• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

Although scholars may not be able to advise policymakers how best to deal with a specific instance of a problem that requires timely action, they can often provide a useful broader discussion of how to think about and understand that general phenomenon—such as, for example, the problem of ethnicity and nationalism. Predictions about such matters should not be regarded as the most important goal of academic scholarship. As David Newsom notes, a more suitable goal is the identification of underlying social forces, mismatches between regimes and peoples, and current policies that may be doomed to failure.544

In recent years scholars have devoted a great deal of attention and research to problems of intrastate conflicts. Much of the knowledge base for avoidance and management of interstate conflict that was acquired during the long years of the Cold War is not relevant or very useful for addressing the many intrastate conflicts that have emerged since the end of that era. An impressive contribution is being made by many scholars to building knowledge for a better understanding of such conflicts and ways of preventing or dealing with them. For example, in 1997 the Carnegie Corporation of New York completed a three-year study of the problems of preventing deadly conflicts. This study drew on available scholarly knowledge and stimulated important new research efforts to fill the gaps in such knowledge. It is a fine example of a collaborative effort of high-level policymakers and scholars to analyze the sources of violent conflicts and to evaluate tools for preventing or limiting them.545 In parallel with the work of the Carnegie Commission on Preventing Deadly Conflict, the National Academy of Sciences established a Committee on International Conflict Resolution, which has published monographic studies of a number of problems in this issue area.546

Another example of research undertaken by academic scholars at the behest of government officials focuses on improving knowledge of circumstances that lead to “state failure.” In 1994, at the behest of Vice President Albert Gore, the U.S. government established the “State Failure Task Force.” Over a period of years, the task force collected and undertook quantitative analysis of a large body of data comprising many variables and issued several useful reports.547

Conclusion: Bridging the Gap

To further bridge the gap between theory and practice, scholars must take a realistic view of the limited, indirect, and yet important impact that scholarly knowledge about foreign policy can have on policymaking. In addressing this question, we advanced three central themes. First, three types of policy-relevant knowledge—conceptual models, generic knowledge, actor-specific behavior models—can indeed help bridge the gap, but they cannot eliminate it. Rather, scholarly knowledge is best conceptualized as an input to policy analysis of specific issues within the government and as an aid to, not a substitute for, the judgments that policymakers must exercise when choosing policies. Indeed, policymakers sometimes have good reasons not to choose the policy option that best meets the criterion of analytic rationality.

Second, although scholarly knowledge can generally be expected to make only an indirect, limited contribution to policymaking, its contribution will nevertheless often be critical for the development and choice of sound policies.

Third, in thinking about the kind of policy-relevant knowledge that needs to be developed, we should give more emphasis to its contribution to the diagnosis of problem situations than focusing on its ability to prescribe sound choices of policy. The three types of knowledge identified are particularly helpful in diagnosing situations for which a policy response must be designed. The same cannot be said for theories that ignore the need for actor-specific behavior models and that bypass the task of situational analysis or deal with it by assumption and instead proceed