Analyzing IGOs, International Law, and NGOs 257see NGOs as falling under the exigencies of the cap i tal ist economic system and as cap
tive to those dominant interests. According to radicals, only a few NGOs have been
able to break out of this mold and develop networks enabling mass participation
designed to change the fundamental rules of the game. After all, radicals desire major
po liti cal and economic change in favor of an international order that distributes eco
nomic resources and po liti cal power more equitably. Con temporary international law
and organ izations are not the agents of such change.
the constructivist view
Constructivists place critical importance on institutions and norms.^20 Both IGOs and
NGOs can be norm entrepreneurs that socialize and teach states new norms. Those
norms may change state preferences, which in turn may influence state be hav ior.
Constructivists acknowledge that new international institutions have been developing
at a rapid rate and are taking on more tasks. But, as Michael Barnett and Martha
Finnemore argue in Rules for the World, international organ izations may produce
conflict, acting in ways that are contrary to the interests of their constituency. They may
pursue particularistic goals, creating a bureaucratic culture that tolerates inefficiency
and lack of accountability. International institutions may become dysfunctional, serving
the interests of international bureaucrats.^21
Law plays a key role in constructivist thinking, not because law establishes precise
rules, but because it reflects changing norms. Thus, both adherents of customary
international law and constructivists see the critical role such norms play in providing
shared expectations about appropriate state be hav ior. Over time, those norms are
internalized by states themselves, they change state preferences, and they shape be hav
ior. A number of key norms are of par tic u lar interest to constructivists, for example,
multilateralism, the practice of joining with others in making decisions. Occurring
both outside and within formal organ izations, participants learn the value of this
norm. Through multilateral participation, states have also learned other norms,
including the emerging prohibition against the use of nuclear weapons, the norm of
humanitarian intervention, and the increasing attention to human rights norms. Yet
just as these norms and ideas affect state be hav ior, states also participate in shaping
them. All of these norms are discussed in coming chapters. Thus, with the steady
expansion of international institutions and international law and influence, construc
tivists have an active research agenda.