Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.645738
Title: Precious stones, black gold and the extractive industries : accounting for the institutional design of multi-stakeholder initiatives
Author: Kantz, Carola
Awarding Body: London School of Economics and Political Science (University of London)
Current Institution: London School of Economics and Political Science (University of London)
Date of Award: 2008
Availability of Full Text:
Access through EThOS:
Full text unavailable from EThOS. Please try the link below.
Access through Institution:
Abstract:
Why was the Kimberley Process (KP) able to devise a soft law institution 'with teeth' whereas the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) failed. In various policy fields and particularly in the extractive industries, multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs) are becoming more important for regulating business behaviour. However, International Relations (IR) has as yet failed to explain why some succeeded in designing a strong international institution whereas others failed. To answer the research question the thesis first establishes a methodology for assessing strong and weak institutionalisation of MSIs. I argue that functional regime theory is inadequate at assessing MSIs as it does not capture institutional variety within soft law. Based on the Global Governance literature, the thesis establishes four indicators - membership, obligation, monitoring and enforcement, which allow us to evaluate the degree of institutionalisation. How can we account for institutional variety of MSIs. Mainstream IR theories are not able to explain the differences between the two case studies as they gloss over the differences in normative and material structures assuming that complete rationality and concerns for efficiency are critical when determining institutional design. I argue that norm entrepreneurs push for strong institutionalisation by the social mechanism of norm diffusion. Succeeding in diffusing the norm by using political strategies such as framing and structural power galvanises support for strong institutionalisation. Nevertheless, norm diffusion can fail when political opportunity structures empower norm opponents rather than norm entrepreneurs. I argue that the impact of norms varies, depending on distinct structural settings. Thus I unveil the circumstances under which new norms do not gain acceptance from the international community. In summary, when accounting for the MSI institutionalisation process, we not only need to pay attention to political strategy and agents, but must include in the analysis normative and material structures as drivers of or constraints to norm diffusion.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.645738  DOI: Not available
Share: