Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T22:07:47.243Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

International Relations Theory and the Study of Canadian-American Relations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 November 2009

Elizabeth Smythe
Elizabeth Smythe
Affiliation:
University of Western Ontario
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Field Analysis/Orientations de la Science Politique
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 13 , Issue 1 , March 1980 , pp. 121 - 147
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association (l'Association canadienne de science politique) and/et la Société québécoise de science politique 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Clarkson, Stephen, “Lament for a Non-Subject: Reflections on the Teaching of Canadian-American Relations,” International Journal 27 (1973), 265–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Lyon, Peyton, “Second Thoughts on the Second Option,” International Journal 30 (1975), 646–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 For our purposes, theory refers to “a deductively organized, logically interrelated set of hypotheses that serves as an explanation for some specified behaviour” and a conceptual framework or approach “is merely a set of concepts to orient inquiry without either specified relations or empirical interpretation.” See Caparaso, James, “A Philosophy of Social Science Assessment of the Stanford Studies in Conflict and Integration,” in Zinnes, D. and Hoole, F. (eds.), Quantitative International Politics: An Appraisal (New York: Praeger, 1976), 355–56Google Scholar.

4 For a review of the theoretical development of the field, see Lijphart, Arend, “The Structure of the Theoretical Revolution in International Relations,” International Studies Quarterly 118 (1974), 41–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Morgenthau, Hans, Politics Among Nations (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1948)Google Scholar.

6 The debate about traditional and scientific approaches is set out in Knorr, Klaus and Rosenau, James (eds.), Contending Theories in International Relations (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969)Google Scholar.

7 Galtung, Johan, “A Structural Theory of Integration,” Journal of Peace Research 5 (1968), 375–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 Singer, J. David and Small, M., “Alliance Aggregation and the Onset of War,” in Singer, J. David (ed.), Quantitative International Politics (New York: The Free Press, 1968)Google Scholar; and Singer, J. David, Bremer, Stuart and Stuckey, John, “Capability Distribution, Uncertainty and Major Power War 1820–1965,” in Russett, B. (ed.), Peace, War and Numbers (Beverley Hills: Sage, 1972)Google Scholar.

9 Deutsch, Karl et al., Political Community and the North Atlantic: International Organization in the Light of Historical Experience (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1957)Google Scholar.

10 Keohane, Robert and Nye, Joseph S., Transnational Relations and World Politics (Cambridge: Harvard Press, 1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 For a discussion of interdependence, see Waltz, Kenneth, “The Myth of Interdependence,” in Kindleberger, Charles (ed.), The International Corporation (Cambridge: The M.I.T. Press, 1970)Google Scholar; Cooper, Richard, The Economics of Interdependence (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1968)Google Scholar, and Rosecrance, Richard and Stein, Arthur, “Interdependence: Myth or Reality,” World Politics 26 (1973), l–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar; for the problems of interdependence see the special issue, “Between Power and Plenty: Foreign Policies of Advanced Industrial States,” International Organization 31 (1977)Google Scholar.

12 See Morse, Edward, “Crisis Diplomacy, Interdependence and the Politics of International Economic Relations,” in Tanter, Raymond and Ullman, Richard H. (eds.), Theory and Policy in International Relations (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1972), 123–50Google Scholar. A good discussion of the consequences of interdependence is offered in Holsti, K. J., “A New International Politics,” International Organization 32 (1978), 518–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13 The concept of status is discussed in Galtung, Johan, “A Structural Theory of Aggression,” Journal of Peace Research 1 (1964), 95–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 See Galtung, , “A Structural Theory of Aggression,” and Wallace, Michael D., “Power, Status and International War,” Journal of Peace Research 8 (1971), 23–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a discussion of Rummel's Dimensionality of Nations Project, see Hilton, Gordon, A Review of the Dimensionality of Nations Project (Beverly Hills: Sage Professional Paper, 1973)Google Scholar.

15 Galtung, Johan, “A Structural Theory of Imperialism,” Journal of Peace Research 8 (1971), 81–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16 Duvall, Robert, “Dependence and Dependencia Theory—Notes Towards Precision of Concept and Meaning,” International Organization 32 (1978), 51–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

17 Ibid., 62.

18 Ibid., 64.

19 See for examples: McGowan, Patrick, “Economic Dependence and Economic Performance in Black Africa,” Journal of Modern African Studies 14 (1976), 25–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar; McGowan, Patrick and Smith, Dale, “Economic Dependency in Black Africa,” International Organization 32 (1978), 179–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Walleri, R. Dan, “Trade Dependence and Underdevelopment: A Causal Chain Analysis,” Comparative Political Studies 11 (1978), 94–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20 Gilpin, Robert, “The Political Economy of the Multinational Corporation,” American Political Science Review 70 (1976), 184–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21 A discussion and clarification of the meanings of dependence and dependency and suggestions as to how these phenomena should be studied are offered in Caparaso, James, “Dependence, Dependency and Power in the Global System,” International Organization 32 (1978), 13–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

22 Wallerstein, Immanual, The Modern World System (New York: The Academic Press, 1974)Google Scholar. See also Kaplan, Barbara Hockey (ed.), Social Change in the Capitalist World Economy (Beverley Hills: Sage, 1978)Google Scholar.

23 See Eayrs, James, The Art of the Possible (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1961)Google Scholar and Fate and Will in Foreign Policy (Toronto: C.B.C., 1967)Google Scholar, and Holmes, John, The Better Part of Valour: Essays on Canadian Diplomacy (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1971)Google Scholar.

