Eleventh Global Studies Conference

Abstract

Can one describe global norms that support peacemaking by studying world opinion on the subject? Norms are generally attached to a society or system, so that international norms would in turn imply the existence of an international society or system. Such assumptions follow from the English School of International Relations, which argues that such a society exists, and affirms specific values. There is, however, a lacuna in this argument. The missing piece is evident in any usage of the term “international system” as this concept is generally under-specified. A general theory of world opinion addresses this lacuna. “Global opinion theory” generates a specific definition of “world opinion” that can be used in theoretical and empirical analyses to study how norms emerge globally. My research design for approaching these questions lies in comparing the results of international surveys from various countries to see whether the country level data on peacemaking correlates with measures of those countries’ rankings on similar institutional measures. These arguments raise several questions relevant to this project. If norms emerge from world opinion, how might we measure them? Can international isolation be effective in reinforcing these norms, and perhaps promoting peace? Finally, recalling the initial question, do norms that affect peacemaking flow from institutional directives or do institutional directives flow from the norms of international society? My research design compares the results of international surveys from various countries to see whether the country-level data on peacemaking correlates with measures of those countries’ rankings on similar institutional measures. The international surveys used would include the World Values Survey, the General Social Survey, and the Pew Global Survey; the institutional measures would include those provided by Amnesty International and others from the archives of the Nobel Institute. A second issue involves whether there are better predictors, and hence explanations, for global norms on peacemaking in the surveys themselves, rather than the institutional measures. The comparisons of institutional measures and survey results will also be directed towards answering these questions. A final question might be whether the opinions of non-elites, such as those measured in global surveys, even matter in an environment where international action and discussion is generally the province of elites. In response, it is unrealistic to assume that elites would desire less information on perceived levels of global norms in a society than more, or that they would consider the perceptions of nations’ citizens irrelevant. Foreign policy may be primarily an elite exercise, but it occurs within a cultural context partially defined by citizens. Ignoring citizen inputs would therefore be a strong disadvantage in decision-making. Further, if one wishes to define peacemaking norms on a global level, one must include some measure of world opinion in that definition. Here again, global survey results become indispensable. Finally, if one wishes to understand the meaning of these norms globally, one needs to assess how citizens “on the ground” perceive peacemaking norms in their own societies, since in many cases they have the closest view of them.