Advertisement

Dedicated to the Good: Norm Entrepreneurs in International Relations

  • Carmen WunderlichEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Norm Research in International Relations book series (NOREINRE)

Abstract

This chapter presents the state of the art on research on norm dynamics in IR with a focus on the role of norm entrepreneurs for the construction, maintenance, strengthening, and change of global norms. Wunderlich provides a comprehensive account of how the concept of norm entrepreneurship has been applied in liberal strands of the norm literature covering the type of actors usually summarized under the label, their characteristics, strategies, motives, and objectives. In doing so, she brings to the fore a normative bias that has led liberal-constructivist norm scholars to focus on prototypical Western liberal actors and their efforts to advocate seemingly universal norms. The extent to which actors other than transnational activist networks or good international citizens are committed to the construction and diffusion of (Western liberal) norms has been largely ignored. The chapter thus lays the foundation for the book’s goal of overcoming this one-sided focus taking recourse to more recent efforts in the realm of critical norm studies.

References

  1. Acharya, A. (2004). How ideas spread: Whose norms matter? Norm localization and institutional change in Asian regionalism. International Organization, 58(2), 239–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Acharya, A. (2009). Whose ideas matter? Agency and power in Asian regionalism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Library.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Acharya, A. (2011). Norm subsidiarity and regional orders. Sovereignty, regionalism, and rule-making in the third world. International Studies Quarterly, 55(1), 95–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Acharya, A. (2013). The R2P and norm diffusion. Towards a framework of norm circulation. Global Responsibility to Protect, 5(4), 466–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Adamson, F. (2005). Global liberalism versus political Islam: Competing ideological frameworks in international politics. International Studies Review, 7(4), 547–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Adler-Nissen, R. (2014). Stigma management in international relations: Transgressive identities, norms, and order in international society. International Organization, 68(1), 143–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Adut, A. (2004). Scandal as norm entrepreneurship strategy: Corruption and the french investigating magistrates. Theory and Society, 33(5), 529–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Aginam, O. (2014). The role of international organizations in promoting legal norms. In J. Yann & B. Knoppers (Eds.), Routledge handbook of medical law and ethics (pp. 390–400). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Alderson, K. (2001). Making sense of state socialization. Review of International Studies, 27(3), 415–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Alford, R. (2008). The nobel effect: Nobel peace prize laureates as international norm entrepreneurs. Virginia Journal of International Law, 49(1), 61–153.Google Scholar
  11. Allison-Reumann, L. (2017). The norm-diffusion capacity of ASEAN: Evidence and challenges. Pacific Focus, 32(1), 5–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Atwood, D. (2002). NGOs and disarmament: Views from the coal face. Disarmament Forum, 1, 5–14.Google Scholar
  13. Axelrod, R. (1986). An evolutionary approach to norms. American Political Science Review, 80(4), 1095–1111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Baisley, E. (2016). Reaching the tipping point? Emerging international human rights norms pertaining to sexual orientation and gender identity. Human Rights Quarterly, 38(1), 134–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Barkin, J. (2003). Realist constructivism. International Studies Review, 5(3), 325–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Barnett, M. (2009). The international humanitarian order. Abingdon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Barnett, M., & Finnemore, M. (1999). The politics, power, and pathologis of international organizations. International Organization, 53(4), 699–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Becker, H. (1963). The outsiders. Studies in the sociology of deviance. New York, NY: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  19. Becker-Jakob, U., Hofmann, G., Müller, H., & Wunderlich, C. (2013) Good international citizens: Canada, Germany and Sweden. In H. Müller & C. Wunderlich (Eds.), Norm dynamics in multilateral arms control, interests, conflicts, and justice (pp. 207–245). Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.Google Scholar
  20. Behringer, R. (2012). The human security agenda: How middle power leadership defied us hegemony. New York, NY: Continuum.Google Scholar
  21. Benford, R., & Snow, D. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 611–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Benner, T. (2012). Brasilien als Normunternehmer: Die “Responsibility While Protecting”. Vereinte Nationen, 6, 251–256.Google Scholar
  23. Björkdahl, A. (2002a). From idea to norm: Promoting conflict prevention. Lund: Lund University.Google Scholar
