The relationship between realism and constructivism in international relations theory is a fraught one. The two paradigmatic framings of IR are often understood, and taught, as being in opposition to each other. The relationship is also an important one. Realism and constructivism are two of the central concepts around which the academic discipline is organized and are often presented as incompatible or paradigmatically irreconcilable. A number of scholars have argued, however, that the two are compatible. But these discussions have tended to be at a theoretical rather than applied level; they ... More

The relationship between realism and constructivism in international relations theory is a fraught one. The two paradigmatic framings of IR are often understood, and taught, as being in opposition to each other. The relationship is also an important one. Realism and constructivism are two of the central concepts around which the academic discipline is organized and are often presented as incompatible or paradigmatically irreconcilable. A number of scholars have argued, however, that the two are compatible. But these discussions have tended to be at a theoretical rather than applied level; they have opened up spaces for discussions of the relationship between the two understandings, but they have not necessarily given clear guidance to scholars for how to combine realism and constructivism as parts of a specific research design. In part this is because there are a variety of ways in which one could reasonably combine the two. Realist constructivism is in this sense a space for a conversation between the two understandings, rather than a specific combination of them. This volume provides a set of examples of applications of different realist constructivisms and an analysis of where they fit in this conversation, and how they speak to each other. Providing such a set of examples both helps to establish the range of the possible in the conversation between realism and constructivism as a set of research practices rather than deductive claims and provides examples to junior scholars of how to build research programs that combine constructivism and realism.