Locating norm diplomacy: Venue change in international norm negotiations

Coleman, Katharina P.

doi:10.1177/1354066111411209

Cited by 61 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…To remedy this gap in our understanding of norm evolution, a promising line of research taking a micro-level view of norms has emerged in the recent years (Wiener 2004, Wunderlich 2013Van Kersbergen and Verbeek 2007;Krook and True 2012;Panke and Petersohn 2012, McKeown 2009, Coleman 2013, Hirsch 2014. This body of literature has enquired into a broad set of dynamics relating to norm evolution, ranging from studies on norm 'degeneration' and norm reversals (Panke and Petersohn 2012, McKeown 2009) to the understanding how changes to the ideational content of norms enables norm diffusion (Hirsch 2014 what we tend to see is 'a battle over the norm itself'.…”

Section: Internal Dynamismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Changing ideas, changing norms: The case of ‘the responsibility to rebuild’

Donovan¹

2018

Cooperation and Conflict

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whilst much has been written on emergence of new norms in international politics, we know significantly less about changes to the ideas and assumptions that underpin such norms. Examined at micro-level, most norms consist of a set of ideas and assumptions that form the basis of what is considered as appropriate, legitimate or even the required thing to do. Far from being stable, ideational constitutions of norms can undergo significant changes in the course of the norm emergence process. Enquiring into such changes is important if we are to move beyond static and linear accounts of norm evolution. Using changes in the ideational constitution of the responsibility to protect – specifically, the de-emphasis of the responsibility to rebuild – as its vantage point, the analysis seeks to answer the following question: what drives change in ideational constitutions of international norms? The chief argument advanced in this article is that misalignments at the level of broader normative structures (external misalignments) and within norms (internal misalignments) result in changes in the ideational constitutions of emerging norms.

show abstract

Section: Internal Dynamismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Changing ideas, changing norms: The case of ‘the responsibility to rebuild’

Donovan¹

2018

Cooperation and Conflict

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While not the only form that law can take, multilateral treaties offer an especially effective vehicle for generating new international norms. In the first case, multilateral negotiations serve as focal points in the crystallization of emergent norms (Coleman ), redefining appropriate responses to global challenges. The creation of a formal legal text translates general standards of appropriate behavior into a set of more specific prescriptive and proscriptive rules and associated legal procedures distinguished by their codification and characteristic form of creation and regeneration (Percy :387; Sandholtz and Stiles :1).…”

Section: Law and Norms Without The Great Powers: A Framework For Analmentioning

confidence: 99%

Norms Without the Great Powers: International Law, Nested Social Structures, and the Ban on Antipersonnel Mines

Bower

2015

Int Stud Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the past two decades, a series of major multilateral treaties were created in the absence of support—and often in the face of sustained opposition—from the United States and other emerging global leaders like China, India, and Russia. These institutions present a puzzle to prominent theories of IR because they fail to encompass predominantly powerful actors regarded as most consequential to the development and enforcement of international rules, raising questions as to their potential efficacy. This paper addresses the prospects for non‐great power law in theoretical and empirical terms. I first draw on constructivist conceptions of international law as a social practice to demonstrate how multilateral treaties may generate powerful new social expectations and alter behavior even when they do not correspond to the prevailing distribution of material power in the international system. Treaties are embedded within an international social system composed of legal and non‐legal elements, and these structural features generate social pressures that bear on formal members and non‐parties alike. I then apply this account to an archetypal—and hard—case, the ban on antipersonnel mines. Contrary to skeptical assumptions, I demonstrate that the Mine Ban Treaty has instantiated a powerful new international social standard which has generated widespread behavioral change among treaty members—challenging accounts that emphasize enforcement by leading states—and non‐parties including major military powers like the United States—challenging the view that great powers avoid new institutional developments not to their liking.

show abstract

“…Whereas early literature on forum-shifting focused on rule-making, the concept is equally relevant to studying actors' efforts at norm-building and agenda-setting at the global level (Coleman 2013). Whether oriented towards establishing binding international law or appropriate standards of international behaviour, successful forum-shifting serves as an important power-enhancing strategy for states (and non-state actors), especially those that lack access to and/or prefer not to exercise raw power (Rüland 2012).…”

Section: Canada's Post-global Food Crisis Approach: Leadership or Formentioning

confidence: 99%

Canada at the G8 and UN Committee on World Food Security: forum-shifting in global food security governance

Margulis

2015

Canadian Foreign Policy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following the 2007-2008 Global Food Crisis, the Government of Canada doubled its aid spending on food security and made fighting world food insecurity a key foreign policy objective. The Government of Canada positioned itself for, and claims to enjoy, global leadership in global food security governance. This article examines the Government of Canada's behavior at two leading institutions for global food security governance, the Group of Eight (G8) and the United Nations Committee on World Food Security (CFS). I argue that the government has engaged in a forum-shifting strategy between these two institutions that has enhanced its reputation among a small group of peer states at the G8 but diminished its reputation and influence at the CFS. With the CFS emerging as a key institution for agenda-setting, norm-building and rule-making in global food security governance, Canada's marginal influence and peripheral status at this body undermines the government's claims of global leadership

show abstract

Locating norm diplomacy: Venue change in international norm negotiations

Cited by 61 publications

References 64 publications

Changing ideas, changing norms: The case of ‘the responsibility to rebuild’

Changing ideas, changing norms: The case of ‘the responsibility to rebuild’

Norms Without the Great Powers: International Law, Nested Social Structures, and the Ban on Antipersonnel Mines

Canada at the G8 and UN Committee on World Food Security: forum-shifting in global food security governance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About