Suchergebnisse

The objective of this study is to propose a theoretical model to investigate the mechanism by which contesting of a harmful legal norm by powerless individual actors results in the emergence of a new norm. While much work has been done on norm contestation at the "actor level" in the field, the structural conditions under which contesting of harmful norms by powerless individual actors lead to emergence of a new norm have been insufficiently studied, especially in the non-democratic cultural context. I developed a model that combine existing causal theories in one frame to reproduce observe conditions in the real world to determine necessary structural conditions for the emergence of a new norm by powerless individual actors. A modeling and simulation method and, more specifically, the theoretical model building paradigm is used to develop the model. Social identity theory and the system dynamics modeling approach are used to respectively build the conceptual model and implement the simulation model. The model is tested and compared within two types of communities: democratic and loose vs non-democratic and tight. My findings determine necessary structural conditions for the emergence of a new norm. Indeed, my model's result show that education among others play the main role in the process of norm emergence which is consistent with the previous literature. Moreover, the model's results demonstrate that while average-strength harmful norms can be replaced in democratic and loose societies, only weak norms can be replaced in non-democratic and tight societies. Finally, the simulation model introduces new counterfactual generated hypothesis that can be further tested through empirical studies.

The introduction to the special issue sets out to examine the normative rivalry between the European Union and other regional actors and how it plays out at the domestic level in the societies of the European neighbourhood. Drawing on the International Relations literature on norm diffusion, and in particular on the scholarship on norm contestation, we posit that the degree and nature of domestic contestation of external political norms (both EU and non-EU) has consequences for norm diffusion in specific domestic settings. We deepen the conceptual understanding of the encounter between external and domestic political norms by emphasizing the agency of domestic societies and the importance of domestic normative structures in the processes of acceptance, modification or rejection of external normative influence. We provide empirical evidence about competing normative influences collected from a plethora of case studies from the eastern and the southern European neighbourhoods allowing us to draw a cross-regional parallel about the political ideas more likely to gain traction in the societies of Eastern Europe and the Middle East and North Africa.

This paper focuses on the social psychological barriers underpinning the EU and Russia's social norm contestation in the context of Ukraine. Through a frame analysis, I analyse how the two actors perceive the Crimean annexation, their own foreign policy behaviour in this context, the foreign policy behaviour of the other, and the general state of the international normative system. My findings indicate that the social psychological barrier which underpins the social norm contestation between the EU and Russia is related to the cognitive processes the actors apply in their construction of the international normative system and the type of norms which constitute it. Whereas the EU points to a stable international normative system based on injunctive norms and their clear-cut application, Russia emphasises that the normative system also consists of descriptive norms and that the presence of this type of social norm makes social norm application a matter of contextual interpretation. What the actors do agree on is the purpose of social norms and the motivation states have for complying with them. The analysis hence finds that the social norm contestation between the EU and Russia is not based on differing perceptions and interpretations on why norms are relevant or why states should comply with them. Rather, it is based on differing perceptions and interpretations of the common knowledge that is to guide state behaviour. What the analysis also suggests is that Russia's foreign policy behaviour in Ukraine was not necessarily influenced by a lack of moral compass or a wish to disrupt the international normative system. Instead, it may have been based on a subjective interpretation of what has been done before in perceived similar contexts.

The idea of the European Union being increasingly contested, whether globally or at home, is a frequently reiterated notion. It is believed that such challenges to the European integration stem from a number of diverse but interlinked global and intra-EU crises that, combined, amount to the current 'perfect storm' affecting the EU and its foreign, security and defense policy. We will explore here how the EU is being put to the test in terms of the norms and fundamental values which guide its foreign policy. It is an important issue within the broader debates of the European crises, as such norm contestation may have a deeper structural and longer-term effect on the EU's external action and its 'resilience' as an international actor. We employ insights from the norm contestation literature to scrutinize a number of the most important current challenges articulated against EU foreign policy norms in recent years, whether at the global, 'glocal' or intra-EU level. ; Elisabeth Johansson-Nogués wishes to acknowledge VISIONS (Visions and practices of geopolitics in the European Union and its neighborhood) funded by the National R+D Plan of the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities (CSO2017-82622-P). Martijn C. Vlaskamp thanks the Beatriu de Pinós postdoctoral program of the Government of Catalonia's Secretariat for Universities and Research (Ministry of Economy and Knowledge) for funding (Grant number: 2017-BP-152). Esther Barbé is grateful to the Catalan Agency for Management of University and Research Grants (AGAUR) for funds making this research possible (2017 SGR 693).

In my contribution to this collection, I aim to expose how the growing transnationalisation of groups of affected persons – in this case children and young people – has brought to the fore normative contradictions and tensions built into the 1989 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. More specifically, I will show how the universal notion of children's rights and a strong global consensus on the 'scourge' of child labour has been challenged through the empowerment of affected persons – in this case child workers. Building on critical constructivist thinking on norms, my core argument is that the increasing access of affected persons' organisations (APOs) to international organisations and high-level events brings with it an increase in norm contestation. Rather than creating new normative contestations, I will show in my analysis, the inclusion of the most affected brings to light normative inconsistencies and ambiguities that have been potentially ingrained in international treaties but hitherto successfully suppressed by powerful norm advocates. The articulation of subversive perspectives on child labour by working children and young people, I will conclude, results in normative tensions and collisions and a reconsideration of seemingly universal values previously taken for granted.

