Within global governance studies, a key priority has been the role, causes and consequences of law-based cooperation, constraint and commitment. A large body of work examines the trend toward legalized international arrangements, and the implications of such ‘legalization’. This paper assesses the influence of (shared) meaning constructs in the legalization process, and will reveal and theorize how decisions on legalization may be influenced by the framing of political discourse, meaning constructs, and ideology. The paper will examine international agreements on the governance of small arms and light weapons, and explore the variance in legally binding force across both specific small arms controls and geographic regions. Specifically, it will ask how have the (normative) concepts of ‘crime’, ‘peace’, ‘security’ and ‘sovereignty’ shaped and constrained the legalization process?’
