Kuperman, R. (2006) ‘Making Research on Foreign Policy Decision Making More Dynamic: a Dynamic Framework for Analyzing Foreign Policy Decision Making’, International Studies Review, Vol. 8, 537–544.

Kuperman, R. (2006) ‘Making Research on Foreign Policy Decision Making More Dynamic: a Dynamic Framework for Analyzing Foreign Policy Decision Making’, International Studies Review, Vol. 8, 537–544.

• Richard Snyder, H.W. Bruck, and Burton Sapin claim that foreign policy decisions are made in terms of how key decision-makers perceive domestic and international systems, making the objective reality of these system irrelevant compared to the perceived reality (537).
• However, the work of Alexander George (1980), shows that similar beliefs produce different policies in different policy-creation systems, meaning that analysis of foreign policy-creation systems is also necessary.
• Most analysts view decision-making as an ad hoc process that begins with the advent of a problem and ends with a solution, the author, however, views political decisions as a continuum where the decision-maker is aware of the problem before they deal with it and can choose non-resolution as a viable option for long periods of time (538).
• Most decision-making likely exists in a continuum between ad hoc and dynamic models, but foreign policy analysts show a definite bias towards interpretation of the ad hoc model.
• The author outlines the process by which ad-hoc decision-making occurs and the process by which dynamic decision-making occurs. He then provides a framework for empirically distinguishing between the two models in foreign policy-creation. The conditions of deference are outlined (539-543).
• Using the dynamic model as the lens of foreign policy analysis carries serious limitations, as a single-decision is no longer capable of representing foreign policy, which instead requires a series of interrelated decisions going back a significant period of time (544).
• It also allows for the researcher to ignore some of the more human elements which typically effect singular events. This is convenient for theorists in their ivory tower, but represents a serious setback to accurately predict or explain historical behaviors in foreign policy creation.