No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
National Styles of NGO Regulation
Abstract
Why do OECD countries vary in their regulatory approach towards non-governmental organizations (NGOs)? This paper introduces an index to assess NGO regulation regarding barriers to entry, NGOs’ political capacity, and economic activity. Our cross-section analysis of 28 OECD countries offers preliminary evidence of systematic differences in NGO regulation between corporatist and pluralist systems. We suggest corporatist systems have more restrictive regulations because NGOs risk upsetting the political order and managed social consensus. In pluralist countries, NGOs face fewer restrictions because governments view them as substitutes for formal communication channels. We present two cases, Japan (corporatist) and the United States (pluralist), to illustrate this argument. In sum, macro-institutional arrangements of political representation have a crucial bearing on national styles of NGO regulation. Future uses of this index include examining the effects of national context on international NGOs, explaining variations in organizational structures and strategies among NGOs, and tracking variations in NGO-state relations over time.
... The early literature emphasized gatekeeper INGOs such as Amnesty International and Greenpeace, typically headquartered in the West, which seem to share similar styles of contention and organizational forms. There have been some more recent exceptions to this bias, which have examined variation among NGO behavior from different domestic contexts (Stroup 2012;Stroup and Murdie 2012;Bloodgood 2010;Bloodgood, Tremblay-Boire, and Prakash 2014), with different institutional geneses (Wong 2012), or of different sizes and reputations (Stroup and Wong 2017). For the most part, however, the INGO literature has neglected domestic sources of explanation for NGOs' transnational behavior (Dellmuth and Bloodgood 2019). ...
... The level of democracy in the domestic political regimes of NGOs' home countries can influence their ability to mobilize globally, with less democratic circumstances likely to dampen NGOs' effectiveness (Smith and Wiest 2005;Stroup 2012;Heiss and Johnson 2016). In addition, access to material and human resources shapes NGOs' capacity to participate in global governance, and we expect that more resource availability leads to more effective mobilization across borders (McCarthy and Zald 2002;Bloodgood, Tremblay-Boire, and Prakash 2014;Bloodgood and Tremblay-Boire 2017). ...
... Nevertheless, it is clear that the state remains crucial to both defining major political opportunities for challengers and shaping the forms and character of political association" (2005,623). States vary significantly in how they enable or obstruct autonomous social activism-the legal context may be more or less permissive (Bloodgood, Tremblay-Boire, and Prakash 2014), funding may be more or less abundant Cooley and Ron 2002), the state may be a partner or opponent (Hsu, Hsu, and Hasmath 2017;Gómez and Harris 2015), and social organizations may have a longer or shorter history of development (Smith and Wiest 2005). Moreover, material constraints on NGOs certainly impede their ability to engage globally (Boström and Hallström 2010, 43;Hanegraaff et al. 2015b). ...
This chapter compares the efforts of NGOs in Russia and South Africa to mediate global approaches to tackling the HIV/AIDS epidemic in their home contexts. It illustrates both the benefits and drawbacks of engaging with GGIs that offer significant levels of authority to NGOs along with very specific rules and standards. Such strong tools, when placed in NGOs’ hands, can help them to mediate effectively in a welcoming domestic political environment; but if dominant political actors oppose global norms, they can lead to pitched battles between civil society and government actors. NGO activists who persevere in a relatively open democratic regime that protects civil and political rights, such as South Africa, can contribute to domestic normative change over time, leading eventually to government policies that align with global principles. Where the political environment is relatively closed and repressive of civil society, as in Russia, NGOs may struggle to muster sufficient authority to mediate effectively.
... Some researchers have paid attention to differences between non-profits and for-profits in strategic decision-making (e.g., Hull & Lio, 2006;Nugroho, 2011 while other have focused on multinational non-profits in the international management context (Rost & Graetzer, 2014). However, too little attention has been paid to how institutions, particularly government (formal institutions), affect non-profit use of strategies commonly studied in the business context (Bloodgood, Tremblay-Boire, & Prakash, 2013;Frumkin & Andre-Clark, 2000). We address this gap as well as the premise that informal institutions interact with the formal ones to affect non-profit strategies. ...
