Contestation and norm change in whale and elephant conservation: Non-use or sustainable use?
Elephants and whales took center stage in the environmental movements of the 1980s. As flagship species, they were the poster children of global initiatives: international ivory trading and commercial whaling were banned in the 1980s in the context of the Convention on International Trade in Endange...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Cooperation and conflict 2022-06, Vol.57 (2), p.226-245 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 245 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 226 |
container_title | Cooperation and conflict |
container_volume | 57 |
creator | Peez, Anton Zimmermann, Lisbeth |
description | Elephants and whales took center stage in the environmental movements of the 1980s. As flagship species, they were the poster children of global initiatives: international ivory trading and commercial whaling were banned in the 1980s in the context of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and the International Whaling Commission (IWC), respectively. While the conservation of both species is contested, we observe a change of existing norms in one case but not in the other: A moratorium on commercial whaling remains in place. Meanwhile, a limited shift to sustainable use regarding ivory was passed in 1997/2000. We ask why norm change occurred in one case but not the other, given their similarities. We argue that the difference can be explained by the perceived legitimacy of the claims of norm challengers using arguments of “affectedness” and the breadth of issues covered by CITES. In contrast, other factors commonly discussed in norms research do not explain this puzzle: the relative power and strategies of norm advocates and challengers, and the degree of legalization. This shows the interplay of discursive aspects and concrete institutional opportunities for norm change, even in the face of otherwise inopportune conditions. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/00108367211047138 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2667391890</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_00108367211047138</sage_id><sourcerecordid>2667391890</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c355t-d25c4d434b645d97848af3ac459ddc6dc16d6ecaa93f663c6d2826265a3c90bd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE9LAzEQxYMoWKsfwFvA89Zkk0w2XkSK_6DoRW_CkibZdkub1GRX8dubbQUP4mngzfu9YR5C55RMKJXykhBKKgaypJRwSVl1gEaUAykYKHqIRsO-GAzH6CSlFSFESAoj9DYNvnOp010bPNbeYh_iBpul9guHW48_l3rtdgu3dtssd9gEn1z82CFX-Cn4ok8Oh4hTn4Nar-eZyNL1KTpq9Dq5s585Rq93ty_Th2L2fP84vZkVhgnRFbYUhlvO-By4sEpWvNIN04YLZa0BayhYcEZrxRoAlpWyKqEEoZlRZG7ZGF3sc7cxvPf5m3oV-ujzyboEkEzRSpHsonuXiSGl6Jp6G9uNjl81JfVQYv2nxMxM9kzSC_eb-j_wDQNtcZc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2667391890</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Contestation and norm change in whale and elephant conservation: Non-use or sustainable use?</title><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><creator>Peez, Anton ; Zimmermann, Lisbeth</creator><creatorcontrib>Peez, Anton ; Zimmermann, Lisbeth</creatorcontrib><description>Elephants and whales took center stage in the environmental movements of the 1980s. As flagship species, they were the poster children of global initiatives: international ivory trading and commercial whaling were banned in the 1980s in the context of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and the International Whaling Commission (IWC), respectively. While the conservation of both species is contested, we observe a change of existing norms in one case but not in the other: A moratorium on commercial whaling remains in place. Meanwhile, a limited shift to sustainable use regarding ivory was passed in 1997/2000. We ask why norm change occurred in one case but not the other, given their similarities. We argue that the difference can be explained by the perceived legitimacy of the claims of norm challengers using arguments of “affectedness” and the breadth of issues covered by CITES. In contrast, other factors commonly discussed in norms research do not explain this puzzle: the relative power and strategies of norm advocates and challengers, and the degree of legalization. This shows the interplay of discursive aspects and concrete institutional opportunities for norm change, even in the face of otherwise inopportune conditions.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0010-8367</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1460-3691</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/00108367211047138</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Conservation ; Elephants ; Endangered species ; Environmental movements ; International trade ; Legitimacy ; Norms ; Whales & whaling ; Wildlife conservation</subject><ispartof>Cooperation and conflict, 2022-06, Vol.57 (2), p.226-245</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c355t-d25c4d434b645d97848af3ac459ddc6dc16d6ecaa93f663c6d2826265a3c90bd3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c355t-d25c4d434b645d97848af3ac459ddc6dc16d6ecaa93f663c6d2826265a3c90bd3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-1323-8344 ; 0000-0001-6746-1248</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/00108367211047138$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00108367211047138$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,21798,27901,27902,43597,43598</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Peez, Anton</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zimmermann, Lisbeth</creatorcontrib><title>Contestation and norm change in whale and elephant conservation: Non-use or sustainable use?