Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-07T06:34:03.219Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessing the Complex Evolution of Norms: The Rise of International Election Monitoring

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 April 2008

Judith Kelley
Judith Kelley
Affiliation:
Duke University, Durham, NC. E-mail: jkelley@duke.edu
Get access

Abstract

Given that states have long considered elections a purely domestic matter, the dramatic growth of international election monitoring in the 1990s was remarkable. Why did states allow international organizations and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to interfere and why did international election monitoring spread so quickly? Why did election monitoring become institutionalized in so many organizations? Perhaps most puzzling, why do countries invite monitors and nevertheless cheat? This article develops a rigorous method for investigating the causal mechanisms underlying the rise of election monitoring, and “norm cascades” more generally. The evolution and spread of norms, as with many other social processes, are complex combinations of normative, instrumental, and other constraints and causes of action. The rise of election monitoring has been driven by an interaction of instrumentalism, emergent norms, and fundamental power shifts in the international system. By dissecting this larger theoretical complexity into specific subclaims that can be empirically investigated, this article examines the role of each of these causal factors, their mutual tensions, and their interactive contributions to the evolution of election monitoring.Versions of this article were presented at annual meetings of the International Studies Association and the American Political Science Association, and at a conference at Northwestern University. I thank Michael Barnett, Valarie Bunce, Jeff Checkel, Gary Goertz, Ian Hurd, Bruce Jentleson, Peter Katzenstein, Fritz Mayer, Layna Mosley, Arturo Santa-Cruz, and three anonymous reviewers for comments on earlier drafts. I am grateful to Lenka Siroki and Valentino Nikolova for research assistance. This material is based on work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 0550111. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Organization , Volume 62 , Issue 2 , April 2008 , pp. 221 - 255
Copyright
© 2008 The IO Foundation and Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Asante, Kofi Darko. 1994. Election Monitoring's Impact on the Law: Can It Be Reconciled with Sovereignty and Nonintervention? New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 26 (2):235–84.Google Scholar
Baker, James. 1990. Remarks Before the CSCE Conference on the Human Dimension, Copenhagen, 6 June. U.S. Department of State Dispatch 1 (1), 3 September 1990.Google Scholar
Barkin, J. Samuel, and Bruce Cronin. 1994. The State and the Nation: Changing Norms and Rules of Sovereignty in International Relations. International Organization 48 (1):107–30.Google Scholar
Beigbeder, Yves. 1994. International Monitoring of Plebiscites, Referenda and National Elections: Self-Determination and Transition to Democracy. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.
Bjornlund, Eric. 2004. Beyond Free and Fair: Monitoring Elections and Building Democracy. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
Bjornlund, Eric, Michael Bratton, and Clark Gibson. 1992. Observing Multiparty Elections in Africa: Lessons from Zambia. African Affairs 91 (364):405–31.Google Scholar
Boutros-Ghali, Boutros. 1992. An Agenda for Peace Preventive Diplomacy, Peacemaking and Peace-Keeping, Report of the Secretary-General Pursuant to the Statement Adopted by the Summit Meeting of the Security Council on 31 January 1992 A/47/277-S/24111, 17 June 1992, Available at 〈http://www.un.org/Docs/SG/agpeace.html/〉. Accessed 24 January 2008.
Boutros-Ghali, Boutros. 1996. An Agenda for Democratization. New York: United Nations.
Bunce, Valarie. 2006. International Diffusion and Postcommunist Electoral Revolutions. Communist and Postcommunist Studies 39 (3):283–304.Google Scholar
Bush, George. 1990. The UN: World Parliament of Peace. Address Before the United Nations General Assembly, New York, 1 October. U.S. Department of State Dispatch 1 (6), 8 October 1990.Google Scholar
Carothers, Thomas. 1997. The Observers Observed: The Rise of Election Monitoring. Journal of Democracy 8 (3):17–31.Google Scholar
Carter Center. 1992. Observing Guyana's Electoral Process, 1990–1992. Atlanta, Ga.: Carter Center.