... Differences between developed nations may be significant, and formal and informal institutions in developed economies can still work differently and should be studied . Bloodgood et al. (2013) demonstrated that formal institutions regulate non-profits differently across developed economies, and Frumkin and Andre-Clark (2000) showed a significant effect of a change in formal regulations on non-profit behavior. Our study expands upon their findings by examining informal institutions as well. ...
... In the non-profit sector, van Leeuwen and Wiepking (2012) observed crossnational differences in campaign fundraising consistent with specific national institutional characteristics, such as trust, state structure, and fundraising regulations. Bloodgood et al. (2013) suggested that approaches to non-profit regulation differ across developed economies. Non-profits might not respond to regulations the same way as MNEs do, given that MNEs want access to markets while non-profits' motivations are different (Hull & Lio, 2006). ...
We applied institutional theory to examine the effect of differences in institutional pressures on strategic decisions of a non-profit non-governmental organization, Greenpeace, in its fight to stop the use of genetically-modified organisms. The effects of differences in institutional pressures were examined through examining differences between the United States and the European Union as well as between two European nations, France and Spain, in Greenpeace's strategy. We suggested that formal and informal institutional pressures influence strategic decision-making in Greenpeace's independent national units. We proposed that the US differs from the EU in both formal and informal institutional environments, Spain and France differ in the informal dimension, and these differences are reflected in Greenpeace's strategies. We also argued that Greenpeace exemplifies the successful use of a transnational strategy and discussed whether non-profits may be better able to adopt a transnational strategy than are for-profits.
... Developed countries often have more stringent legislation to circumvent information asymmetries in the nonprofit sector. For example, the NGO in the USA, except for faith-based nonprofits, can only claim exemption from tax, if they submit IRS form 990 to the Internal Revenue Services (US Department of Treasury; Title 26, section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code, is applicable for NGO working in USA) [22]. Therefore, submitting the IRS form 990 to the Internal Revenue Services is a mandatory action for NGO working in USA. ...
... Numerical values of these weights are dependent upon the probabilities of NGO meeting the threshold values of usability, content, and communication; these thresholds can be taken from a study conducted in a similar environment. For instance, Denmark and Finland follow restrictive regulatory style of NGO regulation, macro-institutions follow corporatism; therefore, if a study conducted in Finland finds that the usability score for NGO' websites is 15, then we can use p U = (Usabilty Score�15), for Denmark, so, if 30% of the NGO in Denmark score at least 15 on usability then p U = 0.3 [22]. Another approach proposed by Nazuk [9], is to use sample average of score on each dimension as an estimate of the thresholds i.e., if the average score of usability is 2, then we can use it as an estimate of the threshold for usability. ...
This study highlights the need for analysis of online disclosure practices followed by non-governmental organizations; furthermore, it justifies the crucial role of potential correlates of online disclosure practices followed by non-governmental organizations. We propose a novel index for analyzing the extent of online disclosure of non-governmental organizations (NGO). Using the information stored in an auxiliary variable, we propose a new estimator for gauging the average value of the proposed index. Our approach relies on the use of two factors: imperfect ranked-set sampling procedure to link the auxiliary variable with the study variable, and an NGO disclosure index under simple random sampling that uses information only about the study variable. Relative efficiency of the proposed index is compared with the conventional estimator for the population average under the imperfect ranked-set sampling scheme. Mathematical conditions required for retaining the efficiency of the proposed index, in comparison to the imperfect ranked set sampling estimator, are derived. Numerical scrutiny of the relative efficiency, in response to the input variables, indicates; if the variance of the NGO disclosure index is less than the variance of the estimator under imperfect ranked set sampling, then the proposed index is universally efficient compared to the estimator under imperfect ranked set sampling. If the condition on variances is unmet, even then the proposed estimator remains efficient if majority of the NGO share online data on the auxiliary variable. This work can facilitate nonprofit regulation in the countries where most of the non-governmental organizations maintain their websites.
... The nonprofit management literature has also examined national patterns of regulation across countries (Bloodgood, Tremblay-Boire, and Prakash 2014) and the phenomenon of voluntary self-regulation (Gugerty, Sidel, and Bies 2010) but has tended to focus more on regulatory issues specific to the United States. For example, prior research has identified areas for federal regulatory reform (Anheier and Toepler 2019;Barber and Smith 2020), explored topics related to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (Benzing et al. 2011;Nezhina and Brudney 2010), and examined issues concerning fundraising regulation (Barber 2012;Barber and Farwell 2016;Barber, Farwell, and Galle 2022;Breen 2012;Dietz et al. 2017). ...
