Lost in Transition

A Critical Analysis of Power Transition Theory

Datos Bibliográficos

ID4444890
AutoresRichard Ned Lebow (0000-0002-1972-141X), Benjamin A Valentino (0000-0002-9393-9687), Benjamin Valentino
Año2009
Volumen23
Número3
Páginas389-410
Fecha de publicación2009-09-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaInternational Relations (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0047-1178 • E-ISSN: 1741-2862
EditorialSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/0047117809340481
OpenAlexW2161010013
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas29
Referencias citadas9

In this paper we identify and critique the key propositions of power transition theory. We find little support for any of power transition theory's main empirical implications. Contrary to most versions of the theory, we fin d that the European and international systems almost never have been characterized by hegemony. No state has achieved a position that allowed it for any extended period to order the international system to suit its interests at the expense of the other major powers. Power transitions are remarkably rare, they seldom occur as the result of differential rates of economic growth, and have most often occurred peacefully. Power transitions are more often the results of wars, rather than the causes of them. Wars between rising and dominant powers are infrequent and are not waged by either side primarily in the effort to defend or revise the international order in their favor. Finally, we find that war rarely resolves the fundamental conflicts of interest caused by power transitions

Differential (mechanical device) · Economics · Hegemony · International relations · Order (exchange) · Physics · Political science · Position (finance) · Positive economics · Power (physics) · Quantum mechanics · State (computer science) · Transition (genetics) · International Relations and Foreign Policy · Law · Mathematics · Political Conflict and Governance · World Systems and Global Transformations