24 For a discussion of roles and Canada's conception of its international role, see Holsti, K. J., “National Role Conceptions in the Study of Foreign Policy,” International Studies Quarterly 14 (1970), 223–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

25 Levitt, Kari, Silent Surrender : The Multinational Corporation in Canada (Toronto: Macmillan, 1970)Google Scholar, and Foreign Ownership and the Structure of Canadian Industry, Privy Council Office, 1968 (The Watkin's Report).

26 See Grant, George, Lament for a Nation (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1965)Google Scholar; Laxer, James (ed.), Canada Ltd. (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1973)Google Scholar; Lumsden, Ian (ed.), Close the 49th Parallel (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1970)Google Scholar.

27 The discussion which follows confines itself to English-language publications only because of the relative absence of this area as a focus of concern for francophone international relations scholars in Canada. Given their concerns regarding Quebec's relations with the rest of Canada, this is understandable. A scanning of recent issues of Choix and Etudes Internationales indicates an interest in Canadian-American relations only as they relate to the Quebec-Canada-United States triangle. See “Le Nationalisme Québécois à la croissée des chemins,” Choix 7 (1975)Google Scholar; and “Le Canada et le Québec: Bilan et prospective,” Etudes Internationales 8 (1977)Google Scholar, especially Part III, “Le Politique Et range re: Analyse et Prospective.”

28 Axline, Andrew, Hyndman, James, Lyon, Peyton and Molot, Maureen A. (eds.), Continental Community? Interdependence and Integration in North America (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1974)Google Scholar.

29 English, H. Edward, “The Political Economy of International Economic Integration,” in Axline, et al. (eds.), Continental Community?, 19–41Google Scholar.

30 Andrew Axline, “Integration and Inequality: Notes on the Study of Integration,” in Ibid., 67–91.

31 Gilbert Winham, “Choice and Strategy in Continental Relations,” in Ibid., 67–91.

32 Naomi Black, “Absorptive Systems are Impossible,” in Ibid., 92–108.

33 Maureen A. Molot,’ “The Role of Institutions in Canada-United States Relations: The Case of North American Financial Ties,” and Gerald Wright, “Persuasive Influence: The Case of the Interest Equalization Tax,” in Ibid., 137–93.

34 Garth Stevenson, “Continental Integration and Canadian Unity,” in Ibid., 194–220.

35 A. E. Safarian, “Foreign Direct Investment from a Canadian Perspective,” in Ibid., 274–97.

36 A note might be made of the extent to which one can measure whether or not a concept has arrived internationally by being made the focus of a special issue of International Organization. Special issues have been devoted to “Transnational Relations” (1972), the problems of interdependence “Between Power and Plenty: Foreign Policies of Advanced Industrial States” (1977), and “Dependency and Dependence” (1978). We may argue then that the 1974 volume certified the relevance of the study of Canadian-American relations to international relations—see Fox, A., Hero, A., Keohane, R. and Nye, J. (eds.), “Canada and the United States: Transnational and Transgovernmental Relations,” International Organization 28 (1974)Google Scholar.

37 Keohane, Robert and Nye, Joseph, “The Complex Politics of Canadian-American Interdependence,” Introduction to the Special Issue of International Organization 28 (1974), 4CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

38 David Leyton-Brown, “The Multinational Enterprise and Conflict in Canadian-American Relations,” in Ibid., 733–54.

39 Joseph Nye, “Transnational Relations and Interstate Conflicts: An Empirical Analysis,” in Ibid., 961–98.

40 Robert Gilpin, “Integration and Disintegration on the North American Continent,” in Ibid., 851–74.

41 Keohane, Robert and Nye, Joseph, Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition (Boston: Little, Brown, 1977)Google Scholar.

42 Ibid., 179.

43 Ibid., 13.

44 Ibid., 24–29.

45 Ibid., 165.

46 Ibid., 203.

47 Ibid.

48 Ibid., 217.

49 Fox, Annette Baker, The Politics of Attraction: Four Middle Powers and the United States (New York: Columbia University Press, 1977), 3Google Scholar.

50 Ibid., 8.

51 Ibid., 264.

52 Ibid., 290

53 Redekop, John, “Reinterpretation of Canadian-American Relations,” this Journal 9 (1976), 227Google Scholar.

54 Ibid., 239.

55 Ibid.

56 Clement, Wallace, Continental Corporate Power: Economic Linkages Between Canada and the United States (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1977)Google Scholar.

57 Ibid., 14.

58 Ibid., 293.

59 Tomlin, Brian, Dolan, Michael, Riekhoff, Harald von and Molot, Maureen A., “Foreign Policies of Subordinate States in Asymmetrical Dyads,” paper presented at the International Studies Association Annual Meeting,Washington, D.C.,February, 1978Google Scholar.

60 See Baumgartner, T., Buckley, W. and Burns, T.R., “Meta-Power and Relational Control in Social Life,” Social Science Information 14 (1975), 49–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Baumgartner, T., Buckley, W. and Burns, T.R., “Unequal Exchange and Uneven Development: The Structuring of Exchange Patterns,” Studies in Comparative International Development 11 (1976), 51–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Baumgartner, T., Buckley, W., Bums, T.R. and Schuster, P., “Meta-Power and the Structuring of Social Hierarchies,” in Burns, T.B. and Buckley, W. (eds.), Power and Control: Social Structures and Their Transformation (Beverley Hills: Sage, 1976)Google Scholar.