  24. Björkdahl, A. (2002b). Norms in international relations: Some conceptual and methodological reflections. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 15(1), 9–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Björkdahl, A. (2008). Norm advocacy: A small state strategy to influence the EU. Journal of European Public Policy, 15(1), 135–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Björkdahl, A. (2013). Ideas and norms in Swedish peace policy. Swiss Political Science Review, 19(3), 322–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Blakeley, R. (2013). Human rights, state wrongs, and social change: The theory and practice of emancipation. Review of International Studies, 39(3), 599–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Blavoukos, S., & Bourantonis, D. (2011). Chairs as policy entrepreneurs in multilateral negotiations. Review of International Studies, 37(2), 653–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Bob, C. (2012). The global right wing and the clash of world politics. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Brosig, M., & Zähringer, N. (2015). Norm evolution a matter of conformity and contestedness: South Africa and the responsibility to protect. Global Responsibility to Protect, 7(3–4), 350–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Brühl, T. (2003). Nichtregierungsorganisationen als Akteure internationaler Umweltverhandlungen. Ein Erklärungsmodell auf der Basis der situationsspezifischen Ressourcennachfrage. Frankfurt a. M.: Campus Verlag.Google Scholar
  32. Brysk, A. (2005). Global good samaritans? Human rights foreign policy in Costa Rica. Global Governance, 11(4), 445–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Brysk, A. (2009). Global good Samaritans: Human rights as foreign policy. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Bucher, B. (2014). Acting abstractions: Metaphors, narrative structures, and the eclipse of agency. European Journal of International Relations, 20(3), 742–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Budabin, A. C. (2015). Celebrities as norm entrepreneurs in international politics: Mia Farrow and the ‘Genocide Olympics’ campaign. Celebrity Studies, 6(4), 399–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Bull, H. (1977). The anarchical society: A study of order in world politics. London: Basingstoke.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Busby, J. (2007). Bono Made Jesse Helms Cry: Jubilee 2000, Debt relief, and moral action in international politics. International Studies Quarterly, 51(2), 247–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Busby, J. (2010). Moral movements and foreign policy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Cable, S., & Shriver, T. (1995). Production and extrapolation of meaning in the environmental justice movement. Sociological Spectrum, 15(4), 419–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Capie, D. (2008). Localization as resistance: The contested diffusion of small arms norms in Southeast Asia. Security Dialogue, 39(6), 637–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Carbonara, E., Parisi, F., & Wangenheim, G. (2008). Lawmakers as norm entrepreneurs. Review of Law and Economics, 4(3), 779–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Carpenter, C. (2007a). Setting the advocacy agenda: Theorizing issue emergence and nonemergence in transnational advocacy networks. International Studies Quarterly, 51(1), 99–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Carpenter, C. (2007b). Studying issue non-adoption in transnational advocacy networks. International Organization, 61(3), 643–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Carpenter, C. (2011). Vetting the advocacy agenda: Network centrality and the paradox of weapons norms. International Organization, 65(1), 69–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Carr, A. (2012). Australia as a middle power norm entrepreneur in the Asia-Pacific 1983–2010. Canberra: University of Canberra.Google Scholar
  46. Carroll, W., & Ratner, R. (1996). Master frames and counter-hegemony: Political sensibilities in contemporary social movements. Canadian Review of Sociology, 33(4), 407–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Charnysh, V., Lloyd, P., & Simmons, B. (2015). Frames and consensus formation in international relations: The case of trafficking in persons. European Journal of International Relations, 21(2), 323–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Checkel, J. (1997). International norms and domestic politics: Bridging the rationalist-constructivist divide. European Journal of International Relations, 3(4), 473–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Checkel, J. (1998). The constructivist turn in international relations theory. World Politics, 50(2), 324–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Checkel, J. (1999a). Norms, institution, and national identity in contemporary Europe. International Studies Quarterly, 43(1), 83–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Checkel, J. (1999b). Regional norms and domestic social mobilization: Citizenship politics in post maastricht, Post-Cold War Germany. ARENA Working Papers WP, 99(3), Oslo.Google Scholar
  52. Checkel, J. (2000). Book review: The power of human rights. Comparative Political Studies, 33(10), 1337–1341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Checkel, J. (2001). Why comply? Social learning and European identity change. International Organization, 55(3), 553–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Checkel, J. (2012). Norm entrepreneurship—Theoretical and methodological challenges. In Memo prepared for a workshop on “The Evolution of International Norms and ‘Norm Entrepreneurship”. The Council of Europe in Comparative Perspective. Oxford: Wolfson College, Oxford University.Google Scholar
