Session 18: How "Norms" Become Normal.

In contrast to the dominant discourse regarding the limited role of ideas in theorizing in the realm of international relations, Matha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink claim that “normative and ideational concerns have always informed the study of international politics”. In “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change”, Finnemore and Sikkink attempt to explore how ideas have emerged, and entrenched themselves in domestic and international politics, taking on the role of “norms”, in order to define interactions within the international system.

In political science, “norms” refer to the “appropriate behavior” for actors with a specific identity, based in a given system. Norms intend to regularize and often limit the behavior of states in order to provide stability to the international system. Scholars have often classified norms into two distinct categories, which more or less, highlight the role that they play within the system: regulative norms which “order and constrain” the activities of actors and constitutive norms, which create new actors, interests and “categories of action”. However, the evaluation and internalization of norms is highly subjective. The propriety of a standard rule is determined by “reference to the judgment of a community”, i.e. while “norms” draw out praise or elicit no reaction from society, norm-breaking behavior generates disapproval. Furthermore, authors claim that it is difficult to distinguish between the standard rules of behavior that apply to domestic and international affairs. Using the example of women suffrage, Finnemore and Sikkink have stressed that domestic norms may often manifest themselves at the international level, thereby making it difficult to distinguish between the two. 

Finnemore and Sikkink propose that the influence of Norms in the international system may be understood as a three-staged process termed as the “Norm Life Cycle”. These stages include “norm emergence”, “norm cascade” and the “internalization” of the norm. Norm emergence places emphasis on human agency and favorable conditions as the central tenets of the process of “norm building”. According to the authors, “norm entrepreneurs” frame issues in such a manner in order to call attention to them. Norm entrepreneurs must construct “cognitive frames” that resonate with the public, while falling within the “standards of appropriateness” as defined by previous norms. In addition, Finnemore and Sikkink stress on the importance of an organizational platform that facilitates norm promoters in their endeavor. These platforms often occur as international and non-governmental organizations. However, norms may be limited by other agendas of international organizations which influence the content of the norm being propagated. Crucial to the emergence of a norm is the presence of a “critical mass of states”. Persuading states to become norm leaders and adopt norms allows the norm to reach a “tipping point” which propels it into the next stage of the Norm Life Cycle. Finnemore and Sikkink acknowledge that the “critical mass” is rather fluid and effected by the type of norm being propagated. Therefore, it is not possible to peg down the tipping point to the adoption of the norm by a specific number of states. 

“Norm Cascades” or the broad acceptance of norms occurs as a dynamic different to the emergence of the norm on the international level. Finnemore and Sikkink argue that at this stage, “regional or international demonstration effect or “contagion” occurs in which international and transnational norm influences become more important than domestic politics for effecting norm change”. Networks of norm entrepreneurs and international organizations therefore become the driving force behind the adoption of norms and policies in the international system. In addition, the authors claim that states face the pressure to conform, need to increase their international legitimacy and state leaders hope to enhance their self esteem, which culminate in successful propagation and widespread acceptance of the norm. In the last stage of the Norm Life cycle, Finnemore and Sikkink argue that norms become so widely accepted that they are “taken for granted”. The internalization of norms entrenches them within the international system, leading to difficulties in challenging them. As conformance to the norm is automatic and they are no longer considered controversial, norms “tend to be ignored by political scientists”. 

The crux of the argument is that what emerges as an idea of an individual is propagated through persuasion and socialization and is ultimately accepted by society (and international system) as the “norm”. By tracing the path taken by norms to becoming firmly entrenched in society, Finnemore and Sikkink have added significantly to the existing discourse on the role of ideas in the international system. What makes their contribution noteworthy is that they have not just presented a philosophical theory as other constructivists have done. Instead, they have legitimized their theory with references to women suffrage and the law of war in the international system, which provides greater credibility to their work.