Researcher
Paul Beaumont
Contactinfo and files
Summary
Paul Beaumont received a Ph.D. in International Relations/International Environmental Studies and Development from the Norwegian University of Life Sciences in 2020. He is a senior researcher at the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI), working in the Global Order and Diplomacy research group. Paul is currently researching public private partnerships in development as part of the DEVINT project, and transnational ecosystem politics with the LORAX project. From April 2025, he will lead the ERC Starting Grant funded project “Navigating the Era of Indicators”.
More broadly, Paul's research interests include IR theory, the (dis)functioning of international institutions, dubious quantified performance indicators, global environmental politics, nuclear weapons, hierarchies in world politics, and pluralist research methods.
Paul has published two monographs: "Performing Nuclear Weapons: How Britain Made its Bomb Make Sense" (Palgrave 2021) and “The Grammar of Status Competition: International Hierarchies and Domestic Politics” (Oxford University Press, 2024). His research has also featured in numerous leading journals, including European Journal of International Relations, Contemporary Security Policy, International Relations, Third World Quarterly and International Studies Review, among others. A keen contributor to policy and public debate, Paul has published multiple op-eds in Klassekampen, Aftenposten, among other Norwegian national newspapers. Committed to fostering pluralistic, rigorous and theoretically informed research within the discipline of IR and adjacent fields, Paul is currently an editor of the Nordics’ leading IR journal Cooperation and Conflict.
Education
2020 Doctorate, International Relations/International Development and Environment Studies. The Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU)
2014 Master of Science, International Relations. (NMBU)
2006 Bachelor, Economic History. The London School of Economics (LSE)
Work Experience
2020- Senior Researcher, Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI)
2019 Visiting Scholar. The Department of Politics and International Studies. Cambridge University
2015-2020 PhD Candidate, The Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU)
2015 Junior Research Fellow. NUPI
2013-2015 Academic Writing Advisor, NMBU
2006-2012 English Teacher - Prague, Tokyo, Buenos Aires, London, Gliwice
Aktivitet
Filter
Clear all filtersThe Construction of Status in Security Politics: Rules, Comparisons and Second-Guessing Collective Beliefs
Tapping into international relations status’ research’s extended lineage, this chapter makes the case for a thick constructivist account of international status dynamics that makes the construction of rules and comparisons central to analysis. Drawing upon the work of Robert Gilpin and Nicholas Onuf, the chapter’s approach enables the exploration of how the rules governing status competitions emerge, why some rules become agreed upon and others contested, and the consequences of these processes of rule formation. While this framework requires a gestalt switch for conventional status research, this chapter argues that it is possible to do so while remaining consistent with status research’s core definition of status. The value of the framework is illustrated via a case study of how the rules of the nuclear status competition emerged and solidified over the course of the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks between the Soviet Union and United States (1969–79).
Review of Transnational Lawmaking Coalitions for Human Rights
A strong contribution to international studies’ scientific ontology of human rights processes, Transnational Lawmaking Coalitions in Human Rights illuminates and dissects a hitherto underappreciated but influential process through which non-state actors influence the interpretation and thus implementation of human rights law. Indeed, getting down among the weeds of human rights treaty bodies’ lawmaking processes, Reiners emerges with a compelling account of how an informal, important if transient, actor, she calls Transnational Lawmaking Coalitions (TLCs), clarifies human rights law and thereby structure states’ human rights obligations through drafting general comments. Operating across the boundaries of inter-governmental organizations, Reiners documents how TLCs emerge out of the “opportunity structure” generated by the recurring need to clarify human rights law and the chronic underfunding of human rights treaty expert bodies (p. 55). Composing of at least one of the treaty body’s appointed expert members, we have a case of TLC when members of the expert body then reach outside to utilize expertise within their professional networks for drafting a general comment. According to Reiners, working outside formal processes, these expert networks conduct their work on a shoestring budget lubricated primarily with the social capital, professional recognition, and moral conviction (p. 57). While lacking formalized processes for engaging with stakeholders, TLCs nonetheless render what can become authoritative new human rights interpretations, largely beyond the purvey or at least the direct influence of the state parties (pp. 22–4). As Reiners put it, TLCs “emerge from” and “operate through” the formal bodies but are not formal institutional entities themselves nor directly employed by state parties (p. 46). In this way, TLCs can be understood as exploiting a loophole in the human rights architecture through which non-state actors can bypass deadlocked formal treaty-making processes (p. 142–3).
Will a more humble NATO be a stronger NATO?