  55. Chwieroth, J. (2008). Normative change from within. The international monetary fund’s approach to capital account liberalization. International Studies Quarterly, 52(1), 129–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Coleman, K. (2013). Locating norm diplomacy: Venue change in international norm negotiations. European Journal of International Relations, 19(1), 163–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Colonomos, A. (2001). Non-state actors as moral entrepreneurs: A transnational perspective on ethics networks. In D. Josselin & W. Wallace (Eds.), Non-state actors in world politics (pp. 76–89). New York, NY: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Cooper, A. (1997). Niche diplomacy: Middle powers after the cold war. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Cooper, A. (2002). Like-minded nations, NGOS, and the changing pattern of diplomacy within the UN system: An introductory perspective. In A. Cooper, J. English, & R. Thakur (Eds.), Enhancing global governance: Towards a new diplomacy? (pp. 1–18). Tokyo: United Nations University Press.Google Scholar
  60. Cooper, A. (2008). Celebrity diplomacy. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.Google Scholar
  61. Cortell, A., & Davis, J. (1996). How do international institutions matter? The domestic impact of international rules and norms. International Studies Quarterly, 40(4), 451–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Cortell, A., & Davis, J. (2000). Understanding the domestic impact of international norms: A research agenda. International Studies Review, 2(1), 65–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Cortell, A., & Davis, J. (2005). When norms clash: International norms, domestic practices, and Japan’s internalisation of the GATT/WTO. Review of International Studies, 31(1), 3–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Cowles, M. (2003). Non-state actors and false dichotomies: Reviewing IR/IPE approaches to European integration. Journal of European Public Policy, 10(1), 102–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Dashwood, H. (2012). CSR norms and organizational learning in the mining sector. Corporate governance: The international journal of business in society, 12(1), 118–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Davies, S. E., & True, J. (2017). Norm entrepreneurship in foreign policy: William Hague and the prevention of sexual violence in conflict. Foreign Policy Analysis, 13(3), 701–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Deitelhoff, N. (2006). Überzeugung in der Politik: Grundzüge einer Diskurstheorie internationalen Regierens. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp taschenbuch wissenschaft.Google Scholar
  68. Deitelhoff, N. (2009). The discursive process of legalization. Charting islands of persuasion in the ICC Case. International Organization, 63(1), 33–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Deitelhoff, N., & Wolf, K. (2013). Business and human rights: How corporate norm violators become norm entrepreneurs. In T. Risse, S.C. Ropp, & K. Sikkink (Eds.), The persistent power of human rights: From commitment to compliance (pp. 222–238). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Deitelhoff, N., & Zimmermann, L. (2013). Things we lost in the fire: How different types of contestation affect the robustness of international norms. International Studies Review, viy080.  https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viy080.
  71. Deitelhoff, N., & Zimmermann, L. (2014). From the heart of darkness. Critical reading and genuine listening in constructivist norm research. A reply to Stephan Engelkamp, Katharina Glaab, and Judith Renner. World Political Science Review, 10(1), 17–31.Google Scholar
  72. Dessler, D. (1989). What’s at stake in the agent-structure debate? International Organization, 43(3), 441–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Drezner, D. (2007). Foreign policy glam. The National Interest, 92, 22–28.Google Scholar
  74. Ehrenreich Brooks, R. (2003). The new imperialism: Violence, norms, and the “rule of law”. Michigan Law Review, 101(7), 2275–2340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Elgström, O. (2000). Norm negotiations: The construction of new norms regarding gender and development in Eu foreign aid policy. Journal of European Public Policy, 7(3), 457–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Ellickson, R. (2001). The market for social norms. American Law and Economics Association, 3(1), 1–49.Google Scholar
  77. Elster, J. (1989). The cement of society: A study of social order. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Engelkamp, S., Glaab, K., & Renner, J. (2014a). Office hours: How (critical) norm research can regain its voice. World Political Science Review, 10(1), 33–61.Google Scholar
  79. Engelkamp, S., Glaab, K., & Renner, J. (2014b). One step forward, two steps back. A reply to Nicole Deitelhoff and Lisbeth Zimmermann. World Political Science Review, 10(1), 1–16.Google Scholar
  80. Epstein, C. (2012a). Stop telling us how to behave: Socialization or infantilization? International Studies Perspectives, 13(2), 135–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Epstein, C. (2012b). Symposium: Interrogating the use of norms in international relations. An Introduction. International Studies Perspectives, 13(2), 121–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Evans, G. (2011). Middle power diplomacy. Lecture by Professor the Hon Gareth Evans, Chancellor of The Australian National University, President Emeritus of the International Crisis Group and former Foreign Minister of Australia. Santiago: Chile Pacific Foundation Santiago. Resource Document. http://www.gevans.org/speeches/speech441.html. Accessed 28 April 2017.
