ABSTRACT
The primary aim of this chapter is to provide some conceptual and theoretical clarity on the diverse manner in which the field of International Relations (IR) understands the concept of hegemony. A secondary aim is to consider what these different theoretical accounts of hegemony have to say about the debate on US hegemony. I begin by providing some definitions of hegemony. In this section, I aim to establish that two main ideas can be distilled from the various definitions of hegemony. The first is the notion that hegemony entails overwhelming or preponderant material power. The second is the idea that hegemony involves the exercise of some form of leadership, including domination, over others. The two notions of overwhelming power and the exercise of leadership are, in turn, carried over to the discussion of how hegemony is conceptualised by the different schools of thought in IR. The second section of this chapter examines how different theoretical approaches in the field comprehend the concept of hegemony. Here I focus primarily on the two main rival theories of realism and liberalism, but I also consider how neo-Gramscians, constructivists and members of the English School grasp the concept of hegemony. In the conclusion, I contemplate what the different theoretical accounts of hegemony offer to understanding the current debate about US hegemony. Here again, I focus primarily on the contending views of realists and liberals, which have tended to dominate the study of contemporary American foreign policy.
