Cave! hic. dragones: a critique of regime analysis

Abstract

This paper challenges the validity and usefulness of the regime concept on five separate counts. These lead to two further and secondary (in the sense of indirect), but not less important, grounds for expressing the doubt whether further work of this kind ought to be encouraged. The five counts (or “dragons” to watch out for) are first, that the study of regimes is, for the most part a fad, one of those shifts of fashion not too difficult to explain as a temporary reaction to events in the real world but in itself making little in the way of a long-term contribution to knowledge. Second, it is imprecise and woolly. Third, it is value-biased, as dangerous as loaded dice. Fourth, it distorts by overemphasizing the static and underemphasizing the dynamic element of change in world politics. And fifth, it is narrow-minded, rooted in a state-centric paradigm that limits the vision of a wider reality.