Making a Difference

Student paper

Making a Difference:

Allison's Three Models of Foreign Policy Analysis

BY

TULASI R KAFLE (U074N0796)

M.A. in International Relations

4/14/2011

Verified By

DR. HUBERT FAUSTMANN

ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR

IREL-530

FOREIGN POLICY ANALYSIS

DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL AND EUROPEAN STUDIES

UNIVERSITY OF NICOSIA

Table of Contents

1. Introduction: 2

2. Model I: Rational Actor Model 3

3. Model II: Organisational Behaviour Model 6

4. Model III: Governmental Politics Model 9

5. Comparison of Model I, II & III: Mapping Similarities & the Differences 11

6. Appreciations & Criticisms: Strengths & Weaknesses 13

7. Conclusion 15

Bibliography 16

1. Introduction:

It seems to me that understanding foreign policy requires at least basic if not extensive knowledge on what is going on around the world. Foreign policy making is rather tedious and complex task. Its loose point in one aspect might bring huge adverse affects thereby leading the policy to a failure stage. Not all results yielded by foreign policy remain straight forward; neither has it survived without critiques. To put foreign policy in the simplest term and as a field of study, "it is the study of the process, effects, causes, or outputs of foreign policy decision-making in either a comparative or case-specific manner" . Indeed foreign policy is the outcome of the efforts made by humans like us but those in power. "The underlying and often implicit argument theorizes that human beings, acting as a group or within a group, compose and cause change in international politics" .

This paper revolves around Allison's three models of foreign policy analysis in his book 'Essence of Decision Making: Explaining Cuban Missile Crisis'. Not only the paper serves as explaining what these models are for, also includes the comparative study of three models. Allison offers us with three different windows to look at and analyse any foreign policy. Looking into foreign policy with these offered windows; one can get different answers to the same question. This is what I call a peculiar nature Allison has gifted to the analysts of foreign policy. Allison with this peculiar writing-contribution was "often praised for its realistic and intuitively appealing description" by all foreign policy analysts as well as the political activists and leaders. However, scholars also criticized his model for "its complexity and lack of explanatory power" . All models are based on different level of analysis and we must use all three models to obtain a complete treatment of any policy case. Each model should be understood as a snapshot that captures only part of a total complex picture .

Beginning with Allison's three models: Rational Actor Model: Model I; Organisational Behaviour Model: Model II; Governmental politics Model: Model III, and explaining what these models are, this paper steps further to explain how good or how bad these models are. In addition to this, paper also accumulates criticisms and appreciations of these models from other scholars. With brief mentioning of the advantages and disadvantages Allison offers through these models, I will devote a tiny part of this paper to understand how realistic these models are. Last but not the least part will be the conclusion where I will assemble all results and outcomes to bring the whole essay together plus my own thoughts about the model.

2. Model I: Rational Actor Model

Rational Actor Model (RAM) is one of the first of Allison's frameworks of foreign policy analysis introduced and elaborated in Essence of Decision with the real reference to Cuban Missile Crisis during 1962. When Essence of Decision was first published in 1971, RAM became the trademark of Allison. "The attempt to explain international events by recounting the aims and calculations of nations or governments is the trademark of the Rational Actor Model" . Rational Actor Model oscillates between decision and choice where "decision presupposes a decider and a choice among alternatives with reference to some goal". Human beings act in rationality with certain policy concepts and as to Allison, "policy means realisation in a number of particular instances of some agent's objectives. These concepts identify phenomena as actions performed by purposeful agents. This identification involves a simple extension to governments of the pervasive everyday assumption that what human beings do is at least 'intendedly rational'." Not only in foreign policy analysis, Allison's this model has also been in use and formulated in other fields as Allison himself puts in: "a rigorous model of this concept of rational action has been formulated in economics, decision and game theory."

Now, let's look at the core concepts established under this model which comprises four core concepts: Goals & objectives; Alternatives; Consequences; and Choice. Goals and objectives refer to "the interest and values of the agent are translated into a payoff or utility or preference function, which represents the desirability or utility of alternative sets of consequences. Ranks all possible sets of consequences in terms of her or his values and objectives - number of side effects ".

Second core concept 'alternatives' is explained that "the rational agent must choose among a set of alternatives displayed before her or him in a particular situation". It further takes its alternative choice to the output of decision. However, there could be several sets of implied decisions a decision tree may give. Third core concepts being Consequences which further takes rational actors to consider that "to each alternative is attached a set of consequences or outcomes of choice that will ensue if that particular alternative