1) Bibliographic data
Owen, John M. IV. (2002), “The Foreign Imposition of Domestic Institutions,” International Organization, V 56-2: 375-409.

2) Question(s) addressed by the author and working arguments
If institutions did not affect international relations, then states would not devote valuable resources to their creation and preservation. Domestic international promotion is an effort by state A to create, preserve, or alter the political institutions within state B.
Neoliberalism primary concern is the effects of information on bargaining. It is not only liberal democracies that promote their own institutions in other states. In the twentieth century, communist, fascist, and theocratic-Islamic states have engaged in the practice.
During the Concert of Europe period, when the five powers were roughly equal, each state invariable promoted institutions only in much weaker states. Democracies are more likely than dictatorships or monarchies to impose new institutions upon a defeated enemy.
Structural realism is inadequate to explain foreign institutional impositions. Even a realism that takes account of the consequences of internal institutions for state power cannot account for the phenomenon.
As Stanley Hoffmann writes, “ If one wants an actor to behave in a certain way on the world stage, that better method is there than to see to it that is the ‘right’ kind of government”

5) Conceptual references to transnational-transnationalism
Transnational, transnationality

6) Conclusions or Final Remarks
The Concert of Europe period was a time of relative security among the great powers yet high ideological tension through Europe and Latin America. Democracy promotion, however, can exacerbate that imbalance and aggravate the security dilemma. Although promoting democracy may still be the right policy, those doing the promoting must give power its due.