  83. Farrell, T. (2001). Transnational norms and military development: Constructing Ireland’s professional army. European Journal of International Relations, 7(1), 63–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Fastenrath, U. (1993). Relative normativity in international law. European Journal of International Law, 4(3), 305–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Feakes, D. (2003). Global society and biological and chemical weapons. In M. Kaldor, H. Anheier, & M. Glasius (Eds.), Global Civil society yearbook (pp. 87–117). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  86. Fey, M., Hellmann, A., Klinke, F., Plümmer, F., & Rauch, C. (2013). Established and rising great powers: The United States, Russia, China, and India. In H. Müller & C. Wunderlich (Eds.), Norm dynamics in multilateral arms control: Interests, conflicts, and justice (pp. 163–206). Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.Google Scholar
  87. Finnemore, M. (1993). International organizations as teachers of norms: The United Nations educational, scientific, and cultural organization and science policy. International Organization, 47(4), 565–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Finnemore, M. (1996). National interests in international society. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  89. Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization, 52(4), 887–917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (2001). Taking stock: The constructivist research program in international relations and comparative politics. Annual Review of Political Science, 4, 391–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Fisher, C. S. (1999). Reformation and resistance: Nongovernmental organizations and the future of nuclear weapons (Report No. 29). Washington, DC: Henry L. Stimson Center.Google Scholar
  92. Flohr, A., Rieth, L., Schwindenhammer, S., & Wolf, K. (2010). The role of business in global governance: Corporations as norm-entrepreneurs. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Florini, A. (1996). The evolution of international norms. International Studies Quarterly, 40(3), 363–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Gamson, W. (1992). The social psychology of collective action. In A. Morris, C. Mc Clurg Mueller (Eds.), Frontiers in social movement theory (pp. 3–76). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  95. Gamson, W., Fireman, B., & Rytina, S. (1982). Encounters with unjust authority. Homewood: Dorsey.Google Scholar
  96. Garris, J. (1973). Sweden’s debate on the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Cooperation and Conflict, 8(4), 189–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Garwood-Gowers, A. (2015). China’s “responsible protection” concept: Re-interpreting the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) and military intervention for humanitarian purposes. Asian Journal of International Law, 6(1), 1–30.Google Scholar
  98. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society. Berkley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  99. Goertz, G., & Diehl, P. (1992). Toward a theory of international norms: Some conceptual and measurement issues. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 36(4), 634–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Goffman, Erving. (1974). Frame analysis. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  101. Gurowitz, A. (1999). Mobilizing international norms: Domestic actors, immigrants, and the Japanese state. World Politics, 51(03), 413–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Gurowitz, A. (2006). The diffusion of international norms: Why identity matters. International Politics, 43(3), 305–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Haas, P. M. (1992). Introduction: Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organization, 46(1), 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Hafner-Burton, E. M. (2008). Sticks and stones: Naming and shaming the human rights enforcement problem. International Organization, 62(04), 689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Halliday, Fred. (2001). The romance of non-state actors. In D. Josselin & W. Wallace (Eds.), Non-state actors in world politics (pp. 21–36). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Hamilton, D. (2008). The United States: A normative power? Working Document 291/2008. Centre for European Policy Studies CEPS. http://aei.pitt.edu/9320/2/9320.pdf. Accessed 28 April 2017.
  107. Heller, R., Kahl, M., & Pisoiu, D. (2012). The “dark” side of normative argumentation—The case of counterterrorism policy. Global Constitutionalism, 1(2), 278–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Herro, A. (2015). The responsibility to protect, the use of force and a permanent United Nations Peace service. International Journal of Human Rights, 19(8), 1148–1162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Hetcher, S. (2000). The FTC as internet privacy norm entrepreneur. Vanderbilt Law Review, 53(6), 2041–2062.Google Scholar
  110. Hofferberth, M., Brühl, T., Burkart, E., Fey, M., & Peltner, A. (2011). Multinational enterprises as “social actors”—Constructivist explanations for corporate social responsibility. Global Society, 25(2), 205–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Hoffmann, M. (2003). Constructing a complex world: The frontiers of international relations theory and foreign policy-making. Asian Journal of Political Science, 11(2), 37–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Hoffmann, M. (2005). Ozone depletion and climate change: Constructing a global response. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  113. Hoffmann, M. (2007). My norm is better than your norm: Contestation and norm dynamics. Paper prepared for presentation at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  114. Hoffmann, M. (2009). Is constructivist ethics an oxymoron? International Studies Review, 11(2), 231–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Hoffmann, M. (2010). Norms and social constructivism in international relations. In Denemark, R. (Ed.) The international studies encyclopedia (pp. 5410–5426). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  116. Hofius, M., Wilkens, J., Hansen-Magnusson, H., & Gholiagha, S. (2014). Den Schleier lichten? Kritische Normenforschung, Freiheit und Gleichberechtigung im Kontext des «Arabischen Frühlings». Eine Replik auf Engelkamp/Glaab/Renner, Ulbert und Deitelhoff/Zimmermann. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen, 21(2), 85–105.Google Scholar
  117. Hulme, D., & Fukuda-Parr, S. (2011). International norm dynamics and “the end of poverty”: understanding the millennium development goals. Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations, 17(1), 17–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Hurrell, A. (2001). Norms and ethics in international relations. In W. Carlsnaes, T. Risse, & B. Simmons (Eds.), Handbook of international relations (pp. 137–154). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  119. Ingebritsen, C. (2002). Norm entrepreneurs: Scandinavia’s role in world politics. Cooperation and Conflict, 37(1), 11–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Ingebritsen, C. (2006). Scandinavia in world politics. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  121. Jepperson, R., Wendt, A., & Katzenstein, P. (1996). Norms, identity, and culture in national security. In P. Katzenstein (Ed.), The culture of national security: Norms and identity in world politics (pp. 33–75). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  122. Job, B. (2006). International peace and security and state sovereignty: Contesting norms and norm entrepreneur. In R. Thakur & W. Sidhu (Eds.), The Iraq crisis and world order: Structural, institutional and normative challenges (pp. 55–74). Tokyo: United Nations University Press.Google Scholar
