Can international relations (IR) be studied productively with field experimental methods? The two most common existing empirical approaches in IR rely on cross-national data, detailed case studies, or a combination of the two. One as yet uncommon approach is the use of randomized field experiments to evaluate causal hypotheses. Applying such methods within IR complements other theoretical, case study, and observational research, and permits a productive research agenda to be built by testing the micro-foundations of theories within IR. This argument is illustrated by exploring how field experimental methods could be applied to two existing areas: how international institutions facilitate cooperation, and whether international actors can promote democracy in sovereign states.
Abbott, Kenneth W., and Duncan Snidal.1998. Why states act through formal international organizations. Journal of Conflict Resolution42 (1): 3-32.
2.
Aitic.2009. About us: AITIC in short. Accessed October 24, 2009. Available at: http://www.acici.org/aitic/aboutus/index.html.
3.
Angrist, Joshua D., and Victor Lavy.1999. Using Maimonides’ rule to estimate the effect of class size on scholastic achievement. Quarterly Journal of Economics114 (2): 533-75.
4.
Axelrod, Robert, and Robert O. Keohane .1985. Achieving cooperation under anarchy: Strategies and institutions. World Politics38 (1): 226-54.
5.
Barnett, Michael N., and Martha Finnemore .1999. The politics, power, and pathologies of international organizations. International Organization53 (4): 699-732.
6.
Burnell, Peter J.2000. Democracy assistance: International co-operation for democratization . London: F. Cass.
7.
Burnell, Peter J.2008. From evaluating democracy assistance to appraising democracy promotion. Political Studies56 (2): 414-34.
8.
Carothers, Thomas.2006. The backlash against democracy promotion. Foreign Affairs85 (2): 55.
9.
Cox, Michael, G. John Ikenberry , and Takash Inoguchi, eds. 2000. American democracy promotion: Impulses, strategies, and impacts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10.
Druckman, James N., Donald P. Green, James H. Kulinski, and Arthur Lupia.2006. The growth and development of experimental research in political science. American Political Science Review100 (4): 627-35.
11.
Duflo, Esther, and Michael Kremer.2004. Use of randomization in the evaluation of development effectiveness. In Evaluating Development Effectiveness , ed. George K. Pitman, Osvaldo Feinstein, and Gregory Ingram, 205-232. World Bank Series on Evaluation and Development . New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
12.
Dunning, Thad.2008. Improving causal inference: Strengths and limitations of natural experiments. Political Research Quarterly61 (2): 282-93.
13.
Easterly, William.2002. The cartel of good intentions. Foreign Policy131:40-49.
14.
Finkel, Steven E., Aníbal Pérez-Liñán , and Mitchell A. Seligson.2007. Effects of US foreign assistance on democracy building. World Politics59 (3): 404-39.
15.
Galiani, Sebastian, and Ernesto Schargrodsky .2007. Property rights for the poor: Effects of land titling. Unpublished manuscript.
16.
Habyarimana, James, Macartan Humphreys, Daniel N. Posner, and Jeremy M. Weinstein .2007. Why does ethnic diversity undermine public goods provision?American Political Science Review101 (4): 709-25.
17.
Habyarimana, James, Macartan Humphreys, Daniel N. Posner, and Jeremy M. Weinstein .2009. Coethnicity: Diversity and the dilemmas of collective action. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
18.
Humphreys, Macartan, and Jeremy M. Weinstein .2009. Field experiments and the political economy of development. Annual Review of Political Science12:367-78.
19.
Hyde, Susan D.2007. The observer effect in international politics: Evidence from a natural experiment. World Politics60 (1): 37-63.
20.
Keohane, Robert O., and Lisa L. Martin .1995. The promise of institutionalist theory. International Security20 (1): 39-51.
21.
Knack, Stephen.2004. Does foreign aid promote democracy? International Studies Quarterly48 (1): 251-66.
22.
Levy, Jack S.1997. Prospect theory, rational choice, and international relations . International Studies Quarterly41 (1): 87-112.
23.
Lyall, Jason.2009. Does indiscriminate violence incite insurgent attacks? Evidence from Chechnya. Journal of Conflict Resolution53 (3): 331-362.
24.
Martin, Lisa L., and Beth A. Simmons .1998. Theories and empirical studies of international institutions. International Organization52 (4): 729-57.
25.
Miguel, Edward, and Michael Kremer.2004. Worms: Identifying impacts on education and health in the presence of treatment externalities. Econometrica72 (1): 159-217.
26.
Millennium Challenge Corporation.2009. Impact evaluation at MCC. http://www.mcc.gov .
27.
National Research Council, Committee on Evaluation of USAID Democracy Assistance Programs.2008. Improving democracy assistance: Building knowledge through evaluations and research . Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
28.
Newman, Edward, and Roland Rich, eds. 2004. The UN role in promoting democracy: Between ideals and reality. Tokyo: United Nations University Press.
29.
Olken, Benjamin A.2007. Monitoring corruption: Evidence from a field experiment in Indonesia. Journal of Political Economy115 (2): 200-249.
30.
Oye, Kenneth A.1985. Explaining cooperation under anarchy: Hypotheses and strategies . World Politics38 (1): 1-24.
31.
Pevehouse, Jon C.2005. Democracy from above: Regional organizations and democratization . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32.
Rich, Roland.2001. Bringing democracy into international law. Journal of Democracy12 (3): 20-34.
33.
Smith, Tony.1994. America’s mission: The United States and the worldwide struggle for democracy in the twentieth century. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
34.
Tomz, Michael.2007. Domestic audience costs in international relations: An experimental approach. International Organization61 (4): 821-40.
35.
Vicente, Pedro C.2006. Does oil corrupt? Evidence from a natural experiment in West Africa. SSRN eLibrary. http://ssrn.com/paper=829865.
36.
Waltz, Kenneth.1979. Theory of international politics. New York: McGraw-Hill.
37.
World Trade Organization.2009. WTO | What is the WTO?-About the WTO-A statement by the Director-General. http://www.wto.org/english/theWTO_e/whatis_e/wto_dg_stat_e.htm (accessed April 30, 2009).
38.
Youngs, Richard.2001. The European Union and the promotion of democracy . Oxford: Oxford University Press .