Checkel, Jeffrey. 2001. Why Comply? Social Learning and European Identity Change. International Organization 55 (3):553–88.Google Scholar
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE). 1989. Conference on the Human Dimension of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. First Meeting, 30 May to 23 June, Paris.
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE). 1990a. Conference on the Human Dimension of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, Department of State Dispatch, Second Meeting, September, Copenhagen.
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE). 1990b. Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, Charter of Paris for a New Europe and Supplementary Document to Give Effect to Certain Provisions of the Charter, 21 November 1990.
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE). 1991. Document of the Moscow Meeting of the Conference on the Human Dimension of the CSCE, 3 October 1991.
Commonwealth Secretariat (CS). 1990. General Elections in Malaysia, 20–21 October 1990. Report of the Commonwealth Observer Group, London.
Cortell, Andrew, and James Davis. 1996. How Do International Institutions Matter? The Domestic Impact of International Rules and Norms. International Studies Quarterly 40 (4):451–78.Google Scholar
Council of Europe (CE). 1990. 1990 Elections in Five Central and East European Countries. Findings of the Observer Missions of the Council of Europe's Parliamentary Assembly. Strasbourg, France: CE.
Crawford, James. 1993. Democracy in International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dahl, Robert, and Charles Lindblom. 1992. Politics, Markets, and Welfare. 2d ed. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction.
Ebersole, Jon. 1992–93. The United Nations' Response to Requests for Assistance in Electoral Matters. Virginia Journal of International Law 33:91–122.Google Scholar
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. 1990. Agreement Establishing the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Paris, 29 May.
Finnemore, Martha. 1996. Constructing Norms of Humanitarian Intervention. In The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics, edited by Peter Katzenstein, 153–85. New York: Columbia University Press.
Finnemore, Martha, and Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. International Norm Dynamics and Political Change. International Organization 52 (4):887–917.Google Scholar
Flynn, Gregory, and Henry Farrell. 1999. Piecing Together the Democratic Peace: The CSCE, Norms, and the ‘Construction’ of Security in Post–Cold War Europe. International Organization 53 (3):505–35.Google Scholar
Fox, Gregory. 1995. The Role of International Law in the Twenty-First Century: Multinational Election Monitoring: Advancing International Law on the High Wire. Fordham International Law Journal 18 (5):1658–67.Google Scholar
Franck, Thomas. 1992. The Emerging Right to Democratic Governance. The American Journal of International Law 86 (1):46–91.Google Scholar
Garber, Larry. 1984. Guidelines for International Election Observing. Washington, D.C.: International Human Rights Law Group.
Geisler, Gisela. 1993. Fair? What Has Fairness Got to Do with It? Vagaries of Election Observation and Democratic Standards. Journal of Modern African Studies 31 (4):613–37.Google Scholar
Grodzin, Morton. 1958. The Metropolitan Area as a Racial Problem. Pittsburgh, Pa.: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Hall, Peter. 1989. Conclusion: The Politics of Keynesian Ideas. In The Political Power of Economic Ideas: Keynesianism Across Nations, edited by Peter Hall, 361–91. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Halperin, Morton. 1993. Guaranteeing Democracy, Foreign Policy 91 (Summer):105–22.Google Scholar
Herrmann, Richard, and Vaughn Shannon. 2001. Defending International Norms: The Role of Obligation, Material Interest, and Perception in Decision Making. International Organization 55 (3):621–54.Google Scholar
Huntington, Samuel. 1991. The Third Wave—Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
Hurd, Ian. 1999. Legitimacy and Authority in World Politics. International Organization 53 (2):379–408.Google Scholar
Hyde, Susan. 2006a. Observing Norms: Explaining the Causes and Consequences of Internationally Monitored Elections. Ph.D. diss., University of California at San Diego.
Hyde, Susan. 2006b. Why Do Leaders Invite International Election Observers? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, September, Philadelphia, Penn.