The existence of federal oversight of charitable organizations in the United States implies a degree of uniformity to US charity regulation. However, charity regulation is far from uniform across the country. States differ significantly in their adoption or non-adoption of various state-level regulatory requirements, creating not one but many different regulatory environments for charities. The complexity and diversity of these regulations has made it difficult for sector stakeholders, such as researchers, regulators, practitioners, information intermediaries, and donors, to understand the nature and significance of state-level charity regulation from a comparative perspective. To address this problem, this article employs latent class analysis to identify three distinct models of state-level charity regulation: broad regulation, limited regulation, and asset oversight. Subsequent analysis identifies relationships between a state’s economic, social, and political characteristics and its model of charity regulation, suggesting new avenues of research for understanding regulatory model emergence. Many additional practical applications of the typology are also discussed.
... In the 1990s, under the National Revolutionary Movement (NRM) regime, state-CSOs relations became relatively collaborative, and CSOs proliferated. This is attributed to the neo-liberal environment which established an increase of foreign donor funds to CSOs, coupled with state incapacity to provide public goods to the entire populace (Bloodgood, Tremblay-Boire, and Prakash 2014;Muhumuza 2010) However, the collaborative form of state-CSOs relations was due to the state's toleration of CSOs so as not to discourage the continued flow of donor funds. Nevertheless, the state engaged primarily with influential CSOs such as the media, women, and Christian groups, but felt threatened by advocacy groups or any CSOs involved in any form of advocacy (Kidd 2002). ...
Although there have been attempts to theorise state-Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) relations in the Counter-Terrorism (CT) context , including the "co-option and containment" and "duality of coercion" perspectives, these two-way articulations have failed to account for the range of strategic options open to the state in regulating CSOs. This study presents the framework of Strategic Exclusion, Co-option and Containment (SECC) to underscore the general patterns of state engagement of CSOs in the context of CT. It mapped secondary evidence in 19 countries and used three illustrative case studies (Australia, Uganda and Russia) to examine the elements of SECC, namely, states' exclusion of CSOs in law and policymaking on CT, the use of strategic ambiguity in enacting and interpreting CT laws, delegitimizing or criminalising advocacy and influencing the transformation of CSOs into state adjutants. This pattern of engagement with CSOs is transforming voluntary and associational life in precarious ways. The article advances the Copenhagen School and rational-actor model of global strategic decision-making, and contributes to discourses on the closing of civic spaces, democratic recession and the resurgence of authoritarianism. It lays a foundation for generalisable theory and future empirical research on state behaviour towards CSOs in the context of violence, conflict, and security.
... This also is reasoned in the fact of reciprocity, that "most foundations are linked to government or corporations, and are dependent on them for funding" (Potter 2015, 492). Bloodgood is stating this reciprocity and dependence on funds have a negative notion, because the state wants to keep control over the non-profit sphere by high requirements and regulations (Bloodgood 2014). Regarding to the cultural background of Japanese social hierarchy of Confucianism, the behavior of state for careful reforms is reasoned. ...
Catastrophes like the Great Kobe Hanshin Awaji earthquake in 1995 and the Triple Disaster at Fukushima in 2011 raise awareness of the importance of supporting local and nationwide philanthropic humanitarian projects. In Japan new concepts and ways of implementing these concepts have recently been developed in order to engage the public. Despite a long tradition of philanthropy influenced by Buddhism, like the Kanjin, collecting money by specific monks for charity and reconstructing purposes, and Confucianism in Japan, modern giving culture is still underdeveloped in comparison to other states of the OECD. The Japanese government is meant to take the main responsibility regarding providing public goods rather than individual welfare. Globalization and demographic change urge the government to act and reform laws and status of Non-Profit-Organizations (NPOs) within the nation’s society. Donations and volunteering are important for supporting new NPOs in an active modern society. These are necessary tools to realize an increase of modern civic participation. Individuals and NPOs are struggling with governmental tax treatments and incentives, which demotivate donors to interact with new types of philanthropic activities. Up to now, half of the donated money is coming from big Japanese companies and their own foundations, the so-called corporate philanthropy to fund their interests in research and education. Furthermore, Japanese people have issues with donating money, time and effort into projects, where they cannot profit, and results are not kept inside the local sphere/community. This social identity behavior of traditional Confucian perception is a main obstacle in a global world. In the following, several factors unique to Japanese philanthropy culture theories shall be analyzed and it shall be outlined why only a slow improvement can be recognized. Additionally, the clash of Western perception with Japanese philanthropy is going to be highlighted.
