Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Institutional Factors in China’s Norm Contestation in Global Governance: International Regime Complexes of Peacebuilding and Climate Change
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Economic History and International Relations.ORCID iD: 0009-0000-6453-056X
(English)Manuscript (preprint) (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Why does China challenge global norms in climate governance while selectively accepting norms in peacebuilding governance? We argue that the focus on domestic factors in much existing literature is insufficient to explain this difference. Instead, we propose an outward-looking approach centered on factors related to international institutions. We conduct a comparative analysis of explanatory factors using a theory of international regime complexity—specifically Henning and Pratt’s framework on the joint effects of authority and differentiation within regime complexes. This analysis utilizes Chinese official documents in English aimed at international audiences. We found that China partially accepts existing norms while proposing alternatives to hierarchical structures in situations where there is a leading institution overseeing similarly functioning institutions. This is the case in peacebuilding governance. In contrast, China largely challenges norms in global governance systems that lack a hierarchical structure and involve institutions with distinct, specialized roles. This is the case for climate governance. We argue that the variation in China’s contestation of global governance norms can be explained by the level of hierarchy and functional differentiation between institutions in each governance regime. The article contributes a new perspective to debates about China’s norm contestation in global governance. 

Keywords [en]
China, norm contestation, international regime complex, peacekeeping, climate change, regime shifting, regime creation
National Category
Political Science (excluding Public Administration Studies and Globalisation Studies)
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-235075OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-235075DiVA, id: diva2:1909087
Available from: 2024-10-29 Created: 2024-10-29 Last updated: 2024-10-29
In thesis
1. Beyond Dichotomies: Making Sense of China’s Engagement in Global Peace Governance
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Beyond Dichotomies: Making Sense of China’s Engagement in Global Peace Governance
2024 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

China has become a key player in peacebuilding, both supporting and sometimes obstructing international cooperation. It appears to adhere to certain established norms in global peace governance while simultaneously resisting and contesting others. For example, while China has supported the Women, Peace, and Security agenda, it has also backed actions and resolutions that challenge this. This leads to the research problem: How can we make sense of China’s seemingly contradictory behavior in global peace governance?

This compilation thesis argues that existing International Relations (IR) literature struggles to capture China’s complex and contradictory engagement in global peace governance. First, much of the literature relies on dichotomies to understand this behavior. It tries to categorize China’s behavior as driven by either material interests or by norms. It views China as a non-Western, non-liberal, and non-traditional actor that is the opposite of Western, liberal, and traditional actors. It also seeks to categorize China as either a status-quo actor or a challenger to the liberal international order.

Second, this literature on China’s engagement in peace governance predominantly draws on conventional IR approaches. This means it offers insufficient analysis of power asymmetries. The IR discipline’s established scholarly convention of adhering to paradigm-bound theories with rigid epistemic commitments also contributes to this limitation.

This thesis addresses these limitations by asking how we can challenge dichotomous and conventional IR perspectives to advance our understanding of China’s engagement. I argue that two moves can advance our understanding. The first is to employ analytic eclecticism which goes beyond fixed analytical boundaries. The second is to adopt different analytical lenses that allow for analysis of various power asymmetries. These moves are key to the methodological approach I adopt. Guided by analytic eclecticism, the thesis exercises methodological pluralism. The four articles employ different analytical lenses including a critical conceptualization of peace, insights from feminist IR, and ideas about norm contestation.

The thesis demonstrates the complex dynamics at work in China’s peace engagement and behavior in global peace governance. It develops three main arguments. First, it argues that China’s contradictory behavior can be explained as part of its broader contestation strategy, which it carries out primarily in the form of economic instrumentalism. Second, it argues that variations in China’s practices of norm contestation and compliance are linked to the institutional environment in which it is participating. Third, it argues that the dominant view, which portrays China’s approach and behavior as distinctively oppositional and problematic, can be misleading.

This thesis contributes to two main IR literatures: the literature about China’s engagement with peacebuilding and that about China’s norm contestation in global (peace) governance. It makes theoretical, methodological, and empirical contributions to these literatures. Its primary contribution is in challenging the dichotomous understandings adopted by existing research on China in global governance. It demonstrates how we can use analytic eclecticism and the integration of power dynamics to go beyond these dichotomies and provide greater understanding. The thesis offers a deeper understanding of China’s behavior in global peace governance.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: Department of Economic History and International Relations, Stockholm University, 2024. p. 67
Series
Stockholm Studies in International Relations, ISSN 2003-1343
National Category
Political Science (excluding Public Administration Studies and Globalisation Studies) Gender Studies Peace and Conflict Studies Other Social Sciences not elsewhere specified
Research subject
International Relations
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-235077 (URN)978-91-8107-010-1 (ISBN)978-91-8107-011-8 (ISBN)
Public defence
2024-12-13, hörsal 5, hus B, Universitetsvägen 10 B, Stockholm, 13:00 (English)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2024-11-20 Created: 2024-10-29 Last updated: 2025-02-20Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Authority records

Jung, Yeonju

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Jung, Yeonju
By organisation
Department of Economic History and International Relations
Political Science (excluding Public Administration Studies and Globalisation Studies)

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 70 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf