Robert Owen Keohane (b. 1941) is the most influential liberal theorist in contemporary international relations. His work on international regimes and institutions challenged realist pessimism by demonstrating that states can achieve sustained cooperation even without world government. In an era of proliferating international organizations, trade agreements, and multilateral governance, Keohane’s framework for understanding how and why institutions matter has become indispensable.
Keohane’s achievement was to take realism seriously—accepting its core assumptions about anarchy and self-interested states—while demonstrating that cooperation remains possible. This “neoliberal institutionalism” became realism’s main competitor in the field, generating a debate that structured international relations theory for decades.
The Person¶
Academic Career¶
Keohane built one of the most distinguished careers in political science:
- PhD from Harvard (1966) studying under Stanley Hoffmann
- Professor at Swarthmore, Stanford, Brandeis, Harvard, Duke, and Princeton
- President of the American Political Science Association (1999-2000)
- Recipient of the Johan Skytte Prize, political science’s highest honor
- Mentor to numerous prominent scholars
His institutional influence matched his intellectual impact.
Intellectual Style¶
Keohane is known for:
- Rigorous theoretical argument
- Careful attention to empirical evidence
- Willingness to engage with critics
- Building research programs rather than just making arguments
- Collaborative scholarship (notably with Joseph Nye)
He exemplifies the professional academic, building knowledge cumulatively rather than seeking dramatic interventions.
Collaborative Relationships¶
Much of Keohane’s most influential work emerged from collaboration:
- With Joseph Nye: complex interdependence and transnational relations
- With responses to Kenneth Waltz: editing “Neorealism and Its Critics”
- With numerous students who extended his research program
- With scholars across theoretical approaches
This collaborative approach multiplied his influence.
Key Ideas¶
Complex Interdependence¶
Keohane’s early work with Joseph Nye challenged realist assumptions:
“Power and Interdependence” (1977) argued:
- Multiple channels connect societies (not just states)
- Economic and social issues are increasingly important (not just security)
- Military force is often inappropriate or ineffective
This “complex interdependence” described a world different from realism’s billiard-ball states in anarchy.
International Regimes¶
Keohane developed the concept of international regimes:
Regimes are “sets of implicit or explicit principles, norms, rules, and decision-making procedures around which actors’ expectations converge in a given area of international relations.”
Examples include: - The international trade regime (WTO, GATT) - The monetary regime (IMF, exchange rate rules) - Human rights regimes (treaties, monitoring bodies) - Environmental regimes (climate agreements, ozone protocols)
Regimes matter because they shape state behavior, even in the absence of enforcement.
After Hegemony¶
Keohane’s masterwork, “After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy” (1984), addressed a crucial question: can international cooperation survive without a dominant power to enforce it?
The hegemonic stability thesis held that cooperation requires a hegemon (like the US after WWII) to provide public goods and enforce rules. If hegemony declines, cooperation should collapse.
Keohane’s argument: Once established, international institutions can sustain cooperation even after hegemony wanes because:
- Institutions reduce transaction costs
- They provide information and reduce uncertainty
- They create iterated interactions that enable reciprocity
- They establish focal points for coordination
- They make cheating easier to detect
Cooperation is not automatic, but institutions make it possible.
Rationalist Institutionalism¶
Keohane developed a “rationalist” approach to institutions:
States are self-interested: Keohane accepts the realist assumption that states pursue their own interests.
Cooperation is beneficial: Many situations create mutual gains from cooperation (trade, environmental protection, security coordination).
Cooperation is difficult: Anarchy creates obstacles—uncertainty about others’ behavior, incentives to cheat, difficulty making credible commitments.
Institutions help overcome obstacles: By providing information, reducing transaction costs, and enabling reciprocity, institutions make cooperation achievable.
This “neoliberal institutionalism” accepts realist premises but reaches different conclusions.
The Functions of Institutions¶
Keohane specified what institutions do:
Reduce transaction costs: Negotiating every agreement from scratch is expensive. Institutions provide frameworks that simplify bargaining.