... He found that most legal frameworks in developing countries to be counterproductive and burdensome. Regulations are also identified as a barrier to TSOs' participation in advocacy, political and economic activities (Bloodgood, Tremblay-Boire, and Prakash 2014). Regulation does not achieve its objectives when regulators' priorities are misplaced, slow to react or not given adequate resources and support from the state (Phillips 2019). ...
Regulation protects the third sector from mismanagement, provides data for policy development, and increases public trust and confidence in its organisations. Different agencies regulate Malaysian third sector organisations (TSO), based on their legal forms and varying activities or functions. Yet, can different regulations governing organisations with similar objectives effectively address issues affecting the sector as a whole? This study provides an overview of the Malaysian third sector regulatory landscape and examines the operational challenges caused by the multiple regulator environment. Third sector actors and regulators were interviewed to understand how they navigate legal and regulatory requirements. Findings show that regulation is hampered by discrepancies surrounding the interpretation and application of laws. This Malaysian study shows that regulatory inconsistencies affect the sector’s operational efficiency and diminish trust between the TSOs and regulators. Based on these findings, uniformity in regulation is crucial to build trust in the sector, as well as between actors and regulators.
... On the other hand, NGOs may be, through their service provision, reproducing dependent states (Englebert 2009) and legitimizing illegitimate ones (Brass 2016). Recognizing the role and influence of NGOs, host states attempt to hold NGOs to account through regulation (Bakke, Mitchell, and Smidt 2019;DeMattee 2019), especially when they are seen as political competitors and potential disruptors of social order (Keck and Sikkink 1998;Bloodgood, Tremblay-Boire, and Prakash 2014). This is partly because support from foreign sources raises concerns about local versus foreign interests and accountability (Bratton 1989). ...
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are pivotal actors in international affairs. They manage billions of dollars in funding, work all around the world, and shape global policies and standards. It thus comes as no surprise that the subject of accountability has drawn the interest of an increasing number of scholars across disciplines. Though there seems to be agreement about its desirability, accountability is also described as chameleon-like and ambiguous. And despite calls for more cross-disciplinary learning and conceptual clarity, there does not exist a comprehensive review of accountability conceptualizations across and within disciplines, or how the different meanings relate to each other. Based on the conceptual review of 217 research articles published within the last twenty years, this study identifies and analyzes conceptualizations of accountability in the major journals of five engaged disciplines: accounting, development studies, international relations and political science, organization studies and management, and public administration. Integrating this broad scholarship reveals that: (1) there exist 113 different conceptualizations of accountability, 90 of which are rarely used and appear in less than 5 percent of all analyzed articles, (2) scholars have used forty-three different conceptualizations in 2019 compared to seventeen conceptualizations in 2009, (3) many conceptualizations refer to same phenomena by different name (duplication), and different phenomena by the same name (conflict), and that (4) conceptual ambiguity contributes to ambiguity among the forty different terms used to measure and operationalize accountability. These findings illustrate a lack of cross-disciplinary learning and accumulation of knowledge, and suggest that new conceptualizations be introduced only if one or more of the 113 existing ones don't already capture an idea sufficiently. The purpose of this article is to serve as a concept map for scholars when debating and charting new directions for the study of accountability.
... National governments play a critical role in the institutional environment of NGOs (Salamon and Anheier, 1998;Bloodgood, Tremblay-Boire, and Prakash, 2014). But because governments are embedded in a global structure, their domestic policies may also be shaped by the preferences of powerful states on which they depend in various ways (Salamon, 1994;Reimann, 2006). ...