</title><title>Cooperation and conflict</title><description>Elephants and whales took center stage in the environmental movements of the 1980s. As flagship species, they were the poster children of global initiatives: international ivory trading and commercial whaling were banned in the 1980s in the context of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and the International Whaling Commission (IWC), respectively. While the conservation of both species is contested, we observe a change of existing norms in one case but not in the other: A moratorium on commercial whaling remains in place. Meanwhile, a limited shift to sustainable use regarding ivory was passed in 1997/2000. We ask why norm change occurred in one case but not the other, given their similarities. We argue that the difference can be explained by the perceived legitimacy of the claims of norm challengers using arguments of “affectedness” and the breadth of issues covered by CITES. In contrast, other factors commonly discussed in norms research do not explain this puzzle: the relative power and strategies of norm advocates and challengers, and the degree of legalization. This shows the interplay of discursive aspects and concrete institutional opportunities for norm change, even in the face of otherwise inopportune conditions.</description><subject>Conservation</subject><subject>Elephants</subject><subject>Endangered species</subject><subject>Environmental movements</subject><subject>International trade</subject><subject>Legitimacy</subject><subject>Norms</subject><subject>Whales & whaling</subject><subject>Wildlife conservation</subject><issn>0010-8367</issn><issn>1460-3691</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>AFRWT</sourceid><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE9LAzEQxYMoWKsfwFvA89Zkk0w2XkSK_6DoRW_CkibZdkub1GRX8dubbQUP4mngzfu9YR5C55RMKJXykhBKKgaypJRwSVl1gEaUAykYKHqIRsO-GAzH6CSlFSFESAoj9DYNvnOp010bPNbeYh_iBpul9guHW48_l3rtdgu3dtssd9gEn1z82CFX-Cn4ok8Oh4hTn4Nar-eZyNL1KTpq9Dq5s585Rq93ty_Th2L2fP84vZkVhgnRFbYUhlvO-By4sEpWvNIN04YLZa0BayhYcEZrxRoAlpWyKqEEoZlRZG7ZGF3sc7cxvPf5m3oV-ujzyboEkEzRSpHsonuXiSGl6Jp6G9uNjl81JfVQYv2nxMxM9kzSC_eb-j_wDQNtcZc</recordid><startdate>20220601</startdate><enddate>20220601</enddate><creator>Peez, Anton</creator><creator>Zimmermann, Lisbeth</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage Publications Ltd</general><scope>AFRWT</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7UB</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1323-8344</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6746-1248</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220601</creationdate><title>Contestation and norm change in whale and elephant conservation: Non-use or sustainable use?</title><author>Peez, Anton ; Zimmermann, Lisbeth</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c355t-d25c4d434b645d97848af3ac459ddc6dc16d6ecaa93f663c6d2826265a3c90bd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Conservation</topic><topic>Elephants</topic><topic>Endangered species</topic><topic>Environmental movements</topic><topic>International trade</topic><topic>Legitimacy</topic><topic>Norms</topic><topic>Whales & whaling</topic><topic>Wildlife conservation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Peez, Anton</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zimmermann, Lisbeth</creatorcontrib><collection>Sage Journals GOLD Open Access 2024</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Cooperation and conflict</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Peez, Anton</au><au>Zimmermann, Lisbeth</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Contestation and norm change in whale and elephant conservation: Non-use or sustainable use?</atitle><jtitle>Cooperation and conflict</jtitle><date>2022-06-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>57</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>226</spage><epage>245</epage><pages>226-245</pages><issn>0010-8367</issn><eissn>1460-3691</eissn><abstract>Elephants and whales took center stage in the environmental movements of the 1980s. As flagship species, they were the poster children of global initiatives: international ivory trading and commercial whaling were banned in the 1980s in the context of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and the International Whaling Commission (IWC), respectively. While the conservation of both species is contested, we observe a change of existing norms in one case but not in the other: A moratorium on commercial whaling remains in place. Meanwhile, a limited shift to sustainable use regarding ivory was passed in 1997/2000. We ask why norm change occurred in one case but not the other, given their similarities. We argue that the difference can be explained by the perceived legitimacy of the claims of norm challengers using arguments of “affectedness” and the breadth of issues covered by CITES. In contrast, other factors commonly discussed in norms research do not explain this puzzle: the relative power and strategies of norm advocates and challengers, and the degree of legalization. This shows the interplay of discursive aspects and concrete institutional opportunities for norm change, even in the face of otherwise inopportune conditions.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/00108367211047138</doi><tpages>20</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1323-8344</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6746-1248</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0010-8367 |
ispartof | Cooperation and conflict, 2022-06, Vol.57 (2), p.226-245 |
issn | 0010-8367 1460-3691 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2667391890 |
source | SAGE Complete A-Z List; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts |
subjects | Conservation Elephants Endangered species Environmental movements International trade Legitimacy Norms Whales & whaling Wildlife conservation |
title | Contestation and norm change in whale and elephant conservation: Non-use or sustainable use? |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-06T20%3A19%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Contestation%20and%20norm%20change%20in%20whale%20and%20elephant%20conservation:%20Non-use%20or%20sustainable%20use?&rft.jtitle=Cooperation%20and%20conflict&rft.au=Peez,%20Anton&rft.date=2022-06-01&rft.volume=57&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=226&rft.epage=245&rft.pages=226-245&rft.issn=0010-8367&rft.eissn=1460-3691&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/00108367211047138&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2667391890%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2667391890&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_00108367211047138&rfr_iscdi=true |