Protectionist norms are a widespread feature of global governance. The process of their diffusion is often cloaked in universalistic claims promising inherent emancipatory potential for those at the receiving end.  It took a while until norm researchers shifted their attention to local norm takers (aka governmental elites) and their practices of (re-)interpretation of global norms. 
 

Yet, the shift in perspective has been incomplete for its disregard of those at the micro-level, the ones actually affected by the protectionist norms themselves – the tacit assumption being that these “beneficiaries” would embrace rather than challenge the norms that had been negotiated for their well-being. Why would, for example, children and youth in the global South challenge a global ban on child labor which is aimed at improving their living conditions?

This project seeks to remedy this shortcoming by putting the alleged norm “beneficiaries” and their normative stances center stage. Tying in with recent work on the “agency of the governed”, it analyzes how apparently weak actors that are excluded from formal norm negotiation processes reclaim agency (thus transcending the structural limitations in which they operate) by means of contesting the norms that were negotiated for their well-being. A particular focus will be put on how actual norm addresses and norm advocates negotiate the meaning of contested global norms, as well as on the context shaping the practices of contestation. Empirical cases include inter alia challenges towards the ban on child labor by the transnational movement of working children and youth.