Laws restricting foreign funding to domestically operating nongovernmen-tal organizations (NGOs) have proliferated in developing countries. This is puzzling because Western powers support the norm that NGOs are critical for democracy and development, recommend governments partner with NGOs, and sometimes use trade sanctions to encourage adherence to this norm. We examine whether rising trade with China influences the onset of NGO restrictions. China, which has emerged as an important export destination, articulates a different norm of state sovereignty over NGOs and does not sanction developing countries that enact restrictive NGO laws. Analysis of 153 developing countries from 2000-2015 finds that increasing exports to China may double the risk of NGO crackdown, but only when accompanied by declining exports to Western democracies. NGO scholars should recognize there are multiple norms about state-NGO relationship and that norm acceptance is influenced by the economic clout of the power that espouses a particular norm.
... The literature review led us to expect that many differences in this regard could be found due to different market conditions for companies' activities or social expectations of business's contribution to resolving environmental and social problems. Moreover, the companies' partners within joint SD projects, including NGOs, may have to deal in countries with different institutional environment and socio-cultural factors to those in Poland (see, e.g., [98][99][100][101][102]), and thus the nature of their collaboration and the obtained results may also be different than in Poland. ...
There is a significant research gap in the theory of the nature of relationships between companies and other organizations (including NGOs) when collaborating on projects to support sustainable development goals. In particular, the company perspective has not yet been analyzed in depth. This paper therefore presents these relationships from the company’s point of view, and particularly in terms of how company representatives describe the roles of each partner in the collaboration and the outcomes it generates for the company. The empirical research is theoretically grounded in the Activities–Resources–Actors (ARA) model developed by Håkansson and Snehota. The study adopted a qualitative approach and was conducted using semi-structured individual in-depth interviews in 18 companies; the companies represented different industries and were involved in different types of projects related to sustainable development goals. The paper contributes to developing the theory in various ways. It contributes to the understanding of processes related to company involvement in sustainable development. It also contributes to the theory of the essence and substance of inter-organizational relationships, and specifically the ARA framework. Moreover, it explains the specificity of such inter-organizational collaborations and identifies to what extent these relationships vary from other types of inter-organizational collaboration, especially from business-to-business relationships. The paper also contributes to the discussion on the role of personal bonds within such inter-organizational relationships. The practical implications relate to the ways in which the activities and resources of a company and its partner may be combined in projects addressing social and/or environmental problems. Therefore, the paper offers guidance to companies and their potential partners interested in undertaking joint sustainability initiatives.
... The prolific emergence of governance practices in the NGO sector (Bloodgood et al., 2014) has become associated with increasingly high levels of organisational complexity involving two key issues. First, at a practical level, the growth of the operations of NGOs has meant that, in some cases, founders of NGOs are no longer able to control directly operational processes (Moore and Stewart, 1998). ...
Purpose
The emergence of Governance practices in the non-governmental organisation (NGO) sector has become associated with increasingly high levels of organisational complexity. In the light of an expanding civil society sector in Chile and the emergence of formalised governance practices, this paper explores the construction of the Executive Director role in Chilean NGOs with reference to organisational functions, organisational dynamics, and external influences.
Design/methodology/approach
Grounded theory is used to explore qualitative data derived from a set of N = 39 interviews conducted in Chile These interviews involve NGO founders, funders, Executive Directors, scholars, consultants, and team members.
Findings
The findings reveal the pivotal role played by Executive Directors in conducting organisational activities which, in other types of organisations, are often distributed across various organisational functions. The data also highlight complex dynamics involving overt compliance with external regulatory requirements, uncertainties about financial sustainability, the recruitment of Executive Board members, the exercise of power by Executive Directors, and the influence of founders in leadership configurations.
Research limitations/implications
The implications of the study are discussed in relation to the governance and accountability of NGOs, the nature of the Executive Director role, the purpose of Executive Boards in the NGO sector, and the recruitment and training of Board members. It is noted that the study was conducted in the NGO sector in Chile; further research is necessary to establish the generalisability of the findings to other contexts.
Originality/value
This paper addresses the shortage of organisational research on NGOs. It contributes by offering analytical perspectives on organisational processes of Leadership and Governance. This paper highlights the relationship between, and interdependency of, those processes.