Norm contestation by local actors has emerged in recent years as an explanation for the failure of norm diffusion. This article contributes to the literature on norm contestation by analysing how norms diffused by the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) pertaining to election observation and free and fair voting are re-constituted and contested by domestic actors in Kazakhstan. The study contributes to the idea of 'constitutive localisation' by emphasising a more fundamental level of disagreement beyond just congruence between the diffused norm and local beliefs; by demonstrating contestation can occur at a later stage in the norm diffusion cycle; by focusing on the micro-politics of contestation by local actors involved in the implementation of diffused norms and; by revealing how norm contestation is not necessarily a process of emancipatory politics, but a strategic act to serve authoritarian consolidation. Utilising a four-fold framework, the analysis illustrates how norms, while initially accepted by Kazakhstani authorities, are reconstituted through political discourse and/or practice creating the moment of contestation. While this contestation is instrumentalised by political elites for their own advantage, it also remains an important element of agency within a normative order in which they had little previous control over.

The Common Foreign & Security Policy (CFSP) is a transnational policy framework to deliver collective foreign policy but also to manage differences among member states. As such, it has always been dependent on their support. Since 2019, however, disagreement within this system is said to have reached a new level. Taking this political trend as starting point, this article proposes a new, conceptual approach to understanding how contestation challenges the EU's foreign policy co-operation system. While the majority of research focuses on disagreements in decision-making, we argue for a broader conceptualisation - systemic contestation. Drawing on norm contestation scholarship, we argue that systemic contestation manifests itself in two ways: as passive contestation, when member states disengage from and fail to take ownership of CFSP initiatives and their implementation; and as tacit contestation, when they fail to act when faced with the need to safeguard the system. This approach accounts for the transgovernmental character of the CFSP; and the central role of member states within, and quality of their commitment to, it. Finally, we contend that our conceptualisation of systemic contestation offers promising new avenues for empirical research to understand the 'black box' of EU foreign policy co-operation.

Western actors have long dominated the political processes and discourses that shape global norms impacting interstate behaviour. Yet, more recently, powerful autocratic regimes such as China and Russia have seemingly challenged democracies, emerging as potential contesters of international norms. What might be the outcome of this contestation? This paper broadly explores this query by investigating Russia's humanitarian justifications for its Ukrainian incursion. It examines whether Russia's claim of humanitarian intervention is more than a petty attempt to disguise pure power politics. Is Russia contesting Western understandings of humanitarian interventions in order to reshape our ideas of permissible violations of sovereignty norms to protect vulnerable populations? Using Atlas.ti, we also explore global responses to Russia's humanitarian claims. Our initial findings indicate that the Ukrainian intervention enabled Russia to contest Responsibility to Protect (R2P) and to champion an alternative version of humanitarian intervention with some limited success.

In the early days of the internet, it was often assumed that the internet would develop into a free and open technology. However, governments have proven to be able to govern the internet, control its content, and develop international content control norms. This dissertation looks at content control from an international norms perspective and asks: How and why do international content control norms emerge and develop? I adopt an analytical eclecticist approach that combines elements from comparative politics and international relations. There are three aspects to this eclectic theory of content control. First, states subscribe to content control norms, which can range from liberal to illiberal norms. States cooperate in the area of content control and promote content control norms. Second, states support content control norms to a different extent because of the democratic or authoritarian values they subscribe to and their internal decision-making procedures, which can lead to conflict. Third, regional and international organizations affect the norm promotion strategies of states. I use both qualitative methods (case studies, content analysis) and quantitative methods (negative binomial hurdle model) to answer the research question. In order to answer the how part of the research question, I analyze two aspects of content control norm development. First, I assess the broader conflicts over norms and institutions in internet governance. I show that these conflicts are dependent on the identities of the actors involved. Second, I analyze the strategies that autocratic states use to push for specific content control norms. I show that institutional structures create opportunities and constraints to their norm promotion strategies. In order to answer the why part of the research question, I zoom in even further by comparing content control practices between democratic and authoritarian regimes. I show that democracies also control content, but mainly security-related content. Hence, content control practices are ...

Trade policy constitutes a significant part of the European Union's (EU) foreign policy. The EU's emphasis on global trade liberalization in the 21st century is most evident through its ever increasing number of modern, deep, bilateral trade agreements. However, aspects of EU trade policy and bilateral agreements are hotly contested. We examine this by comparing the rhetoric employed by European civil society organizations from 2013 through 2020. While the focus of contestation and the rhetorical strategy remained fairly consistent, the effects of contestation (politicization, institutionalization of new processes) changed, largely due to the presence or absence of negotiations on a deep trade agreement with an economic and political equal perceived to have greater bargaining power. This study contributes to the literature on norm contestation and politicization by providing empirical evidence that mere contestation is insufficient for politicization, and by showing show that perceived bargaining strength influences trade politicization.