NATO’s narrative about itself has changed. However, this narrative is unlikely to gain much support elsewhere in the world, claim the authors of this op-ed in Aftenposten. NATO turns 75 and describes itself as "the world’s most successful military alliance". Like all other viable international actors, NATO must be able to look itself in the mirror and critically reflect on its own actions to maintain legitimacy both among its own populations and in the wider world, and, if necessary, adjust its course. This article, based on a longer analysis published in the journal Contemporary Security Policy, is an attempt to contribute to this reflection.
How are these two supposed to cooperate?
They don’t have much in common, Donald Trump and Keir Starmer. But does that mean we are about to see a British showdown with the United States? In this op-ed in Dagsavisen, NUPI researchers Øyvind Svendsen and Paul Beaumont raise this question. At first glance, the two leaders appear to be diametrical opposites. On one side, the somewhat rigid social democrat and human rights lawyer Starmer; on the other, the ruthless rule-breaker Trump. Can they cooperate at all? Must the British now break away from their special relationship with their American guiding star?
Prestige and punishment: Status symbols and the danger of white elephants
This article identifies and unpacks the intrinsic potential for backlash in the pursuit of status symbols. While status loss has been associated with domestic pushback and reduced legitimacy for ruling governments, the literature on status is yet to examine how status-seeking can backfire even when a state can successfully claim to have acquired a status symbol. We contend that status backlashes are an inherent risk of status-seeking due to the multivocality of costly status symbols. Our heuristic framework for studying status backlashes proposes examining modes of critique that construe status symbols as irrational or unjustified costly endeavours, undermining their legitimating capacity and potentially even transforming them into a marker of stigma. Empirically, we identify three modes of critique present in reactions to Brazil’s hosting of the World Cup in 2014 and the Olympics in 2016. There, despite recognizing the symbolic value of hosting these mega-events, Brazilian audiences also criticized the government for the opportunity costs, vested interests and subservience that it entailed. Undertaking two shadow case studies – on the backlash against the United Kingdom’s renewal of its Trident nuclear weapons system and Norway’s engagement in military interventions between 1999 and 2012 – we document how these modes of critique associated with status symbols can travel across contexts.
The Grammar of Status Competition: International Hierarchies and Domestic Politics
States do not only strive for wealth and security, but international status too. A burgeoning body of research has documented that states of all sizes spend considerable time, energy, and even blood and treasure when seeking status on the world stage. Yet, for all scholars' success in identifying instances of status seeking, they lack agreement on the nature of the international hierarchies that states are said to compete within. Making sense of this status ambiguity remains the key methodological and theoretical challenge facing status research in international relations scholarship. In The Grammar of Status Competition, Paul David Beaumont tackles this puzzle head on by making a strength out of status' widely acknowledged slipperiness. Given that states, statesmen, and citizens care about and pursue status despite its difficulty to assess, Beaumont argues that we can study international status hierarchies through these actors' attempts to grapple with this same status ambiguity. The book thus redirects inquiry toward the theories of international status (TIS) that governments and citizens themselves produce and use to make sense of their state's position in the world. Advancing a new framework for studying such TIS, the book illuminates how specific theories of international status emerge, solidify, and become contested, and how these processes influence domestic and foreign policy. Showcasing the value of a TIS approach via multiple historical case studies—from nuclear arms control to Norwegian education policy—Beaumont thereby addresses three major puzzles in IR status research: why states compete for status when the international rewards seem ephemeral; how states can escape the zero-sum game associated with quests for positional status; and how status scholars can overcome the methodological problem of disentangling status from other motivations
Reimagining NATO after Crimea: Defender of the rule-based order and truth?
Russia’s annexation of Crimea and war on Ukraine has led to upheaval in NATO’s discourse and practice. Taking a step back from the security debate, this article contends that the very process of responding to Russian aggression has led to the reimagining of NATO’s identity. While NATO tends to present change as continuity, this article’s mixed methods analysis illuminates how a trio of new and ambitious self-representations have risen to prominence within NATO’s post-Crimea discourse. NATO has anointed itself defender of the international rules-based order and purveyor of truth and facts amidst a world of disinformation, while pushing a resilience policy agenda that expands its authority into new domestic domains. Problematizing these shifts, the article warns that NATO’s new narrative ignores its own role in the problems it seeks to solve and thus risks undermining NATO efforts to rally global support for Ukraine.
NUPI project to receive prestigious European Research Council funding
From the incoming editors: A leading International Relations journal with a Nordic touch
The new editors of Cooperation and Conflict introduce themselves and their aims for the journal going forward.
Dizzying Developments in International Relations