  123. Johnson, R. (2000). Advocates and activists: Conflicting approaches on nonproliferation and the test ban treaty. In A. Florini (Ed.), The third force: The rise of transnational civil society (pp. 49–82). Tokyo, Washington D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.Google Scholar
  124. Johnston, A. (2001). Treating international institutions as social environments. International Studies Quarterly, 45(4), 487–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Johnstone, I. (2007). The secretary-general as norm entrepreneur. In S. Chesterman (Ed.), Secretary or general? The UN secretary-general in world politics (pp. 123–138). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Jose, B. (2018). Norm contestation: Insights into non-conformity with armed conflict norms. SpringerBriefs in political science. Cham: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Josselin, D., & Wallace, W. (2001a). Non-state actors in world politics. A framework. In D. Josselin & W. Wallace (Eds.), Non-state actors in world politics (pp. 1–20). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  128. Josselin, D., & Wallace, W. (2001b). Non-state actors in world politics. The lessons. In: D. Josselin, & W. Wallace (Eds.), Non-state actors in world politics (pp. 251–260). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  129. Jüngling, K. (2013). Großmächtige Worte? Zur Wirkung verbaler Menschenrechtskritik auf Russland im Falle des Grosny-Ultimatums. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen, 20(2), 35–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Kamradt-Scott, A. (2010). Making sense of global health governance: A policy perspective. Global Public Health, 5(5), 556–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. Katzenstein, P. (1996). Introduction: Alternative perspectives on national security. In P. Katzenstein (Ed.), The culture of national security: Norms and identity in world politics (pp. 1–32). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  132. Kaufmann, C., & Pape, R. (1999). Explaining costly international moral action: Britain’s sixty-year campaign against the Atlantic Slave Trade. International Organization, 53(4), 631–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Keck, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond borders: Advocacy networks in international politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  134. Kelley, J. (2007). Who keeps international commitments and why? The international criminal court and bilateral nonsurrender agreements. American Political Science Review, 101(3), 573–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Kelsen, H. (1967). The pure theory of law. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  136. Keohane, R. (1986). Reciprocity in international relations. International Organization, 40(1), 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Kersbergen, C. J., & Verbeek, B. (2007). The politics of international norms: Subsidiarity and the imperfect competence regime of the Europenean Union. European Journal of International Relations, 13(2), 217–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Khagram, S., Riker, J., & Sikkink, K. (2002). From Santiago to Seattle: Transnational advocacy groups restructuring world politics. In S. Khagram, J. Riker, & K. Sikkink (Eds.), Restructuring world politics: Transnational social movements, networks, and norms (pp. 3–23). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  139. Kingdon, J. (1995). Agendas, alternatives and public policies. New York, NY: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  140. Klandermans, B. (1997). The social psychology of protest. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  141. Klotz, A. (1995a). Norms in international relations: The struggle against Apartheid. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  142. Klotz, A. (1995b). Norms reconstituting interests: Global racial equality and U.S. sanctions against South Africa. International Organization, 49(3), 451–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. Klotz, A., & Lynch, C. (2007). Strategies for research in constructivist international relations. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  144. Knopf, J. (2012). NGOS, social movements and arms control. In R. Williams & P. Viotti (Eds.), Arms control: History, theory, and policy (pp. 169–194). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.Google Scholar
  145. Koh, H. (1998). The 1998 Frankel lecture. Bringing international law home. Houston Law Review, 623, 646–655.Google Scholar
  146. Kowert, P., & Legro, J. (1996). Norms, identity, and their limits: a theoretical reprise. In P. Katzenstein (Ed.), The culture of national security: Norms and identity in world politics (pp. 451–497). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  147. Krebs, R. R., & Jackson, P. T. (2007). Twisting tongues and twisting arms: The power of political rhetoric. European Journal of International Relations, 13(1), 35–66.Google Scholar
  148. Krook, M., & True, J. (2012). Rethinking the life cycles of international norms: The United Nations and the global promotion of gender equality. European Journal of International Relations, 18(1), 103–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. Kumar, A. V. (2017). Norm entrepreneur, catalyst or challenger? India in the nuclear non-proliferation narrative. South Asian Survey, 21(1–2), 90–111.Google Scholar
  150. Lanteigne, M. (2017). ‘Have you entered the storehouses of the snow?’ China as a norm entrepreneur in the Arctic. Polar Record, 53(2), 117–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Lantis, J. (2011). Redefining the nonproliferation norm? Australian Uranium, the NPT, and the Global Nuclear Revival. Australian Journal of Politics and History, 57(4), 543–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. Liese, A. (2006). Staaten am Pranger. Zur Wirkung Internationaler Regime auf Innerstaatliche Menschenrechtspolitik. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  153. Manners, I. (2002) Normative power Europe: A contradiction in terms? JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 40(2), 235–258Google Scholar
  154. Månsson, K. (2008). UN Peace operations as norm entrepreneurs: The challenge of achieving communicative action on human rights. In A. Swain, R. Amer, & J. Öjendal (Eds.), Globalization and challenges to building peace (pp. 121–144). London: Anthem Press.Google Scholar
  155. March, J., & Olsen, J. (1998). The institutional dynamics of international political orders. International Organization, 52(4), 943–969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  156. March, J., & Olsen, J. (2004). The logic of appropriateness. Arena Working Paper 9/2004. http://www.arena.uio.no/publications/wp04_9.pdf. Accessed 28 April 2017.
