questions?
?
Klaus Dingwerth
Ina Lehmann
Ellen Reichel
Tobias Weise
www.globalnorms.uni-bremen.de
globalnorms@iniis.uni-bremen.de
From Sovereign Equality to Global Democracy? Constitutional Change in the International Regulation of Security, Environment and Human Rights
overview of academic discourse
What we found
What we do and how we do it
4 policy fields
FUNCTIONALITY | institutions solve problems

SOVEREIGNTY | institutions respect state sovereignty

MEDIATION BETWEEN
FUNCTIONALITY AND SOVEREIGNTY | institutions mediate sovereignty

WORLD SOCIETY | institutions act on behalf of world society

DEMOCRACY | institutions are democratic

LAW AND LEGALITY | institutions operate on legal basis of international law
textbooks
frames
57 (plan: 72) | 1970s - today | en (us, uk), de, fr
qualitative content analysis
SECURITY | top-down – least likely case?
ENVIRONMENT | bottom-up – most likely?
HUMAN RIGHTS | mixed?
TECHNOLOGY & RISK | based on expertise?
Is there a change from Westphalian to Post-Westphalian norms of global governance?
Westphalian?
Post-Westphalian?
interpretation
preliminary findings
SECURITY


ENVIRONMENT


HUMAN RIGHTS
small number of evaluations
functionality core baseline
slight decline in usage of sovereignty frame
hardly any evaluations based on Post-Westphalian norms
functionality core baseline
appropriateness of sovereignty frame is questioned
world society frame present in early decades but missing later
democracy frame increasingly important in 1990s & 2000s, yet mainly based on inclusiveness
functionality core baseline
sovereignty frame rarely found
stability of usage of different frames despite significant changes in policy field
hardly any evaluations based on Post-Westphalian norms
no clear evidence for changing norms found (attention! preliminary findings)
slight decline of Westphalian norms, yet no strong rise in Post-Westphalian norms