Jason, Karen. 1991–92. The Role of Non-Governmental Organizations in International Election Observing. NYU Journal of International Law and Politics 24 (4):1795–843.Google Scholar
Johnston, Ian. 2001. Treating International Institutions as Social Environments. International Studies Quarterly 45 (4):487–515.Google Scholar
Kaiser, Paul 1999. Power, Sovereignty, and the International Election Observers: The Case of Zanzibar. Africa Today 46 (1):29–46.Google Scholar
Katzenstein, Peter. 1996. Introduction: Alternative Perspective on International Security. In The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics, edited by Peter Katzenstein, 1–32. New York: Columbia University Press.
Kegley, Charles, Raymond Gregory, and Margaret Herrman. 1998. The Rise and Fall of the Nonintervention Norm: Some Correlates and Potential Consequences. Fletcher Forum of World Affairs 22 (1):81–97.Google Scholar
Kelley, Judith. 2004a. Ethnic Politics in Europe: The Power of Norms and Incentives. Princeton, N.J.: University Press.
Kelley, Judith. 2004b. International Actors on the Domestic Scene: Membership Conditionality and Socialization by International Institutions. International Organization 58 (3):425–57.Google Scholar
Kelley, Judith. 2006. Operational Overlaps of International Organizations: Insights from Election Monitoring. Paper presented at the Princeton Conference on Nesting and Overlapping Institutions, February, Princeton, N.J.
Keohane, Robert, and Judith Goldstein. 1993. Ideas and Foreign Policy: Belief Institutions and Political Change. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Kingdon, John. 1984. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. Boston: Little, Brown.
Klotz, Audie. 1995. Norms Reconstituting Interests: Global Racial Equality and U.S. Sanctions Against South Africa. International Organization 49 (3):451–78.Google Scholar
Luard, Evan. 1988. Conflict and Peace in the Modern International System: A Study of the Principles of International Order. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Lyons, Gene, and Michael Mastanduno. 1993. International Intervention, State Sovereignty and the Future of International Society. International Social Science Journal 45 (4):519–32.Google Scholar
March, James, and Johan Olsen. 1998. The Institutional Dynamics of International Political Orders. International Organization 52 (4):943–69.Google Scholar
Marinov, Nikolay. 2005. Economic Pressure for Democratization and the Spread of Limited Government. Unpublished manuscript, Yale University, New Haven, Conn.
McCoy, Jennifer. 1993. Mediating Democracy: A New Role for International Actors. In Security in a New World Order?, edited by David Bruce, 129–40. Atlanta: Georgia State University Press.
McCoy, Jennifer. 1995. Invited Intrusion: International Election Monitoring and the Evolving Concept of Sovereignty. Working Paper 95-1. Atlanta, Ga.: Carter Center/Georgia State University.
McFaul, Michael. 2004–2005. Democracy Promotion as a World Value. Washington Quarterly 28 (1):147–63.Google Scholar
Nadelmann, Ethan. 1990. Global Prohibition Regimes: The Evolution of Norms in International Society. International Organization 44 (4):479–526.Google Scholar
National Democratic Institute (NDI). 1991. Albania: 1991 Elections to the People's Assembly. A Post Election Report. April 30. Available at 〈http://www.accessdemocracy.org/library/1143_zw_refusal.pdf〉. Accessed 24 January 2008.
National Democratic Institute (NDI). 2000. Statement on the Refusal by the Government of Zimbabwe to Accredit NDI and Others to Observe the June 24–25 Elections, 20 June 2000. Washington, D.C.: NDI.
Nelson, Joan, and Stephanie Eglinton. 1992. Encouraging Democracy: What Role for Conditioned Aid? Washington, D.C.: Overseas Development Council.
Odell, John S. 1982. U.S. Monetary Policy: Markets, Power, and Ideas as Sources of Changes. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Organization of American States (OAS). 1990. Unit for the Promotion of Democracy. AG/RES.1063 (XX-0/90), June 8. Washington, D.C.: OAS.
