Why Comply? Social Learning and European Identity Change
Why Comply? Social Learning and European Identity Change
复制标题
为什么要遵守？
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2001
影响因子：
7.8
通讯作者：
Jeffrey T. Checkel
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Jeffrey T. Checkel
为什么代理人要遵守制度和国际机构中的规范？学者们针对这个合规难题提出了两种相互竞争的答案，一种是理性主义者，另一种是建构主义者。理性主义者强调强制、成本/收益计算和物质激励；建构主义者强调社会学习、社会化和社会规范。然而，两所学校都解释了合规性的重要方面。为了在它们之间架起一座桥梁，我研究了论证说服和社会学习的作用。这使得隐含在许多建构主义顺从研究中的社会选择和互动理论变得明确，并且拓宽了关于行为者顺从的工具性和非工具性过程的理性主义论证。我认为国内政治——特别是制度和历史背景——限制了说服/社会学习的因果作用，从而帮助理性主义者和建构主义者完善其合规主张的范围。为了评估这些论点的合理性，我研究了为什么各国遵守欧洲区域组织倡导的新公民/成员规范。
Why do agents comply with the norms embedded in regimes and international institutions? Scholars have proposed two competing answers to this compliance puzzle, one rationalist, the other constructivist. Rationalists emphasize coercion, cost/benefit calculations, and material incentives; constructivists stress social learning, socialization, and social norms. Both schools, however, explain important aspects of compliance. To build a bridge between them, I examine the role of argumentative persuasion and social learning. This makes explicit the theory of social choice and interaction implicit in many constructivist compliance studies, and it broadens rationalist arguments about the instrumental and noninstrumental processes through which actors comply. I argue that domestic politics—in particular, institutional and historical contexts—delimit the causal role of persuasion/social learning, thus helping both rationalists and constructivists to refine the scope of their compliance claims. To assess the plausibility of these arguments, I examine why states comply with new citizenship/membership norms promoted by European regional organizations.
DOI：
10.2307/jj.16552219
发表时间：
2018-04
期刊：
--
影响因子：
--
作者：
E. Haas
通讯作者：
E. Haas