{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027995520716685332, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.431654676258993, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Toward a (More) Critical FPA


 Contrary to other subfields of international relations, foreign policy analysis (FPA) has not experienced a “critical turn” yet. This research note suggests that this may be in part because FPA scholarship does already contain certain “critical” features, such as holding decision-makers to account and the incorporation of various “subordinated” actors in its analyses. Having said that, FPA scholarship tends to fall short on other dimensions of critical scholarship. That is, despite its relatively broad analytical net, it nonetheless silences certain actors, places little attention to the effects of foreign policy decisions, and shows a somewhat limited ethical-political engagement. While an outright critical turn is unlikely to be forthcoming not least for epistemological reasons, FPA would still benefit from a further infusion of critical insights.