| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
183142
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In recent decades, civil society organizations (CSOs) have ostensibly attained increased access to the United Nations (UN) and other intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) and, in turn, increased opportunities for collaboration with IGOs. However, in most cases, CSO access to IGOs remains limited and highly regimented. Little scholarship has been undertaken to examine barriers to effective CSO–IGO collaborations. Virtually, no empirical research has examined the degree or nature of the interaction between the UN and international civil society via the dynamic of the flagship programme designed to facilitate such collaborations—the consultative status framework. This exploratory study partially addresses the latter gap in the scholarship by undertaking a qualitative macro-scale examination of CSOs within the UN Economic and Social Council’s (ECOSOC) consultative status programme, the primary vehicle in the UN–civil society dynamic. Specifically, the study sought to identify barriers to UN–civil society collaboration within the consultative status programme as perceived by participating CSOs. Findings of a survey sent to a random sample of 10% of CSOs holding UN–ECOSOC consultative status revealed that barriers to participation in the programme varied with some obstacles far more common than others. The degree of barriers reported by CSOs also strongly reflected the level of accreditation they held within the programme. Additionally, survey respondents offered insight as to how impediments in the collaboration could potentially be addressed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
127461
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
191231
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Civil society plays an important role in European energy and climate policymaking. This paper poses the questions of how organized civil society handled the opportunities and challenges presented by the lockdown to its access to the climate and energy policymaking within the European Commission (EC)? How has the balance between organized civil society groups and businesses in Europe been affected by pandemic-related travel restrictions? Moreover, what role has the EC played in creating such opportunities and affecting the legitimacy of democratic policymaking? This research sheds light on the changing role of the EC in democratic governance and policy formation in the European Union (EU) by examining the relationship between funding received by CSOs active in the policy areas of environment and climate, the number of meetings attended, and the importance of coalitions and networks. This research revealed a possible relationship between level of participation in policymaking and the operational support received from the EC. Despite the resources invested, opportunities for interest representation in the energy and climate policy areas disproportionately favor businesses and organizations with long-term relationships with and proximity to Brussels. Increased number of virtual meetings only marginally increased share of participation of NGOs in these meetings. Thus, a physical presence in Brussels and resource investment remain important factors in access to the EU policymaking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
114219
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article examines the dynamics of engagement between national human rights institutions (NHRIs) and civil society organizations (CSOs) in the Asia Pacific region. It explores the role of CSOs in the establishment of NHRIs and argues that this history is essential to understanding the experience of NHRIs within different states. Second, it explores the evolution and impact of networks of NHRIs and CSOs in a region that currently lacks a supranational mechanism for promoting and protecting human rights. Finally, it considers the potential for CSOs to utilize the evolving processes of the International Coordinating Committee of Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights (ICC) to strengthen the independence and effectiveness of NHRIs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|