Beyond internalization: Alternate endings of the norm life cycle

Journal article

Norm scholars tend to treat norm contestation and acceptance as binary categories. This obscures variation in how much states agree over how to apply international law to specific situations. I distinguish between disagreements over norm frames (justifications) and claims (actions) and thus highlight four different outcomes of norm contestation. These differ in their effects on the clarity and strength of the contested norms, as well as on subsequent debate over them. Specifically, I argue that frame agreement limits the range of actions that actors can legitimately pursue and thus involves norm recognition. In contrast, if states only agree on the action that should be taken, but not on the norm that applies, we see norm neglect. Both outcomes structure subsequent debates, but norm neglect is the more volatile outcome: because of the lack of normative commitment, states can justify the agreed-upon action as exceptional compromise and later revert back to a norm impasse (frame and claim disagreement). However, the joint action may also trigger socialization processes that lead to agreement on both frames and claims—that is, produce norm clarification. Hence, this typology builds a bridge between understandings of contestation as a never-ending debate and as an avenue toward agreement; it helps improve our understanding of compliance mechanisms and of contestation.

Authors: Stimmer, A

• Publication status: Published
• Peer review status: Peer reviewed
• Publisher: Oxford University Press
• Journal: International Studies Quarterly
• Volume: 63
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 270-280
• Publication date: 2019-03-04
• Acceptance date: 2018-07-01
• DOI: 10.1093/isq/sqz001
• EISSN: 1468-2478
• ISSN: 0020-8833
• Language: English
• Keywords: FFR