Making normative meaning accountable in international politics
If cultural practices shape experience and expectations, they need to be identified and made accountable based on empirical research. Drawing on international relations (IR) theory, international law and normative democratic theory this article develops a framework approach to studying the contested meaning of norms in international politics under conditions of constitutionalisation beyond the nation-state. The goal is to formulate observations and identify a design for empirical research, which is suitable to examining the “invisible constitution” of politics, that is, the individually held associative connotations which inform contested interpretation of normative meaning. To do so, the article is organised in two parts. Part I derives research assumptions and hypotheses from the literature. It turns to the distinction of types of norms and conditions of norm contestation in section 1, identifies research assumptions and hypotheses in section 2, argues to bring culture back into constitutionalism in section 3, and summarises the guiding question of convergence, divergence, or diffusion of normative meanings in section 4. Part II then focuses on research operationalisation. Section 5 elaborates on the rationale of the research framework and type of enquiry. Section 6 highlights the method of interview evaluation. Section 7 identifies the research indicators including type of social group to be interviewed, fundamental norms that are likely to be contested, domestic political arenas in which the social groups operate, and issue areas linked with core constitutional norms. Section 8 summarises the case study’s design and procedure.
|Date of creation:||2007|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Reichpietschufer 50, 10785 Berlin, Germany|
Phone: ++49 - 30 - 25491 - 0
Fax: ++49 - 30 - 25491 - 684
Web page: http://www.wzb.eu/
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Hall, Peter A. & Taylor, Rosemary C. R., 1996. "Political science and the three new institutionalisms," MPIfG Discussion Paper 96/6, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
- Karin Fierke & Antje Wiener, 1999. "Constructing Institutional Interests: EU and NATO Enlargement," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 14, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
- Kratochwil, Friedrich & Ruggie, John Gerard, 1986. "International organization: a state of the art on an art of the state," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(04), pages 753-775, September.
- Finnemore, Martha & Toope, Stephen J., 2001. "Alternatives to “Legalization”: Richer Views of Law and Politics," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(03), pages 743-758, June.
- Kratochwil, Friedrich, 1984. "The force of prescriptions," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 38(04), pages 685-708, September.
- Schimmelfennig, Frank, 2001. "The Community Trap: Liberal Norms, Rhetorical Action, and the Eastern Enlargement of the European Union," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(01), pages 47-80, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:wzbtci:spiv2007305. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.