Norm advocacy networks: Nordic and Like-Minded Countries in EU gender and development policy
| Published date | 01 June 2017 |
| Date | 01 June 2017 |
| Author | Ole Elgström |
| DOI | 10.1177/0010836716652429 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
652429CAC0010.1177/0010836716652429Cooperation and ConflictElgström
research-article2016
Article
Cooperation and Conflict
2017, Vol. 52(2) 224 –240
Norm advocacy networks:
© The Author(s) 2016
Reprints and permissions:
Nordic and Like-Minded
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836716652429
DOI: 10.1177/0010836716652429
journals.sagepub.com/home/cac
Countries in EU gender and
development policy
Ole Elgström
Abstract
This article investigates the informal networks of Member States that are claimed to be the
drivers of EU gender and development policy. The aim is to highlight the negotiation strategies
used in gender and development negotiations and to link these to network characteristics. I
categorise the characteristics of the Nordic and the like-minded groupings, relying on network
theory and investigate their modes of influence. The article is based on interviews with officials at
the Permanent Representations and EU institutions in Brussels. My results demonstrate that the
Nordics and the Like-Minded Countries constitute informal networks with frequent interaction.
Network members share information and coordinate initiatives. The findings show a preference
for gradual entrapment and framing rather than shaming and exclusion. The choice of strategies
can be linked to network characteristics: the like-minded network is non-formalised and open,
and as the ambition is to spread the norms of the like-minded also to reluctant actors, network
participants prefer gradual entrapment and traditional diplomatic initiatives before confrontation.
Norm promotion normally occurs in concentric circles negotiations, mirroring the layered
structure of the network. This article contributes to the literature on informal governance in EU
foreign policy by highlighting key strategies used in intra-EU policy networks.
Keywords
Gender and development, informal governance, like-minded countries, networks, Nordic states
Introduction
How do informal, vanguard Member State groupings go about influencing European
Union (EU) policies? The role of informal governance in the formation of EU policies
has been increasingly emphasised (Christiansen and Neuhold, 2013; Delreux and
Keukeleire, 2015; Kleine, 2014; Stone, 2013). According to this research, different con-
stellations of informally cooperating countries matter depending on the issue area
Corresponding author:
Ole Elgström, Department of Political Science, Lund University, Box 52, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden.
Email: ole.elgstrom@svet.lu.se
Elgström
225
(Delreux and Keukeleire, 2015; Delreux and Van den Brande, 2013; Mérand et al., 2011).
Also in the area of EU foreign policy, there are often ‘lead countries’ that try to advance
their policy ideas within the EU. But what characterise these groupings and what diplo-
matic tools and strategies do they practise?
In this article, the focus is on the strategies and characteristics of informal groupings
– networks – of Member States that are claimed to be the drivers in EU development
policy. EU and Member State development policies are converging (Olsen, 2013;
Zemanová, 2012). This has been seen as an example of ‘Europeanisation from below’
(De Flers and Müller, 2011), where certain Member States spread their cherished values
to other members and to the EU. The Nordic countries have a solid reputation as gener-
ous and progressive aid donors, and have been presumed to influence EU policies in this
direction (Odén, 2011; Selbervik with Nygaard, 2006). In recent years, it has been argued
that other Member States have adopted similar, or even more progressive, policies,
expanding to a circle of Like-Minded Countries (LMCs) that push EU policies forward
(Bué, 2010). These claims are anecdotic, however, and no research seems to have been
done either on the characteristics of these networks, or on what these informal groupings
actually do to influence policies.
