International Relations. A self-Study Guide to Theory

cept of “policy interdependence”. Policy interdependence refers to a particu-
lar configuration of state preferences. Here Moravcsik adopts the classical 
definition of interdependence developed by Keohane and Nye (1977): the 
pursuit of state preferences under conditions of interdependence imposes 
costs upon other states (Moravcsik 2008: 239). In new liberal theory, besides 
the sub-systemic structures of the state, the pattern of interdependent prefer-
ences forms one of the most important significant structures in the new liber-
al explanation. This pattern of interdependent state preferences influences 
state behavior in international politics. Such a structure of policy interde-
pendence is defined by the extent to which basic national goals are compati-
ble. “The lower the net gains and the greater the distributional conflict, 
whereby the realization of interests by a dominant social group in one coun-
try necessarily impose costs on dominant social groups in other countries, the 
greater the potential for interstate tension and conflict” (Moravcsik 2008: 
239, emphasis in the original). In contrast, the incentives for international 

---

166 
policy coordination or convergence are greater where policy coordination 
generates mutual gains (with low distributive consequences). 
We can think of different preference constellations, such as harmony, 
conflict and interdependence (Moravcsik 1997: 520f). Harmony offers the 
best chance of cooperation because state preferences are similar. Under con-
ditions of interdependence states have to cooperate in order to realize their 
goals (comparable to the neoinstitutionalist concept of interdependence). 
Whether interdependence, conflict or harmony prevails as a preference con-
stellation depends on societal goals and internal selection processes within 
the state (as a representative institution). 
The concept of policy interdependence is considered to be a distinctive 
conception of inter-state power (Moravcsik 2008: 239). At the heart of this 
concept lies variation in state preferences, not variation in capabilities (neo-
realism). This is why, from the new liberal perspective, the plea for “Taking 
preferences seriously” (the title of Moravcsik’s work 1997) marks the start to 
bringing a reformulated liberal theory back to IR. Particular preferences have 
to be theorized and explained, not assumed (Moravcsik 2008: 250). 
To sum up, whereas in domestic politics the state is a representative insti-
tution (structure) representing coalitions of interests, in international politics 
the state is a purposive actor.