Spaces such as the domain of education are not mere mute, neutral and external backdrops of knowledge circulation and identification, but distinct expressive cultures filled with ideologies, hierarchies and politics. In this article we mobilize the figure? of space invaders to acknowledge the everyday experiences of migrant, ethnic minority and international exchange students, exposing challenges and changes in educational institutions and knowledge domains. Transposing space invaders to the Dutch context we scrutinize intersecting ethnic, gendered and religious post-secular exclusionary norms these students experience in Dutch higher education, institutional strategies adopted for dealing with these invasions, the type of tactics migrant, ethnic minority and international exchange students pursue in order to contest them. The argument builds on empirical, ethnographic-inspired fieldwork among 40 students conducted in the context of the EU Framework 7 funded project Mig@Net: transnational digital networks, migration and gender.

The EU has drawn on its migration policy in the Middle East and North Africa as a method of region-building set to reconfigure a broader EU Mediterranean Neighborhood. At the same time, EU migration policy as a region-building initiative has had contentious, albeit understudied, effects. We know little about either variation in states' responses to the EU or the contextual dynamics and motives pushing them to challenge EU migration policy as a vector for regulating regions 'from beyond'. Building on the case of displacement from Syria, the article targets the EU's refugee approach in its 'neighborhood' as a site of contention whereby states, rather than being policy borrowers, dispute the EU's attempt to regulate regions. The article employs insights from EU refugee cooperation with Lebanon, one of the key regional host states. It shows how Lebanon has sought to contest and adapt the EU's script of resilience-building, which consists of strengthening governments' capacity to host refugees 'within the region' and at a distance. Looking at EU neighbors as policy agents rather than vessels helps to unravel the tensions underlying the external, regional, and bilateral dimensions of EU migration policy and delineate how these overlapping dimensions play out on the ground.

A discussion of the interplay of different concepts of justice and reconciliation in United Nations peace operations in Timor Leste and in the Timorese political leadership. Drawing on research into norm diffusion and concepts of localization and norm contestation to understand how societies deal with their violent past under the auspices of international actors in UN peace operations, the analysis challenges the UN's functionalistic concept of transitional justice as a precondition to state- and nationbuilding in post-conflict societies. As the case of Timor Leste demonstrates, the Timorese leadership has been successful in promoting its own concept of justice and reconciliation, leading to a localized version of state- and nationbuilding that openly contests international approaches.

This cumulative dissertation explores the contestation of global norms. It seeks to shed light on the discursive strategies behind those struggles about meaning and asks about their relation to normative change on the international level. To do so, I accept the empirical ambiguity and contestedness of normative meaning as a starting point, not an analytical problem to be overcome. Rather than isolating 'pure' and unambiguous norms that can be neatly traced, the articles in this dissertation seek to shed light on those ambiguities, contradictions and tensions: First, how can be conceptualize them and capture them analytically? Second, what do actors do with those ambiguities and contradictions? How do they leverage them? How are they bound by normative struc-tures and, simultaneously, how do they engage and seek to transform them? How do actors use norms and normative context in struggles over meaning, for example by exploiting, resisting, subverting, stabilizing or de-stabilizing them? What agency lies in gaining power over definition and meaning? And third, what does this teach us about the process of normative change on the international level? This dissertation consists of four separate articles. First, Political Steering: How the EU Employs Power in its Neighbourhood Policy towards Morocco, was published in Mediterranean Politics and co-authored with David Remmert. It explores the European Union's promotion of the rule of law and human rights norms and conceptualizes this as a form of discursive power. Second, Appropriation and the Dualism of Human Rights: Understanding the Contradictory Impact of Gender Norms in Nigeria was published in Third World Quar-terly. It conceptualizes appropriation as a form of local agency in norm promotion pro-cesses. Third, Friction, not Erosion: Assassination Norms at the Fault Line between Sovereignty and Liberal Values was published in Contemporary Security Policy. It shifts the focus towards the conundrum of weakening norms and explores the role of normative context in it, ...

Russian norm diffusion has been studied mainly as the mirror image of the EU's, but deserves to be studied in its own right and complexity. Three core categories of political norms are explored: sovereign choice, regime and conservative ideas. It is argued that Russia does not promote a coherent political model, by lack of one, but rather diffuses a disparate set of conservative ideas and non-democratic practices. Russia's normative positioning is equivocal. It champions established international norms like sovereignty, placing itself within the dominant normative community, but contesting the application by the West. When it comes to certain liberal political norms (often reduced to a strawman version), it questions their validity and rejects them, placing itself outside the dominant normative community, but claiming to defend 'genuine' European values. This makes Russia an ambiguous norm contester, rather than the perfect normative rival of the EU. The complexity of its norm contestation follows from exogenous motives: it is predominantly an anti-hegemonic reaction against what it perceives as the Western imposition of norms, harming vital Russian interests.