  157. McKeown, R. (2009). Norm regress: US Revisionism and the slow death of the torture norm. International Relations, 23(1), 5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  158. Mintrom, M., & Norman, M. (2009). Policy entrepreneurship and policy change. The Policy Studies Journal, 37(4), 649–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. Montoya, C. (2013). From global to grassroots: The European Union, transnational advocacy, and combating violence against women. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. Mueller, J. (1996). Changing attitudes towards war: The impact of the First World War. British Journal of Political Science, 21(1), 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  161. Müller, H. (2004). Arguing, bargaining and all that. Communicative action, rationalist theory and the logic of appropriateness in international relations. European Journal of International Relations, 10(3), 395–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. Müller, H. (2011). Habermas meets role theory. Communicative action as role playing? In S. Harnisch, C. Frank, & H. Maull (Eds.), Role theory in international relations. Approaches and analyses (pp. 55–73). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  163. Müller, H. (2013). Introduction: Where it all began. In H. Müller & C. Wunderlich (Eds.), Norm dynamics in multilateral arms control, interests, conflicts, and justice (pp. 1–19). Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.Google Scholar
  164. Müller, H., & Wunderlich, C. (2013). Norm dynamics in multilateral arms control, interests, conflicts, and justice. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.Google Scholar
  165. Müller, H., Below, A., & Wisotzki, S. (2013). Beyond the state: Nongovernmental organizations, the European Union, and the United Nations. In H. Müller & C. Wunderlich (Eds.), Norm dynamics in multilateral arms control, interests, conflicts, and justice (pp. 296–336). Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.Google Scholar
  166. Murithi, T. (2016). The African Union as a norm entrepreneur: The limits of human protection and mass atrocities prevention. Global Responsibility to Protect, 8(2–3), 227–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. Muzzatti, S. (2002). Moral Panic. In D. Levinson (Ed.), Encyclopedia of crime and punishment (pp. 1076–1079). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  168. Nadelmann, E. (1990). Global prohibition regimes: The evolution of norms in international society. International Organization, 44(4), 479–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  169. Nagtzaam, G. (2009). The making of international environmental treaties: Neoliberal and constructivist analyses of normative evolution. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  170. Neumann, I., & Gstöhl, S. (2006). Introduction: Lilliputians in Gulliver’s world? In C. Ingebritsen & I. Neumann (Eds.), Small states in international relations (pp. 3–36). Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
  171. Nye, J. (1990). Soft power. Foreign Policy, 80, 153–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  172. Orchard, P. (2014). A right to flee. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  173. Padamsee, T. (2009). Culture in connection: Re-contextualizing ideational processes in the analysis of policy development. Social Politics, 16(4), 413–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  174. Panke, D., & Petersohn, U. (2012). Why international norms disappear sometimes. European Journal of International Relations, 18(4), 719–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  175. Payne, R. (2001). Persuasion, frames and norm construction. European Journal of International Relations, 7(1), 37–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  176. Posner, R. (1997). Social norms and the law: An economic approach. The American Economic Review, 87(2), 365–369.Google Scholar
  177. Posner, R. (1999). The problematics of moral and legal theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  178. Powell, C. (2004). The role of transnational norm entrepreneurs in the U.S. “War on terrorism”. Theoretical Inquiries in Law, 5(1), 47–80.Google Scholar
  179. Pozen, D. (2008). We are all entrepreneurs now. Wake Forest Law Review, 43, 282–340.Google Scholar
  180. Price, R. (1997). The chemical weapons Taboo. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  181. Price, R. (1998a). International norms and the mines Taboo: Pulls toward compliance. Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, 5(3), 105–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  182. Price, R. (1998b). Reversing the gun sights: Transnational civil society targets land mines. International Organization, 52(3), 613–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  183. Price, R. (2003). Transnational civil society and advocacy in world politics. World Politics, 55(4), 579–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  184. Price, R. (2008). Moral limit and possibility in world politics. In R. Price (Ed.), Moral limit and possibility in world politics (pp. 1–52). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  185. Price, R., & Tannenwald, N. (1996). Norms and deterrence: The nuclear and chemical weapons taboos. In Katzenstein, P. (Ed.), The culture of national security. Norms and identity in world politics (pp. 114–152), New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  186. Ravenhill, J. (1998). Cycles of middle power activism: Constraint and choice in Australian and Canadian foreign policies. Australian Journal of International Affairs, 52(3), 309–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  187. Raymond, G. (1997). Problems and prospects in the study of international norms. Mershon International Studies Review, 41(2), 205–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  188. Reich, S. (2005). Global versus national norms: Are codes of conduct converging across regions?. Pittsburgh, PA: Ford Institute for Human Security.Google Scholar