Provide information: States uncertain about others’ intentions and actions can use institutions to share information and monitor compliance.
Create expectations: Institutions establish expectations about appropriate behavior, making cooperation more predictable.
Enable issue-linkage: Institutions connect different issues, allowing tradeoffs that make agreements easier.
Establish focal points: When multiple equilibria exist, institutions identify which one states should coordinate around.
The Design of International Institutions¶
Later work examined how institutions are designed:
Membership rules: Who can join, and on what terms?
Scope: What issues does the institution address?
Centralization: How much authority does the institution have?
Flexibility: How easily can rules be modified?
Enforcement: What mechanisms exist for compliance?
Different designs suit different problems. Understanding institutional variation requires analyzing the problems institutions are meant to solve.
Major Works¶
“Power and Interdependence” (with Joseph Nye, 1977)¶
The founding text of complex interdependence:
- Challenged realism’s state-centric assumptions
- Introduced multiple channels, multiple issues, diminished military force
- Analyzed US-Canadian and US-Australian relations
- Became a classic of liberal international relations theory
“After Hegemony” (1984)¶
Keohane’s most influential single-authored work:
- Asked whether cooperation can survive declining hegemony
- Developed functional theory of international institutions
- Applied to international economic regimes
- Became foundational for institutionalist research
“Neorealism and Its Critics” (edited, 1986)¶
A collection responding to Waltz’s “Theory of International Politics”:
- Included major critiques and defenses of neorealism
- Keohane’s own contribution outlined “neoliberal institutionalism”
- Framed the “neo-neo debate” that structured the field
- Essential for understanding theoretical development
“Designing Social Inquiry” (with Gary King and Sidney Verba, 1994)¶
While not about international relations specifically, this methodology text:
- Articulated standards for qualitative research
- Influenced how political scientists assess evidence
- Generated extensive debate about methodology
- Became required reading in graduate programs
“Power and Governance in a Partially Globalized World” (2002)¶
Essays reflecting on globalization:
- Examined governance beyond the nation-state
- Analyzed the relationship between power and institutions
- Addressed challenges of the post-Cold War era
- Showed how Keohane’s thinking evolved
Influence¶
The Neo-Neo Debate¶
Keohane shaped theoretical development through debate with realists:
Neorealism (Waltz): The anarchic structure of international politics generates competition and conflict. States focus on relative gains.
Neoliberal institutionalism (Keohane): Even in anarchy, states can cooperate through institutions. States can focus on absolute gains.
This debate, sometimes criticized as too narrow, nonetheless structured the field for years.
The Study of International Organizations¶
Keohane’s work transformed how scholars study international organizations:
- Functional analysis replaced formal-legal description
- Scholars asked why institutions exist and what they do
- Rational choice approaches became influential
- The EU, WTO, and other institutions received systematic analysis
Policy Relevance¶
Keohane’s ideas informed policy thinking:
- Support for multilateral institutions rested on institutionalist logic
- Trade agreements and international organizations were seen as valuable
- The importance of rules-based order became conventional wisdom
- Concerns about institutional decay echoed “after hegemony” worries
Training Scholars¶
Keohane trained numerous prominent academics:
- Lisa Martin (international institutions)
- Beth Simmons (human rights, compliance)
- Daniel Drezner (sanctions, international political economy)
- Many others who extended institutionalist research
His influence multiplied through generations of students.
Criticisms¶
Realist Critiques¶
Realists argue Keohane:
- Underestimates how institutions reflect power rather than constraining it
- Ignores that powerful states create and manipulate institutions
- Overestimates institutional autonomy from power politics
- Cannot explain why institutions fail (NATO in Libya, UN in Syria)
When institutions conflict with major power interests, power wins.
Constructivist Critiques¶
Constructivists argue Keohane:
- Treats interests as given rather than socially constructed
- Ignores how institutions constitute state identities
- Focuses narrowly on cooperation problems, missing broader effects
- His “rationalist” ontology is too restrictive
Institutions do more than solve coordination problems—they shape who actors are.