The aim of this article is to highlight the network negotiation strategies used in EU
gender and development negotiations and to link these to network characteristics. I
pinpoint and categorise the characteristics of the Nordic and the like-minded group-
ings, relying on network theory, and investigate what modes of influence these net-
works and their members utilise when trying to promote their values and policies. I
apply ideas from the literature on socialisation and from norm diffusion-theory to
construct a typology of informal intra-EU diplomatic practices (cf. Lequesne, 2015)
and use this as a platform to empirically demonstrate the key strategies that have been
employed in gender and development policy. Thereby, I cast light on the main strate-
gies that norm advocates have chosen in a situation where coercion and conditionality
are largely absent and where actors instead have to rely on various persuasive instru-
ments. The ambition is primarily exploratory: the study of practices of informal sub-
groups among Member States is a novel field of research where little empirical
knowledge exists.
The empirical focus is on gender and development policy, a key element in EU devel-
opment policy. The gender equality norm holds a prominent position in the EU’s norma-
tive framework. This makes gender and development a good case to explore the strategies
of networks in internal EU norm negotiations. My findings are mainly based on inter-
views with officials in charge of this policy area at the Permanent Representations of
seven Member States, but also with a representative of the European External Action
Services (EEAS) and a former official at the Commission (a list of all 11 interviewees is
provided at the end of the article). The interviewees are mainly from countries that are
part of the like-minded network: these are the officials who know the network’s practices
and characteristics.1 Interviews are considered the best way to uncover actual diplomatic
practices (cf. Lequesne, 2015: 362), not least within the area of informal governance.
Interviews were structured around the theoretically derived network characteristics and
influence modes. To ensure openness, interviewees were promised not to be quoted in
the text.
226
Cooperation and Conflict 52(2)
The results show a preference for gradual entrapment, framing and knowledge-based
diffusion rather than shaming and exclusion. The choice of such network strategies can
be linked to network characteristics: the like-minded network is non-formalised and
open, and as the ambition is to spread the norms of the like-minded to reluctant actors,
network ‘members’ prefer gradual entrapment and traditional diplomatic initiatives
before confrontation. Norm promotion normally occurs in concentric circles negotia-
tions, mirroring the layered structure of the network. New normative ideas are first
anchored in an inner circle of network participants and only then promoted to a wider
circle of Member States, inside and outside the network. These findings increase our
understanding of the practices and characteristics of informal Member State networks in
EU external policy, thereby providing a substantial empirical contribution to an under-
studied research area. Through its elaboration of network modes of influence and key
strategies, this article makes a theoretical contribution to this field, as well as to the lit-
erature on ‘Europeanisation from below’.
I start by introducing key concepts and ideas from network theory and from the litera-
ture on norm advocacy and socialisation, resulting in an original typology to guide the
empirical analysis. In the following section, a brief overview is provided of the tradi-
tional roles of the Nordic Member States in development policy and gender policy, dis-
cussing the alleged change towards a wider circle of Like-Minded Countries. Next I
apply my framework to EU development and gender policy, in order to illuminate net-
work characteristics and typical modes of influence. In the conclusion, I summarise my
main findings and discuss future research avenues.
Norm advocacy in development policy networks: network
characteristics and a typology of influence practices
The types of informal coordination and cooperation structures that are the focus of this
article can be described in terms of networks. A policy network includes a relatively sta-
ble set of individual or organisational actors, linked through communication and the
exchange of information, expertise and other policy resources (Elgström and Jönsson,
2000: 695). Network analysis directs our attention to relational data: to contacts, ties and
connections. Networks are usually associated with lack of hierarchy and informality,
though the degree of informality may vary over time and across issues. Donald Chisholm
(1989) emphasises some positive aspects of informal networks: they adapt easily, gener-
ate trust and facilitate a free exchange of information (cf. Jönsson and Strömvik, 2005:
16). A network approach also implies assigning more significance to individuals than a
traditional state-centric model.
Policy networks may be characterised according to a number of dimensions: insular-
ity, density, intensity and degree of formalisation (cf. Elgström and Jönsson, 2000).
Insularity has to do with the openness of the network. A network that is not welcoming
to new members is insular, in contrast to the open, fluid network that may vary in its
composition of members. Density refers to the interconnectedness of the network. A
network...
To continue reading
Request your trial