Economic and Security Motives in International Development Assistance: On Quantitative Methods in International Studies

Over the last decade we have been able to observe that most of Russian political scientists, specializing in international relations, have become numerically inclined. They have focused on the quantitative research methods, the phenomenon which now seems to have turned into the cult of statistics. If any research work  – an article or monograph– fails to provide quantitative data, it is automatically stigmatized as political opinion-based journalism. The supporters of quantitative methods in the sphere of international relations usually put forward three reasons: 1) any research work requires complying with standards and accuracy; 2) only numerical data can be verified; 3) allegedly, only figures can provide “discipline” in research being the solid and objective evidence for your observations. However, what they do not realize is that such dominance of statistics in the humanitarian research creates a risky illusion of being “quasi- accurate”. Scientists often provide numerical data for the unprovable and even faulty assumptions.

The bulk of the examples from history are in unconformity to quantitative models of the international relations, as from a numerical viewpoint it is the territory and the size of the population of the country which is most important. According to this logic, it was the defeated (in real history) who had to win and not the opposite way around. Apparently, the material resources, which can be numerically assessed, are less important than non-material resources: the spirit and mentality of the nation, its cultural strategy as well as the quality and the mindset of the political elites. It is impossible to assess these factors statistically, but it was these very factors that led those states to victories over the others.

Thus, the emphasis on quantitative research methods in political science is not that harmless, as it might seem at first sight. Its main effect is not “scientific accuracy”, as alleged by its proponents, but rather in promoting mechanistic superiority of the potentials. The latter can be easily disguised by hidden material or non-material factors, which seem to be difficult or even impossible to consider when using quantitative approach. The result of this clash is often not in favor of the numerically inclined scientists. Ideally, by employing the quantitative models we could avoid discussions involving moral and ethical issues, but in reality such an approach is even more likely to throw light on these problems (which are initially subjective matters) in international relations.

1. (1974). Istoriya Vtoroj mirovoj vojny 1939 – 1945. V 12 tomah. [ History Of world war II 1939–1945.

2. In 12 volumes]. Vol 3. Moskva: Voennoe Izdatel'stvo Ministerstva Oborony SSSR. 498 p.

3. (2003). Science Journals and Curricula. Political Science and Politics. Vol. 36. No. 3. P. 373–378.

4. Abaev L.CH. (2011) Ob aktual'nyh podhodah k modelirovaniyu mezhdunarodnyh otnoshenij [On current approaches to modeling international relations]. Problemy nacional'noj strategii. No. 2. P. 31–48.

5. Amme C.H. (1988). NATO Strategy and Nuclear Defense. N.Y.: Greenwood Press. 188 p.

6. Basovskaya N. I. (2010). Stoletnyaya vojna: leopard protiv lilii [Hundred years war: leopard against Lily]. Moscow: Astrel': ACT, 446 p.

7. Becker G. S. (2003). Chelovecheskoe povedenie: ehkonomicheskij podhod [Human behavior: an economic approach]. Moscow: GU VSHEH. 672 p.

8. Bennett A., Aharon B., Rutherford K. (2003). Do We Preach What We Practice? A Survey of Methods in Political Science Journals and Curricula. PS: Political Science & Politics. Vol. 36. Issue 3. P. 373–378.

9. Biller P. (2001). The Measure of Multitude: Population in Medieval Thought. N.Y.: Oxford University Press. 476 p.

10. Borodkin L.I. (2005). Metodologiya analiza neustojchivyh sostoyanij v politiko-istoricheskih processakh [Methodology for the analysis of unstable States in political and historical processes]. Mezhdunarodnye protsessy. Vol. 3. No. 1 (7). P. 4–16.

11. Clausewitz C. (1937). 1806 god [1806 year]. M.: Gosvoenizdat, 1937. 193 p.

12. Degterev D. A. (2017) Teoretiko-igrovoj analiz mezhdunarodnykh otnoshenij [Game-Theory analysis of international relations]. M.: Aspekt-press, 352 p.

13. Degterev, D. V. (2015). Kolichestvennye metody v mezhdunarodnyh issledovaniyakh [Quantitative methods in international studies]. Mezhdunarodnye protsessy. Vol.13. No. 2. P. 35–54.

14. Delbrück G. (2001). Istoriya voennogo iskusstva v ramkah politicheskoj istorii [History of military art in the framework of political history]. Vol. 1–4. St. Petersburg: Nauka.

