Lecture 8 - Social Constructivism (Finnemore / Sikkink) Flashcards
Middle-Ground Constructivism
Constructivist ontology (norms, ideas, identities) and positivist cause-effect epistemology
Constructivist epistemology plus strategic actor ontology
Finnemore & Sikkink: Norms and Causal Claims
norms have a causal effects on interests and behaviour
norms
single standard of behaviour
interests
Collections of norms and mix of rules and practices
regulative norms
Order, constrain behavior of actors
constitutive norms
Create new actors, interests, or categories of action
prescriptive norms
Define standards of „appropriate“ behavior and therefore standards to distinguish (in-)acceptable behavior.
Types/Categories of Norms
regulative
constitutive
prescriptive
norm change: neorealism
Systemic change when the distribution of power changes.
norm change: social constructivism
systemic change when ideas and norms change
Norm Life Cycle Model: three stages
- norm emergence
- norm cascade
- internalization
Stage 1: Norm emergence
new norms are proposed and advocated by individuals or groups who advocate for this norm
Stage 2: Norm cascade
new norm starts to gain significant traction / visibility and influencial actors like states begin to adopt / promote the norm
this leads to a tipping point (1/3 of the states) where norms spread rapidly through the population
Stage 3: Internalization
norms become widely accepted and internalized, becoming a standard part of behaviour / practice within the international society
Tipping Point between stage 1 and 2
Critical mass of states / approximate 1/3 adopts the norm
Which Norms Matter Under What Conditions
intrinsic quality: some intrinsic qualities of a norm may make it more likely to be adopted –> against vulnerable groups, equality etc.
Adjacency: resemblance of an existing norm, or somehow derivable from that make new norm more likely to be accepted
prominence: norms held by prominent states (e.g., powerful states, war victors) are likely to be adopted
World Time and symbolic events: a depression or shock can lead states to look for new norms
2nd Wave of Norm Scholars (Amitav Acharya)
Interested in why do some transnational ideas and norms find greater acceptance in a particular locale than in others.
Because questions about norm diffusion in world politics are not simply about whether and how ideas matter, but also which and whose ideas matter
Looks beyond international prescriptions and stress the role of domestic political, organizational, and cultural variables in conditioning the reception of new global norms
–> Interested in how local agents reconstruct foreign norms to ensure the norms fit with the agents’ cognitive priors and identities
Critique of First Wave Scholars = Moral Cosmopolitan Perspective
The moral cosmopolitanism perspective has contributed to two unfortunate tendencies
- sets up a dichotomy of good universal / bad local norms
- Moral cosmopolitans view norm diffusion as teaching by transnational agents, thereby downplaying the agency role of local actors
This perspective captures a significant, but small, part of norm dynamics in world politics, focusing
on principled ideas, which establish a fundamental distinction between what is good and what is
evil
desirable norms for moral cosmopolitans
For moral cosmopolitans, norms making a universalistic claim about what is good are
considered more desirable and more likely to prevail than norms that are localized or
particularistic
Norm Localization
Describes the process through which local actors build congruence between transnational norms and local beliefs and practices and whereby then transnational norms become incorporated into local norms
=> Process in which the role of local actors is more crucial than that of outside actors
