Taking the pressure: Unpacking the relation between norms, social hierarchies, and social pressures on states

Abstract

This article advances a hierarchy-centered approach to the study of international social pressure on states. Prior scholarship has centered on the exposure of a gap between word and deed as key for social pressure. We argue that the scholarship on social pressure would benefit from paying more attention to the centrality of social hierarchies in the dynamics and effects of social pressure on states. It is through comparative assessments — the normative ordering of states as superior and inferior and placement in a social hierarchy — that social pressure is exerted and states are prodded into action. States positioned at the top or in the middle of normative hierarchies may be subjected to different social pressure than states positioned at the bottom. Developing this claim, we contend that normative hierarchies come in several forms. Reflecting on the dynamics of these normative hierarchies is important in and of itself, in our view, as it provides a deeper understanding of how norms generate shame, embarrassment, or status anxiety. That said, understanding normative hierarchies also gives us added purchase on explaining how states manage the social pressure of being ranked.

Multi-stakeholder initiatives, policy learning and institutionalization: the surprising failure of open government in Norway

“…While research on international rankings and policy diffusion have explicitly theorized social dynamics of competition, emulation and learning between national governments (Jörgens, 2009;Towns & Rumelili, 2017), these frameworks have not been applied to the context of public governance MSIs.…”

“…According to this view, political elites are the "gatekeepers" who determine the political appropriateness of global norms, and whether they are institutionalized and empowered in national contexts (Checkel, 1997, p. 576). While a handful of studies have explored these dynamics in specific country contexts Niemann & Schillinger, 2017;, the majority of scholarship on global norm promotion has emphasized interactions between governments (Steinberg, 2003;Terman & Voeten, 2017;Towns & Rumelili, 2017), and little attention has been given to defining the domestic mechanisms through which global norms are adopted into national policy.…”

“…Norms are regularly presented with high degrees of specificity, particularly in the context of international behavior. International law is itself often defined as a set of "specific legal norms" (Brunnée & Toope, 2010), and recent international relations scholarship has noted that social norms can entail absolute standards for state behavior (Towns & Rumelili, 2017), while O'Mahoney (2014) has proposed that norms are defined by tension between specific understandings of their application. Policy diffusion researchers have meanwhile emphasized the ambiguity inherent in structured policy, describing the abstraction operationalized by specific policy regimes (Hansen, 2016), and noted that many diffusion initiatives advance policy agendas that "consist of a shared set of objectives, rather than a set of identifiable tools or techniques" (Common, 2013, p. 14).…”

Likestilling og Norges fredsengasjement – en balansekunst

“…Norge var blant annet et av de første medlemslandene i FN som vedtok en nasjonal handlingsplan for kvinner, fred og sikkerhet (KFS) i 2006. 3 Rollen som normentreprenør på KFS-området har i økende grad bidratt til å styrke Norges prestisje og anseelse i internasjonal politikk (Towns 2010;Towns og Rumelili 2017). Et kjennetegn ved norsk KFS-politikk er det tette samarbeidet med sivilsamfunnsorganisasjoner både på det globale planet og ute i konfliktområder, noe vi kjenner igjen fra nasjonal politikk og statsfeminismens framvekst på 1980-tallet (Tryggestad 2014).…”

Developmental Idealism in Internet Search Data

“…As a generalized worldview, developmental idealism (hereafter DI) constitutes a coherent network of perceptions, beliefs, values, expectations, roles, and scripts about how the world works, how it is organized, how a person should live in the world, and what goals individuals and societies should pursue (Thornton 2001;Thornton et al 2015). One of the organizing principles of DI is developmental hierarchy, or the idea that countries can be socially ordered according to attributes thought to be related to development, such as health, wealth, education, or gender equality (Merry et al 2015;Towns and Rumelili 2017). Developmental hierarchy derives from social scientific theories that define development as progress away from the characteristics of traditional life and toward the attributes of modern life (Nisbet 1969;1986).…”