Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorBower, Adam Stephen
dc.contributor.editorAvant, Deborah
dc.contributor.editorWesterwinter, Oliver
dc.date.accessioned2018-06-23T23:32:47Z
dc.date.available2018-06-23T23:32:47Z
dc.date.issued2016-06-23
dc.identifier.citationBower , A S 2016 , Networking for the ban: network structure, social power, and the movement to ban antipersonnel mines . in D Avant & O Westerwinter (eds) , The New Power Politics: Networks and Transnational Security Governance . Oxford University Press , pp. 169-195 .en
dc.identifier.isbn9780190604493
dc.identifier.isbn9780190604509
dc.identifier.otherPURE: 241586700
dc.identifier.otherPURE UUID: d9d8a02d-91a4-4199-8634-2b2f455c01fd
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0001-5951-3407/work/60196615
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10023/14500
dc.description.abstractThe ban on antipersonnel mines is rightly regarded as a major humanitarian achievement. Yet the successful creation of a legally binding treaty is not reducible to the properties of actors or the quality of ideas in isolation, but is rather the product of the patterned relations among constituent units and the empowering effects these interactions produce. I argue that the position of key actors as hubs within the mine ban network provides them with disproportionate influence in re-shaping the policy agenda concerning antipersonnel mines. These actors acquired their hub position, though, based in part on their promise in accomplishing particular governance tasks. The relational structure of the mine ban network thus created the conditions of access necessary to facilitate persuasion and social pressure noted in previous studies. This account helps explain how the goal of a complete prohibition won-out in the face of sustained opposition, and why global military powers led by the United States were unable to generate support for an alternative framing that retained antipersonnel mines as legitimate weapons of war. To demonstrate this, I map the key actors and ties within the mine ban network, and illustrate their development in two distinct phases, concerning the negotiation of the Mine Ban Treaty and its subsequent implementation, respectively. The network has adapted to new governance challenges inherent in promoting an existing treaty—rather than advocating for its creation—with the addition of a new hub. This structural shift has meant that certain actors have increased their relative importance while others have decreased in stature.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherOxford University Press
dc.relation.ispartofThe New Power Politics: Networks and Transnational Security Governanceen
dc.rightsCopyright 2016. This work is made available online in accordance with the publisher’s policies. This is the author created, accepted version manuscript and may differ slightly from the final published version. The final published version of this work is available at https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-new-power-politics-9780190604493?lang=en&cc=gben
dc.subjectJX International lawen
dc.subject.lccJXen
dc.titleNetworking for the ban: network structure, social power, and the movement to ban antipersonnel minesen
dc.typeBook itemen
dc.description.versionPostprinten
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews.School of International Relationsen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews.Institute of Legal and Constitutional Researchen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews.Centre for Global Law and Governanceen
dc.date.embargoedUntil2018-06-23
dc.identifier.urlhttps://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-new-power-politics-9780190604493?cc=gb&lang=en&en


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record