GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Research
    • Governance
      • Democracy & elections
      • Public sector management
      • Security & justice
      • Service delivery
      • State-society relations
      • Supporting economic development
    • Social Development
      • Gender
      • Inequalities & exclusion
      • Poverty & wellbeing
      • Social protection
    • Conflict
      • Conflict analysis
      • Conflict prevention
      • Conflict response
      • Conflict sensitivity
      • Impacts of conflict
      • Peacebuilding
    • Humanitarian Issues
      • Humanitarian financing
      • Humanitarian response
      • Recovery & reconstruction
      • Refugees/IDPs
      • Risk & resilience
    • Development Pressures
      • Climate change
      • Food security
      • Fragility
      • Migration & diaspora
      • Population growth
      • Urbanisation
    • Approaches
      • Complexity & systems thinking
      • Institutions & social norms
      • Theories of change
      • Results-based approaches
      • Rights-based approaches
      • Thinking & working politically
    • Aid Instruments
      • Budget support & SWAps
      • Capacity building
      • Civil society partnerships
      • Multilateral aid
      • Private sector partnerships
      • Technical assistance
    • Monitoring and evaluation
      • Indicators
      • Learning
      • M&E approaches
  • Services
    • Research Helpdesk
    • Professional development
  • News & commentary
  • Publication types
    • Helpdesk reports
    • Topic guides
    • Conflict analyses
    • Literature reviews
    • Professional development packs
    • Working Papers
    • Webinars
    • Covid-19 evidence summaries
  • Projects
  • About us
    • Staff profiles
    • International partnerships
    • Privacy policy
    • Terms and conditions
    • Contact Us
Home»Document Library»Overview and Typology of IGO Norms for Security Sector Reform and Governance

Overview and Typology of IGO Norms for Security Sector Reform and Governance

Library
Oksana Myshlovska
2007

Summary

What international norms and principles exist for security sector reform and governance? Where are the gaps and which norms need further development? This study from the Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF) assesses the norms established by a range of intergovernmental organisations (IGOs). It argues that for the SSR agenda to move forward, it is vital to develop a common set of standards and best practices, to which the SSR-relevant IGOs and other actors subscribe.

International norms shape and are shaped by the international system. Norms affect state behaviour by providing solutions to coordination problems, reducing transaction costs, providing a language and grammar of international politics. In addition to their role at the international level, norms have an impact on the domestic policies implemented by states. IGOs play an important role as an instrument for norm-setting in international relations. A number of other actors such as states, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and the media can also play a significant part in norm creation, especially of ‘soft’ norms.

Difficulties related to the implementation of SSR norms stem from the fact that overall agreement across IGOs on a uniform body of norms does not yet exist. Some ‘norms’ are still vague and need to be further tested in the field.

  • Only one IGO has developed comprehensive norms dealing with each security sector actor and their functions.
  • The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Council of Europe (CoE) and Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) have taken the most comprehensive approaches to norm development.
  • The most detailed norms developed to date concern the military, police and law-enforcement bodies.
  • Norms governing the behaviour of the executive, parliament, judiciary and civil society vis-à-vis the security sector remain underdeveloped.
  • There are relatively few norms defining the role of intelligence services, border guards, private military companies (PMCs), private security companies (PSCs) and other non-state groups within the security sector and regulating their behaviour.
  • There are no norms in the SSR context concerning such security sector actors as political parties, the business community and other non-state actors.

Given the fact that IGOs tend to specialise in developing particular norms and given the gaps that have been identified, it is likely that IGOs will need to continue to cooperate in the development, transfer and sharing of norms developed by individual IGOs.

  • The central challenge is the implementation of norms. There remains a considerable gap between the declared norms and their integration into programme design and delivery.
  • The way in which the norms are put into practice will determine their viability.
  • Practical implementation will lead to the erosion of some norms and the development of new ones that will further guide the SSR process in various countries and contexts.

Source

Myshlovska, O.,2007, 'Overview and Typology of IGO Norms for Security Sector Reform and Governance' in Intergovernmental Organisations and Security Sector Reform, ed. D. Law, DCAF, Geneva, pp. 25-42

University of Birmingham

Connect with us: Bluesky Linkedin X.com

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2026; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2026; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2026

We use cookies to remember settings and choices, and to count visitor numbers and usage trends. These cookies do not identify you personally. By using this site you indicate agreement with the use of cookies. For details, click "read more" and see "use of cookies".