In the previous chapter, we outlined the basic components and interactions of the normative and operating systems respectively. What happens when there is a change in the normative system? The framework and discussion in Chapter 2 indicated that changes in the normative system do not always lead to commensurate transformations in the operating system as are implied in other treatments. Such alterations might not be needed, but it could also be the case that even desirable shifts in the operating system lag behind or do not occur at all, leaving the two systems in a state of imbalance. What our framework did not provide at that point, however, was a specific model that gave a causal explanation for when and why operating system changes occur (or not). In this chapter, we provide such a model, consistent with the tenets of our theoretical framework.

Normative change comes most commonly in the form of a treaty that creates new rules in a substantive area such as patent rights or the treatment of diplomatic personnel. For example, the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (1994) obligates states to mitigate the effects of drought, among other responsibilities. Less common would be changes from alterations in international customary law or law crafted in international bodies (e.g., UN Security Council) empowered to authorize legally binding decisions. For example, the imposition of sanctions on Libya following the Lockerbie bombing in 1988 is an instance of changing rules, albeit very narrow and potentially time bound.