  189. Risse, T., & Draude, A. (2018). Special issue: The agency of the governed. Third World Quaterly, 2(5).Google Scholar
  190. Risse, T., Ropp, S., & Sikkink, K. (1999). The power of human rights, international norms and domestic change. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  191. Risse, T., & Sikkink, K. (1999). The socialization of international human rights norms into domestic practices: Introduction. In T. Risse, S. Ropp, & K. Sikkink (Eds.), The power of human rights, international norms and domestic change (pp. 1–38). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  192. Risse, T., & Sikkink, K. (2013). Conclusion. In T. Risse, S. Ropp, & K. Sikkink (Eds.), The persistent power of human rights: From commitment to compliance (pp. 275–295). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  193. Rosert, E. (2012). Fest etabliert und weiterhin lebendig. Normenforschung in den Internationalen Beziehungen. Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft, 22(4), 599–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  194. Rosert, E. (2018a). Salience and the emergence of international norms: Napalm and cluster munitions in the inhumane weapons convention. Review of International Studies, 45(1), 77–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  195. Rosert, E. (2018b). Norm emergence as agenda diffusion: Failure and success in the regulation of cluster munitions. European Journal of International Relations (open access).  https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066119842644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  196. Rosert, E., Becker-Jakob, U., Franceschini, G., & Schaper, A. (2013). Arms control norms and technology. In H. Müller & C. Wunderlich (Eds.), Norm dynamics in multilateral arms control: Interests, conflicts, and justice (pp. 109–140). Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.Google Scholar
  197. Rosert, E., & Schirmbeck, S. (2007). Zur Erosion internationaler Normen. Folterverbot und nukleares Tabu in der Diskussion. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen, 14(2), 253–288.Google Scholar
  198. Rublee, M. (2008). Taking stock of the nuclear nonproliferation regime: Using social psychology to understand regime effectiveness. International Studies Review, 10(3), 420–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  199. Rublee, M. (2009). Nonproliferation norms: Why states choose nuclear restraint. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.Google Scholar
  200. Rushton, S. (2008). The UN Secretary-General and norm entrepreneurship: Boutros Boutros-Ghali and democracy promotion. Global governance: A review of multilateralism and international organizations, 14(1), 95–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  201. Rutherford, K., Brem, S., & Matthew, R. (2003). Reframing the agenda: The impact of NGO and middle power cooperation in international security policy. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
  202. Sandholtz, W. (2007). Prohibiting plunder: How norms change. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  203. Sandholtz, W., & Stiles, K. (2009). International norms and cycles of change. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  204. Santa-Cruz, A. (2005). Constitutional structures, sovereignty, and die emergence of norms: The case of international election monitoring. International Organization, 59(3), 663–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  205. Saunders, E. (2006). Setting boundaries: Can international society exclude “rogue states”? International Studies Review, 8(1), 23–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  206. Schimmelfennig, F. (2003). Internationale Sozialisation. Von einem “erschöpften” zu einem produktiven Forschungsprogramm? In G. Hellmann, K. Wolf, & M. Zürn (Ed.), Die neuen internationalen Beziehungen. Forschungsstand und Perspektiven in Deutschland (pp. 401–427). Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  207. Schumpeter, J. (1912). Theorie der wirtshaftlichen Entwicklung. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
  208. Sell, S., & Prakash, A. (2004). Using ideas strategically: The contest between business and NGO networks in intellectual property rights. International Studies Quarterly, 48(1), 143–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  209. Sending, O. (2002). Constitution, choice and change: Problems with the “logic of appropriateness” and its use in constructivist theory. European Journal of International Relations, 8(4), 443–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  210. Shannon, V. (2000). Norms are what states make of them: The political psychology of norm violation. International Studies Quarterly, 44(2), 293–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  211. Sikkink, K. (1993a). Human rights, principled issue-networks, and sovereignty in Latin America. International Organization, 47(2), 411–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  212. Sikkink, K. (1993b). Transnational politics, international relations theory, and human rights. PS: Political Science and Politics, 31(3), 516–523.Google Scholar
  213. Sikkink, K. (2011). Beyond the justice cascade: How agentic constructivism could help explain change in international politics. Revised paper from a keynote address. Millenium Annual Conference, “Out of the Ivory Tower. Weaving the Theories and Practice of International Relations”, London School of Economics. https://www.princeton.edu/politics/about/file-repository/public/Agentic-Constructivism-paper-sent-to-the-Princeton-IR-Colloquium.pdf. Accessed 28 April 2017.
