國際關係建構主義學者認爲國際規範具有社會本體論的特性，即規範是社會事實（social fact)而非自然事實，國際規範如何普遍運作有效則是國際成員相互建構而成，是一種社會建構(social construction)。國家主權正是一種國際規範、社會建構，其正當性原是奠基於領土疆域的不干涉原則，但由於歷經歷史的情勢發展，由不同成員相互所建構而成。建構主義學者質疑主權是固定、永久不變的本質，具有自然客觀存在的基礎，而認爲主權是一種社會建構或人類建構，是隨歷史時空變遷的國際規範與政治論述。國家主權原則是歷史偶發的原則，以往的領土內外與認同異同的區分主權，既不自然也不必要，而是若干歷史的先前意外事件的結果。國家現已相互建構奠基於人道的國家(主權）保護（人民）責任（The Responsibility to Protect)原則，此原則闡述了國家主權意含了責任，首要責任是保護國內人民；以及保護因種族屠殺、內戰、叛亂、壓迫或國家失靈，還有國家遭質疑無意或無能力終止或扭轉此苦難而受苦的人們，不干涉原則不及於國際保護責任。隨著學者提出各種補充的理論基礎及批判，促進了此國際規範的擴散與國際社會化，以及後續在聯合國安理會的決議下，依據此規範而人道軍事干預利比亞、南蘇丹、馬利、中非共和國等國，更說明此原則已經成爲具體的國際規範。在此國際規範的社會建構過程中，建構主義理論的描述與解釋顯示出其優點所在。

Constructivists have argued that international norms have a social ontological character, that is, they are a social fact, not a natural fact. The application of international norms is a social construction co-constituted by the members of international society. Therefore, state sovereignty is both an international norm and a social construction, with its legitimacy based on the principle of non-intervention of territory which arose in a particular historical context through the actions of the members of international society. Constructivists problematize the claim that sovereignty is constant, permanent, and with a natural foundation in objective existence, and instead claim that sovereignty is a social or human construction, an international norm, and a political discourse that emerged with historical change of time and space. The principle of state sovereignty is a principle of historical contingences; the division of sovereignty by territory (internal or external) and by identity (similar or different) is neither natural nor necessary. Sovereignty is instead the result of several historical accidents. State actors have also jointly constructed the principle of “the responsibility to protect” which defines state sovereignty, meaning a primary responsibility to protect their population from genocide, civil war, insurgency, oppression, or state failure. In states where populations suffer from these ills, the willingness and ability of the state to end or reverse this suffering has been questioned. Therefore, the principle of non-intervention is subject to “the responsibility to protect” norm. Scholars have proposed a new theoretical basis for the diffusion and international socialization of this norm. Furthermore, UN Security Council resolutions on humanitarian intervention in countries such as Libya, South Sudan, Mali, and the Central African Republic have accorded to this norm. Therefore, constructivism has emerged as a useful way to explain the social construction process of this international norm.