15. Droysen I. (2011) Istoriya ehllinizma [The History of Hellenism]. Moscow: Akademicheskij Proekt; Kirov: Konstanta. 623 p.

16. Earle E.M. (ed.) (1960). Makers of Modern Strategy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1960. 553 p.

17. Friedman N. (1983). U.S. Aircraft Carriers: An Illustrated Design History. Annapolis, MD: United States Naval Institute Press. 427 p.

18. Gribovsky V. Y. (2004). Rossijskij flot Tikhogo okeana, 1898–1905: Istoriya sozdaniya i gibeli [Russian fleet of the Pacific Ocean, 1898-1905: History of creation and death]. Moscow: Voennaya kniga, 140 p.

19. Gumilev L.N. (1994). Ehtnogenez i biosfera Zemli [Ethnogenesis and biosphere of the Earth]. M.: Tanais DI-DIK. 544 p.

20. Khrustalev M. A. (2004). Metodologiya analiza mezhdunarodnyh peregovorov [Methodology of analysis of international negotiations]. Mezhdunarodnye protsessy. Vol. 2. No. 3 (6). P. 64–78.

21. Korotina N. Y. (2014). Podhody k izmereniyu «myagkoj sily» [Approaches to the measurement of "soft power"]. Discourse-PI. No. 4 (17). P. 56–61.

22. Kuznets S. (1973). Population, Capital and Growth. N.Y.: Norton. 342 p.

23. Lotman Y. M. (1994). Besedy o russkoj kul'ture [Conversations about Russian culture]. Sankt-Peterburg: Iskusstvo – SPB. 558 p.

24. Lyudendorf-E. (2015). Totalnaya vojna [Total war]. Moscow: Ehksmo-OOO. 446 p.

25. Maddison E. (2015). Kontury mirovoj ekonomiki [Contours of the world economy]. Moscow: Izdatel'stvo Instituta Gajdara. 584 p.

26. Maliniak D., Oakes A., Peterson S., Tierney M. (2011). International Relations in the US Academy. International Studies Quarterly. Vol. 55 (2). P. 437–464.

27. Marinovich, L. P. (1993). Greki i Aleksandr Makedonskij [The Greeks and Alexander the Great]. Moscow: Izdatel'stvo "Vostochnaya literatura. 287p.

28. Mazalov V. V. (2010). Matematicheskaya teoriya igr i prilozheniya [Mathematical theory of games and applications]. Petersburg-Moscow-Krasnodar: LAN. 446 p.

29. Miller J.H. (2003). Game theory at work: how to use game theory to outthink and outmaneuver your competition. New York: McGraw-Hill. 288 p.

30. Moltke H. von. (1938). Voennye poucheniya. Voennye poucheniya. Operativnaya podgotovka k srazheniyu [Military instruction. Military instruction. Operational preparation for battle]. Moscow: Voenizdat. 311 p.,

31. Moltke H.von. (1937). Istoriya germano-frantsuzskoj vojny 1870–1871 gg. [History of the GermanFrench war of 1870-1871]. Moscow: Voenizdat. 360 p

32. Moscovici S. (1998). Vek tolp [The Age of crowds]. M.: Institut psihologii RAN, KSP+. 480 p.

33. Nash J.F. (1950). Equilibrium Points in N-person Games. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. No. 36 (1). P. 48–49.

34. Nestik T. A., Zhuravlev, A. L. (2018) Psihologiya global'nyh riskov [Psychology of global risks]. M.: Institut psihologii RAN. 402 c.

35. Neumann J. von, Morgenstern O. (2007). Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007. 776 p.

36. Rosenau J. (2008). “Kvantifikaciya podrazumevaet prezhde vsego poisk zakonomernostej” ["Quantification implies, first of all, the search for regularities"]. Mezhdunarodnye protsessy. Vol. 6. № 3 (18). S. 67–72.

37. Roskill S. (1954). The War at See, 1939–1945. L.: H.M. Stationer Office. 615 p.

38. Shultz T. (1968). Human Capital. Sills D.L. (ed.) International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Vol. 6. N.Y.

39. Slavko T.I. (1981). Matematiko-statisticheskie metody v istoricheskih issledovaniyah [Mathematical and statistical methods in historical research]. Moscow: Nauka. 159 p.

40. Teri E. (2008). Ekonomicheskoe preobladanie Rossii [Economic dominance of Russia]. M.: Rossijskaya politicheskaya ehnciklopediya (ROSSPEHN), 2008. 183 c.

41. Webb J.N. (2007). Game theory: decisions, interaction and evolution. Springer. 242 p.