  214. Sikkink, K. (2014). Latin American countries as norm protagonists of the idea of international human rights. Global Governance, 20(3), 389–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  215. Sjöström, E. (2010). Shareholders as norm entrepreneurs for corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(2), 177–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  216. Smith, K. (2004). The European Parliament and human rights: Norm entrepreneurs or ineffective talking shop? Dossier El Parlamento Europeo en la Política Exterior, 11(2004).Google Scholar
  217. Snow, D., & Benford, R. (1988). Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobilization. International Social Movement Research, 1(1), 197–217.Google Scholar
  218. Souaré, I. (2014). The African Union as a norm entrepreneur on Military Coups d’Etat in Africa 1952–2012. An empirical assessment. Journal of Modern African Studies, 52(1), 69–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  219. Stein, T. (2008). Global social and civil entrepreneurs: An answer to the poor performance of global governance? Discussion Paper SP IV 2008-304, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung.Google Scholar
  220. Sterling-Folker, J. (2000). Competing paradigms or birds of a feather? Constructivism and neoliberal institutionalism compared. International Studies Quarterly, 44(1), 97–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  221. Stuenkel, O. (2015). The BRICS and the future of global order. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  222. Sunstein, C. (1996). Social norms and social roles. Columbia Law Review, 96(4), 903–968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  223. Tannenwald, N. (1999). The nuclear taboo: The United States and the normative basis of nuclear non-use. International Organization, 53(3), 433–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  224. Tarrow, S. (2011). Power in movement: Social movements and contentious politics. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  225. Thomson, J. (1993). Norms in international relations: A conceptual analysis. International Journal of Group Tensions, 23(1), 67–83.Google Scholar
  226. Towns, A. (2012). Norms and social hierarchies: Understanding international policy diffusion “from below”. International Organization, 66(2), 179–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  227. Vadura, K. (2015). The EU as ‘norm entrepreneur’ in the Asian region: Exploring the digital diplomacy aspect of the human rights toolbox. Asia Europe Journal, 13(3), 349–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  228. Wallbott, L. (2014). Keeping discourses separate: Explaining the non-alignment of climate politics and human rights norms by small island states in United Nations climate negotiations. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 27(4), 736–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  229. Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what states make of it. The social construction of power politics. International Organization, 46(2), 391–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  230. Widmaier, W. W., & Park, S. (2012). Differences beyond theory: Structural, strategic, and sentimental approaches to normative change. International Studies Perspectives, 13(2), 123–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  231. Wiener, A. (2008). The invisible constitution of politics: Contested norms and international encounters. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  232. Willetts, P. (1996). “The conscience of the world”: The influence of nongovernmental organizations in the UN system. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  233. Wisotzki, S. (2008). Negotiating human security at the UN: Transnational civil society, arms control and disarmament. In J. Joachim, & B. Locher (Ed.), Transnational Activism in the UN and the EU. A Comparative Study (pp. 74–89). Abington: Routledge.Google Scholar
  234. Wrage, S., & Wrage, A. (2005). Multinational enterprises as “moral entrepreneurs” in a global prohibition regime against corruption. International Studies Perspectives, 6(3), 316–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  235. Wunderlich, C. (2013). Theoretical approaches in the study of norms. In H. Müller & C. Wunderlich (Eds.), Norm dynamics in multilateral arms control, interests, conflicts, and justice (pp. 20–47). Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.Google Scholar
  236. Youde, J., & Slagter, T. (2013). Creating “good international citizens”, middle powers and domestic political institutions. Seton Hall Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations, 14(2), 123–133.Google Scholar
  237. Zimmermann, L. (2017). Global norms with a local face? Rule-of-law promotion and norm translation. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  238. Zwingel, S. (2012). How do norms travel? Theorizing international women’s rights in transnational perspective. International Studies Quarterly, 56(1), 115–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  239. Zwolski, K., & Kaunert, C. (2011). The EU and climate security: a case of successful norm entrepreneurship? European Security, 20(1), 21–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Political ScienceUniversity of Duisburg-EssenDuisburgGermany

Personalised recommendations