Ottaway, Marina, and Thomas Carothers. 2000. The Burgeoning World of Civil Society Aid. In Funding Virtue: Civil Society Aid and Democracy Promotion, edited by Marina Ottaway and Thomas Carothers, 3–21. Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Powers, Kathy, and Gary Goertz. 2006. The Evolution of Regional Economic Institutions (REI) into Security Institutions or the Demise of Realist Military Alliances? Paper presented at the Duke University Seminar on Global Governance and Democracy, November, Durham, N.C.
Prize, Richard. 1997. The Chemical Weapons Taboo. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
Rich, Roland. 2001. Bringing Democracy into International Law. Journal of Democracy 12 (3):20–34.Google Scholar
Santa-Cruz, Arturo. 2005a. Constitutional Structures, Sovereignty, and the Emergence of Norms: The Case of International Election Monitoring. International Organization 59 (3):663–93.Google Scholar
Santa-Cruz, Arturo. 2005b. International Election Monitoring, Sovereignty, and the Western Hemisphere Idea: The Emergence of an International Norm. New York: Routledge.
Schelling, Thomas. 1960. The Strategy of Conflict. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Simmons, Beth, and Zachary Elkins. 2004. The Globalization of Liberalization: Policy Diffusion in the International Political Economy. American Political Science Review 98 (1):171–89.Google Scholar
Thomas, Daniel. 2001. The Helsinki Effect: International Norms, Human Rights and the Demise of Communism. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
United Nations (UN). 1988. UN General Assembly Resolution A/res/43/157. Enhancing the Effectiveness of the Principle of Periodic and Genuine Elections. 8 December. New York: UN.
United Nations (UN). 1989. Letter from the Secretary General Addressed to the President of the General Assembly. A/44/210. 5 April. New York: UN.
United Nations (UN). 1991a. Human Rights Questions, Including Alternative Approaches for Improving the Effective Enjoyment of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Enhancing the Effectiveness of the Principle of Periodic and Genuine Elections. Report of the Secretary General, General Assembly, A/46/609/Add.1 (4 November 1991); General Assembly A/45/pv.69, A/46/609/Add.2 (11 January 1991). New York: UN.
United Nations (UN). 1991b. Reports of the Secretary General to the General Assembly. Enhancing the Effectiveness of the Principle of Periodic and Genuine Election, A/46/609, 19 November. New York: UN.
United Nations (UN). 1992. An Agenda for Peace, Preventative Diplomacy, Peacemaking and Peace-keeping. Report of the Secretary General pursuant to the statement adopted by the Summit Meeting of the Security Council, 31 January 1992. A/47/277-S/24111. 17 June. New York: UN.
United Nations (UN). 2001. Respect for the Principles of National Sovereignty and Non-interference in the Internal Affairs of States in Electoral Processes as an Important Element for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights. UN General Assembly Resolution, A/RES/56/154, 19 December. New York: UN.
United Nations (UN). 2003. Respect for the Principles of National Sovereignty and Diversity of Democratic Systems in Electoral Processes as an Important Element for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights. UN General Assembly Resolution, A/RES/58/189, 22 December. New York: UN.
Vachudova, Milada. 2005. Europe Undivided: Democracy, Leverage and Integration After Communism. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Van Evera, Stephen. 1997. Guide to Methods for Students of Political Science. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
Weber, Max. 1978. Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Berkeley: University of California Press.
World Bank. 1989. Sub-Saharan Africa: From Crisis to Sustainable Growth. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
Wright, Theodore. 1964. American Support for Free Elections Abroad. Washington, D.C.: Public Affairs Press.
Youngs, Richard. 2001. The European Union and the Promotion of Democracy. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Zak, Marilyn Anne. 1987. Assisting Elections in the Third World. Washington Quarterly 10 (4):175–93.Google Scholar