Speakers: Lyndon Burford (BASIC), Kjølv Egeland (NORSAR), Heba Taha (Lund University), Tom Vaughan (University of Leeds), Jana Wattenberg (University of Aberystwyth)

Discussants: Nick Ritchie (University of York) and Cameron Hunter (University of Copenhagen)

Abstract: How might nuclear disarmament actually be achieved? Under what conditions are nuclear-armed states most likely to give up their weapons? The scholarly literature devoted to these questions is at best immature. Indeed, the declared urgency of the goal of nuclear abolition is belied by the dearth of fleshed-out ‘theories of change’ elucidating how nuclear disarmament might take place in practice. In this article, the authors set out a broad research agenda aimed at identifying, appraising, fostering, and refining, and appraising theories of nuclear disarmament. In so doing, they aim to stimulate the development of creative, cogent, and systematic theories of change and to help inform ongoing policy discussions by bringing the implicit bets and assumptions underpinning alternative policy proposals to the surface. The paper's argument is three-fold. First, it maintains that nuclear disarmament deserves to be theorized more intensively than it has been hitherto. Second, it argues that the relative scarcity of direct evidence of nuclear disarmament presents a serious but not insurmountable challenge for those eager to develop cogent theories of nuclear abolition or relinquishment. And third, it suggests that long-standing policy debates could and should be clarified through a sharper focus on plausible scenarios for change.