Description
This paper introduces a tripartite model of norm contestation, encompassing discursive, procedural, and applicatory contestation. These practices, though distinct, overlap, as contesting actors aim to influence the meaning, institutionalization, and implementation of norms. The framework not only explores how these contestation dynamics affect norm quality and content but also emphasizes the active role of the state. Unlike conventional constructivist approaches that view the state as a passive norm follower, this framework highlights the state as an active agent shaping ostensibly static norms.
Building on recent theoretical advancements in critical constructivist norm research, the framework extends our understanding of norm contestation. Empirical evidence demonstrates that norm challengers employ diverse practices beyond the traditional applicatory and validity contestation dichotomy. While contestation over norm application remains prevalent, challenges to a norm's validity and legitimacy are less common. Norm challengers often adopt less costly strategies to influence norm content, institutionalization, and implementation.
To illustrate these dynamics, their indicators, and impacts, I analyse the contested evolution of the Responsibility to Protect norm within the United Nations institutional framework. This examination reveals how contestation has played a crucial role in shaping the norm's meaning and practice over time.
