A Phoenix Tale? The Dynamics of Norm Robustness

04. bis 05.12.2015 | 09.00 - 17.00 Uhr: Internationale Konferenz, Gebäude "Normative Ordnungen, Raum 5.01

Veröffentlicht am: Mittwoch, 02. Dezember 2015, 14:33 Uhr (02-05)

A Phoenix Tale? The Dynamics of Norm Robustness

Konferenz

4. Dezember 2015, 9 Uhr bis 5. Dezember 2015, 17 Uhr

Mit Tanja Börzel (FU Berlin), Adam Bower (St. Andrews), Jutta Brunnée (University of Toronto), Christopher Daase (Goethe Universität), Sarah Percy (University of Queensland), Richard Price (University of British Columbia), Thomas Risse (FU Berlin), Wayne Sandholtz (USC Dornsife) Beth Simmons (Harvard University), Kathryn Sikkink (Harvard University), Nina Tannenwald (Brown University), Jennifer Welsh (European University Institute), Antje Wiener (Universität Hamburg)

Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main
Campus Westend
Gebäude „Normative Ordnungen“, Raum 5.01,
Max-Horkheimer-Str. 2, 60323 Frankfurt am Main

Anmeldung ist erforderlich: Dr. Lisbeth Zimmermann (zimmermann@hsfk.de)

Es handelt sich um einen Autorenworkshop. Plätze sind darum begrenzt

Veranstalter:
Die Tagung wird organisiert im Rahmen des DFG-Projekts "Internationale Normen im Streit. Kontestation und Normrobustheit" an der Hessischen Stiftung Friedens- und Konflitkforschung und vom Exzellenzcluster „Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen“

Organisiert von: Prof. Dr. Nicole Deitelhoff, Dr. Lisbeth Zimmermann

 


Information:
Contestation has become a new buzzword in IR norm research. While the 1990s saw the rise and diffusion of many “good” international norms – such as human rights standards, environmental standards and humanitarian law – today their contestation and potential decay is the focus of debate. Instead of studying the strategies of ‘norm entrepreneurs’ in establishing norms, current research is interested in how ‘norm revisionists’ resist and weaken existing norms.
Little is known so far, however, about why international norms remain robust, are strengthened or lose their influence.
The major relevance can be illustrated by the following questions – to which an answer would have major policy relevance:

  • Has the U.S.’ reinterpretation of the international ban on torture led to the norm’s weakening at an international level – or has the ban rather been strengthened by U.S. non-compliance, and the ensuing international discourse?
  • Has the constant critique of numerous African states weakened the International Criminal Court’s legitimacy?
  • Is the ban on chemical weapons weakened or strengthened by current controversies regarding its application in Syria?
  • Has the contestation concerning the responsibility to protect (R2P) led to a specification of what R2P is and is not, and has this strengthened the norm’s robustness? Would the writing into law of the moral R2P norm make it more robust?

Current scholars differ widely on these questions regarding norm robustness. This is also due to lacking agreement on the question of what norm robustness is and how it can be measured. We often do not know if we observe norm decay or a process where a norm is strengthened as a result of intense international contestation, like a Phoenix rising from the ashes. Additionally, how is robustness linked to changing interpretations of norms, which have recently been studied in International Relation?
In addition, the workshop should encourage more research on the explanation of the dynamics of norm robustness. Papers should focus on the following questions: What is the relation of norm contestation and norm robustness? How is norm change (i.e. changing norm
interpretations) linked to norm robustness? Does law make norms more robust? Why or why not? How are the dynamics of norms interrelated?
Can we observe waves of strengthening or weakening of interrelated norms or norms in the same policy field? What effects do exits of states from international conventions have on norm robustness? (such as a potential exit of African states from the Rome Statute). These questions will be at the heart of the Frankfurt workshop.