Conclusions

International non-security norms are a product of complex social processes and the interplay of scientific knowledge, normative beliefs, economic, political and social power. Norms are constructed by means of multilayered negotiations, involving different levels of analysis, and actors with conflicting interests and demands. The process of norm construction has a direct effect on the character, strength and binding power of the emerging norm. Norms based on consensus and genuine closure tend to be more effective, characterised by higher levels of compliance. Even though scientific knowledge and normative beliefs lie at the core of international norms, the norm construction process is deeply political. Behavioural norms are products of their time, reflecting power structures, dominating interests and beliefs, but not necessarily determined by them. This study has demonstrated that in the realm of non-security norms, traditional state power may not always yield the desired results. Norms are generally constructed to respond to specific problems, which tend to be contemporary or which are perceived to have consequences in the near future. The attention of governments is usually drawn to the need for constructing regulation by a wide variety of non-state actors, including scientific experts, NGOs, businesses. This study has sought to reconceptualise norm development by reconsidering the elements of the process of norm building, adding the assumption that all non-security norms have a core of technical knowledge and normative beliefs, and demonstrating that norms have similar patterns of development by revisiting existing theoretical models. This is done by combining the insights of the sociologists of scientific knowledge and the social constructivists of international relations. These two approaches provide the research tools for rethinking norm development as a dynamic process and examining the stages of this evolution. A number of theoretical and empirical studies have contributed to building an improved understanding of the process. The two theoretical approaches have examined the

concept of closure, which is useful in understanding the dynamics of norm development. Building on this idea, the current study introduced the notion of normative and scientific closures, which contribute to the achievement of more stable political closure. The character of the political closure, in turn, is likely to influence the levels of implementation and compliance with the new norm. Based on the empirical findings of the sociologists of knowledge and social constructivists, and to address the problem of issuespecific norm research, this study offered a reconceptualisation of the way in which states and non-state actors interact, network and build coalitions in the context of the norm-constructing process. This has been crucial in adjusting normative research to the complexities of world politics and making it more pragmatic and relevant. Norms are socially constructed and emerge in a relatively defined logical sequence, which raises a number of substantive questions. How do scientific knowledge, political power and normative beliefs interact to lead to successful norm creation? What circumstances favour the development of new norms? What factors induce change in social perceptions? How is consensus built among actors of different calibre, different social roles and diverse aims and not necessarily harmonious interests? Who are the actors best positioned to attract the attention and support of policy-makers for the creation of new norms? The goal of this research has been to seek answers to these questions, as these could improve our understanding of global governance and the everyday conduct of international politics, as well as the role and the type of power that various actors wield in the international system. International norms are increasing in number and scope. Scholars of international relations have used a multitude of approaches to explain their presence and relevance in global politics. This study argued that to gain a better understanding of why norms exist, we need to take another look at how they come into existence. The sections that follow examine in turn the way in which we theorise normative change, the actual patterns of norm construction and normative change in the broader context of world politics, and the implications of the current research for building a better understanding of norm development.