Emergence and Diffusion of International Norms: Fossil Fuel Subsidies Reform and Carbon Divestment

In order to avoid the most disastrous effects of climate change, the greater part of fossil fuel reserves (oil, coal, gas) will have to be left in the ground. Despite this consensus amongst scientists, fossil fuels still receive large sums in investments and continue to be heavily subsidised. Two transnational campaigns have been launched recently to address these issues: the carbon divestment and fossil fuel subsidies reform movements. We consider the causes that both movements advocate to be emergent international norms, acting on the international policy agenda. These international norms can be understood as “standards of behaviour”, hence “they are not obeyed because they are enforced, but rather because they are seen as legitimate” (Florini, 1996, pp. 364-365). Norms therefore inherently entail a sense of ‘oughtness’, they define what actors ought -or ought not- to do. Considering carbon divestment and fossil fuel subsidies reform to be international norms, two questions arise: why did these norms exactly emerge and to what extent have they been diffused? Norms have been primarily studied within the constructivist tradition of international relations studies. Early such scholars focussed mainly on the fixed, linear process of norm evolution, as well as the behavioural effects of norms (Finnemore & Sikkink, 1998; Keck & Sikkink, 1998). Most recently, attention has shifted towards studying the dynamics and contestation of norms. Early theorisation was criticised for neglecting to treat norms as dynamic processes that have shifting meanings, different interpretations and are continuously contested and mediated by agents and contexts. Discourse then becomes a central factor in the analysis of norm processes –e.g. influence of different interpretations of a norm on the inscription in international agreements (Wiener, 2014; Bucher 2014; Wunderlich, 2014). In this paper we will use the analytical framework of Wunderlich (2013) with which she establishes the central role of contestability for the dynamic evolution of norms. The model therefore adequately synthesises insights from the constructivist and discursive research traditions. Wunderlich’s model also describes three driving forces that trigger the evolution of norms: norm entrepreneurs, exogenous factors (or ‘political opportunity structure’), and norm contestation/conflicts. The first two elements will be examined through process-tracing. For the latter, contestation, we will rely on Schön and Rein’s (1994) frame analysis. This paper will thus challenge both existing theoretical and empirical knowledge. In terms of the paper’s empirical relevance, the divestment and fossil fuel subsidies campaigns have not yet been studied from an international norms perspective. Up until now, research primarily focussed on decision-making within international organisations (IOs). By focussing on norms, his paper paves the way for analysis of the emergence and diffusion of the campaigns’ objectives, irrespective of action through IOs. Theoretically, we will probe whether Wunderlich’s synthesis model of constructivist and discursive insights, which was developed with reference to multilateral arms control, is useful to analyse norm dynamics in other issue areas and with regards to non-state actors.