Critical Theory Critiques¶
Critical scholars argue Keohane:
- Ignores how international institutions serve powerful states and capital
- Treats existing institutions as generally beneficial rather than examining whom they harm
- Does not question why certain issues get institutionalized and others don’t
- Is fundamentally conservative, legitimizing the status quo
The Decline of Liberal Order¶
Current challenges test institutionalist optimism:
- Great power competition strains international institutions
- The US under Trump withdrew from multiple agreements
- International cooperation on climate, health, and trade faces obstacles
- The rules-based order is under pressure
Does this vindicate or refute Keohane’s framework?
Contemporary Relevance¶
Institutional Resilience¶
Keohane’s framework helps analyze current challenges:
- Will institutions survive hegemonic decline?
- How do institutions adapt to changing power distributions?
- What explains variation in institutional resilience?
- Can institutions survive when major powers defect?
Global Governance¶
Keohane’s work informs understanding of global governance:
- How do states manage transboundary problems?
- What is the role of non-state actors in governance?
- How do different governance mechanisms interact?
- What are the limits of global governance?
Climate Change¶
International climate cooperation exemplifies institutionalist questions:
- Why is cooperation so difficult?
- What institutional designs might work better?
- How do the Paris Agreement and other arrangements function?
- Can cooperation intensify as climate impacts worsen?
Economic Interdependence¶
Keohane’s early work on interdependence remains relevant:
- Does economic interdependence reduce conflict?
- How do states manage the politics of interdependence?
- What happens when states weaponize interdependence?
- Is deglobalization reversing complex interdependence?
US-China Relations¶
The central geopolitical question involves institutionalist concerns:
- Can institutions mediate US-China competition?
- Will China integrate into or challenge existing institutions?
- What new institutions might emerge?
- Do institutions matter in great power rivalry?
Conclusion¶
Robert Keohane demonstrated that the study of international relations need not be a counsel of despair. By showing how institutions enable cooperation even in anarchy, he provided intellectual support for efforts to build rules-based international order. His careful, cumulative approach to scholarship built a research program that has shaped how generations of scholars and practitioners think about international cooperation.
The current moment challenges liberal institutionalism. Great power competition, populist nationalism, and institutional erosion test whether Keohane’s framework can account for when cooperation fails as well as when it succeeds. His framework was always about the conditions for cooperation, not its inevitability; present difficulties may vindicate his analysis of what makes cooperation possible even as they demonstrate that those conditions can be undermined.
What remains valuable is Keohane’s core insight: that international cooperation, while difficult, is not impossible; that institutions matter; and that understanding how and why they work (or fail) is essential for navigating international politics. In a world facing problems—climate change, pandemics, nuclear proliferation—that require cooperation, this insight is more important than ever.
Keohane’s scholarship models what rigorous engagement with fundamental questions looks like. Whether the liberal order he helped theorize survives current challenges, his work will remain essential for understanding what international cooperation requires and what it can achieve.
Sources & Further Reading¶
Robert Keohane, “After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy” (1984) - The foundational text of neoliberal institutionalism, demonstrating how international institutions can sustain cooperation even without hegemonic enforcement. Essential reading.
Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye, “Power and Interdependence” (1977, revised editions) - The classic statement of complex interdependence, challenging realist assumptions about international politics. Still valuable for understanding how economic and social connections affect state behavior.
Robert Keohane, ed., “Neorealism and Its Critics” (1986) - The collection that framed the neo-neo debate. Keohane’s own contribution clearly articulates how his approach differs from Waltz’s neorealism while sharing key assumptions.
Lisa Martin, “Interests, Power, and Multilateralism” (1992) - A student of Keohane extends his framework to analyze why states choose multilateral rather than bilateral cooperation. Shows how the institutionalist research program developed.
John Mearsheimer, “The False Promise of International Institutions” (1994/95) - The most influential realist critique of institutionalism, arguing that institutions are merely reflections of power. Keohane’s response in the same journal issue clarifies the debate.