a conference paper presented to the 30th Annual Conference of the Japan Association of International Relations in Tokyo, October 1986. Reprinted in: Authority and Markets: Susan Strange’s Writings on International Political Economy. Roger Tooze and Christopher May, editors. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002.
Keywords: Foundational Work; Hegemony; Structural Power, Power; Theory
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Foundational Work, Hegemony, Structural Power, Power, Theory, 1980's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1987
Strange, Susan. SAIS Review 6, no. 1 (1986): 25-38.
Here Strange returns again to the inadequacy of economics in its analysis of international trade, made in 'International Trade' (1955) and 'International money matters' (1970), and elsewhere. Noting the contradictions between economic models of international trade and what was actually happening in the international economy, Strange argues economists have failed to appreciate that trade is only a secondary international structure. This leads her to briefly lay out the argument that would be developed at more length in States and Markets (1988). Most importantly she firmly concludes that international economics is an ideological construction which serves the interests of the powerful states, most significantly the United States.
Keywords: Economics; Hegemony; Theory; Trade; General Framework
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Economics, Hegemony, Theory, Trade, 1980's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1986
Strange, Susan. The World Today 41, nos. 8 and 9 (1985): 148-150.
In this short polemic piece Strange argues that states should adopt a pragmatic approach to protectionism (mimicking the practices, if not the ideology of America). With the growth of international production and bi-lateralism it is little wonder that, despite the GATT's claims to the contrary, the actual figures on international trade suggest the overall protectionism has little effect on growth. This suggests that the state (and politically driven preferential procurement) can still play a role in the national links to international trade without fear of disaster.
Keywords: Trade
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Trade, 1980's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1985
Strange, Susan. International Organisation 39, no. 2 (1985): 233-259.
In discussing the question of protectionism Strange contends that her structural understanding of the international political economy - with four structures; security, production, finance, knowledge - shows that concerns about trade 'inefficiencies' as a disruptive element within the international system miss the real problem. She argues that trade is only a 'secondary structure' which is influenced and shaped by the primary structures. The disruption in the international system and trade relations is in fact a symptom of disruptions within the primary structures, and especially the financial structure. This article represents a forceful precursor to States and Markets (1988) and is the first time that Strange lays out in its fullest form her structural approach to power within the international political economy, including primary and secondary structures. Reprinted in: Authority and Markets: Susan Strange’s Writings on International Political Economy, edited by Roger Tooze and Christopher May. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002.
Keywords: Political Economy; Structural Power, Power; Trade; General Framework
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: Political Economy, Structural Power, Power, Trade, 1980's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1985
Strange, Susan. Australian Outlook 38, no. 2 (1984): 106-110.
Strange identifies three 'shaky assumptions' underlying the call to revive the GATT negotiations, that protectionism was the main cause of the 1930s depression, that the GATT was a necessary condition of post-war recovery, and free trade was ever a widely followed 'norm'. However, though the alternatives are presented as a hegemonic system run by the US or a multilateral system managed through the GATT, Strange argues that the reality is a cob-web of bi-lateral agreements which accords with many people's desire to have their own state manage their affairs.
Keywords: International Institutions; Trade
Contributor(s): Susan Strange Keywords: International Institutions, Trade, 1980's Source and Medium: Journal Article
Year of Publication: 1984