|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
058471
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
135290
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Scholarship has traditionally portrayed transnational NGOs (TNGOs) as ‘principled’ actors animated by global norms to advance human rights, sustainable development, humanitarian relief, environmental stewardship, and conflict resolution. However, scholarship has also identified instances in which TNGOs appear to act ‘instrumentally’ by engaging in resource-maximising behaviour seemingly inconsistent with their principled nature. Moreover, prior scholarship addressing this puzzle has been constrained by the limitations of small-n case studies examining relatively narrow subsectors of the TNGO community. Addressing these limitations, we reexamine the logic of TNGO behaviour in light of findings from an interdisciplinary, mixed-method research initiative consisting of in-depth, face-to-face interviews with a diverse sample of 152 top organisational leaders from all major sectors of TNGO activity. Using an inductive approach to discover how TNGO leaders understand their own behaviour, we introduce the heuristic of ‘principled instrumentalism’ and specify our framework with a formal model.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
171844
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
International relations (IR) scholars have recognized the importance of technology in enabling nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to build transnational networks and enhance their influence. However, IR scholars have typically focused on elite networks across NGOs, states, and international organizations. This article considers how digital technologies generate new types of networked power between NGOs and their members. Digital tools allow for fast feedback from supporters, rapid surges in mobilization, and more decentralized campaigns. Importantly, in the digital era, NGOs must decide not only which digital platforms to use, but also whether to devolve decision-making to their supporters. Two questions arise: First, do NGO staff or supporters primarily define and produce advocacy content? Second, is the goal of digital activism to broaden or intensify participation? Answers to these questions generate four digital strategies: proselytizing, testing, conversing, and facilitating. These strategies change advocacy practices, but only facilitating strategies open up new forms of networked power based on supporter-to-supporter connections. Digital strategies have profound ramifications for individual organizations, the nature of the advocacy sector, and its power in relation to states, corporations, and other nonstate actors. Digital adoption patterns shape how NGOs choose campaigns, how they legitimate their claims, and what strategies they rely on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|