Norm emergence as agenda diffusion: Failure and success in the regulation of cluster munitions
| Published date | 01 December 2019 |
| Date | 01 December 2019 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1354066119842644 |
| Author | Elvira Rosert |
https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066119842644
European Journal of
International Relations
2019, Vol. 25(4) 1103 –1131
© The Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1354066119842644
journals.sagepub.com/home/ejt
E
JR
I
Norm emergence as agenda
diffusion: Failure and
success in the regulation
of cluster munitions
Elvira Rosert
Universität Hamburg and Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy, Germany
Abstract
The research on international norms offers several models of their evolution;
however, a convincing model specifically depicting the phase of norm emergence is
still lacking. Macro models (e.g. the norm life cycle) focus on the overall evolution of
norms and distinguish the emergence phase as one among others, but they remain
too rough. Meso models focus on a specific phase, but on phases other than norm
emergence, such as diffusion (e.g. the signalling model) or enforcement (e.g. the
spiral model). If they do focus on emergence, this focus remains case-specific and
lacks theorisation. Micro models (e.g. the persuasion model or the funnelling model)
focus on specific sequences within a phase. In this article, I develop one model of
norm emergence by conceptualising it as the diffusion of a problem through different
agendas and the discursive transformation of a problem into a (problem-solving)
norm. The model distinguishes four sequences of norm emergence: problem adoption
by norm entrepreneurs; issue creation in the public sphere; candidate norm creation
in the institutional-deliberative sphere; and norm creation in multilateral negotiations.
I illustrate the utility of this model by tracing the emergence of the norm against
cluster munitions.
Keywords
Agenda setting, cluster munitions, humanitarian arms control, international norms,
norm emergence
Corresponding author:
Elvira Rosert, Institut für Friedensforschung und Sicherheitspolitik an der Universität Hamburg, Beim
Schlump 83, 20144 Hamburg, Germany.
Email: elvira.rosert@uni-hamburg.de
842644EJT0010.1177/1354066119842644European Journal of International RelationsRosert
research-article2019
Article
1104 European Journal of International Relations 25(4)
Introduction
How do international norms emerge? At the beginnings of norm research in International
Relations (IR), ‘the dynamics by which norms emerge, evolve, and expand in international
society’ were diagnosed to ‘have been the subject of strikingly little study’ (Nadelmann,
1990: 479). But since then, a large body of literature has been exploring various aspects of
this question. Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink’s (1998) norm life cycle and Thomas
Risse, Stephen Ropp and Kathryn Sikkink’s (1999) spiral model are certainly the two most
prominent cases in point, frequently applied and adapted (Bailey, 2008; Flockhart, 2006;
Krook and True, 2012). Several other studies suggest alternative patterns of norm emer-
gence or diffusion (Efrat, 2015; Sandholtz and Stiles, 2009), or deal with differing factors
driving norm evolution (Linde, 2014; Müller and Wunderlich, 2013). Yet, we still lack a
model of norm emergence that offers a fine-grained framework for studying its stages,
actors and dynamics. This article develops one such model.
Norms may emerge via different pathways, for example, from habits (Kratochwil,
1991: 81–83), from decentralised national legislation (Clapp and Swantston, 2009) or
from practices (Kelley, 2008). They may be codified, but they do not need to be
(Finnemore, 2000). They may originate with governments (Ingebritsen, 2002) or with
(transnational) societal actors (Kaufmann and Pape, 1999). In the present article, I model
and study one particular type of norm emergence, namely, norm emergence through
bottom-up processes leading to the formalisation of proscriptions or prescriptions giving
expression to what kind of behaviour is considered appropriate in certain situations for
actors with a certain identity (Jepperson et al., 1996: 54). I conceptualise norm emer-
gence as the diffusion of a problem through different agendas. In this process, a (deplor-
able) condition is discursively transformed into a (problem-solving) norm in four stages.
In the first stage — problem adoption — an undesirable condition appears on the norm
entrepreneurs’ agenda, where it is defined as a problem. In the second stage — issue
creation — this problem appears on the public agenda, where it is defined as a social
issue. In the third stage — candidate norm creation — this social issue appears on the
institutional-deliberative agenda, where it is defined as a candidate norm. In the fourth
stage — norm creation — this candidate norm appears on the institutional decision-
making agenda, where norm negotiations take place.
The value added by this model is twofold: first, the model organises established theo-
retical concepts into one coherent framework; and, second, this framework advances our
understanding of why some norms emerge but others do not by designing one ideal-
typical path of norm emergence and by specifying both the necessary stages for an
emerging norm to complete and the necessary conditions within those particular stages
to be met. Hence, the present study proposes a novel perspective on norm evolution,
while also adding to the emerging interest in negative cases and broadening the focus on
norm diffusion by considering the diffusion through different political spheres instead of
through different levels of the international system.
To demonstrate the value of the model, I conduct a plausibility probe by studying the
emergence of the norm against cluster munitions (CM) in the period 1945 to 2008. The
political relevance of this case lies in its connection to human security, as well as in the
fact that the adoption of the Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM) in 2008 was
To continue reading
Request your trial