... Building on recent work engaging with this issue (Booth and Robbins, 2010;Gauja, 2010;Potter and Tavits, 2015;van Biezen and Kopecký, 2017;Casal Bértoa, 2017), we try to enrich the study of the relationship between party financing and party system development by focusing on comparing its effects on party systems in different contexts. Our theorizing of the different manners in which party finance affects party competition in new and established democracies complements in an innovative way the results shown by Potter and Tavits (2015). 1 Bloodgood et al. (2014) and Bolleyer (2018) further examine how the state regulates interest groups and non-governmental organizations. We thank an anonymous reviewer for this point. ...
Studies of party system size have looked at institutional and sociological factors in their attempt to explain what determines the number of parties. While some recent studies contend that party laws, beyond the district magnitude, have a significant impact on, among others, new party entry, we know very little about whether certain rules matter more in some societies than they do in others. In this paper, we study the extent to which various party finance rules affect party system size and differentiate the effect between new and established democracies. Specifically, we focus on direct and indirect public subsidization and limits on private donation and campaign expenditure. We hypothesize that compared to established countries, new democracies tend to have a larger party system size when the political finance rules create more equal conditions for electoral competition. Using data from 43 Europe democracies, the empirical analyses support our hypothesis.
... As depicted in Figure 1, the international society of states and the transnational society of TNAs have traditionally been perceived to be distinctive domains with practices unique to their respective domains. As further depicted in Figure 1, the relations between international society and transnational society are traditionally understood to involve both top-down procedures regulating TNAs provided by states in international society (Bloodgood, Tremblay-Boire and Prakash, 2014) and bottom-up advocacy practices of TNAs in transnational society promoting reforms in international society (Clark, 2007;Busby, 2010;Buzan, 2018). ...
Although there has been widespread attention to the apparent rise of a transnational society of cross-border non-state actors alongside the international society of states, transnational society and international society have traditionally been treated as distinctive domains with different institutions. This article, by contrast, aims to transform theorization of world order through its investigation of how actors in transnational society have developed institutions that mirror in notable respects some of the primary institutions of the international society of states such as through serving constitutive and regulative functions. In addition to delineating these institutions of transnational society, the article interrogates the interdependence of these institutions of transnational society and those of international society, as well as their differences and repercussions for world order. The analysis considers how, in conjunction with the contribution of institutions of international society to international order, institutions of transnational society contribute to transnational order. By exploring not only the tensions between but also the complementarities of transnational and interstate institutions, the article both provides a reinterpretation of contemporary world order and helps reveal the potential for its more harmonious operation.
Organizational ecology has attracted growing interest in global governance research in recent years. As a structural theory, however, organizational ecology has overlooked how organizations may shape the organizational environment by their own choices. Bridging the insights of organizational ecology and the study of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), I argue that the organizational choice of specialism (as opposed to generalism) increases the power of NGOs to influence an environmental condition—issue salience—by targeting a small but engaged segment of the public. Focusing on wildlife conservation governance, I collected new comprehensive data on NGOs and issue characteristics (2008–2015). My empirical analysis shows that specialist NGO density is strongly associated with issue salience. I further examined causal processes in the case of pangolin conservation advocacy, in which specialist NGOs first raised issue salience and generalist NGOs followed. The findings suggest a division of labor among NGOs and challenge a conventional view that the power of NGOs is concentrated in a small number of prominent organizations.
Some microfinance institutions (MFIs) can drift from their social mission, generating well-studied effects for their borrowers. We focus on the lesser-known effect of mission drift on the financial return to other stakeholders (employees, government, micro-savers, and banking creditors). Using a sample of 534 MFIs, we calculated the economic value distributed by the MFI to these stakeholders by considering salaries, taxes, and interest paid. We found a negative relationship between average loan size and return to employees (RTE), government, and banking creditors, and a positive relationship between women borrowers and RTE and government. This is explained by the fact that mission-focused MFIs are usually small, labor-intensive institutions with a stable business model. We found a positive relationship between average loan size and return to micro-savers, and a negative relationship between women borrowers and return to micro-savers. The reason is that many mission-focused MFIs do not offer micro-savings, undermining financial inclusion.
The study of companies and other organisations is a classic component of economics. Today, it is an important focus area in the field of institutional economics as well.
Laws are a unique type of primary data: they structure our everyday interactions and are publicly available to all people. How can we assess the law's effect when multiple overlapping and cross‐referencing statutes constrain and incentivize behavior simultaneously? I present a principled method for aggregating the legal rules coded in multiple laws into a single legal institution to help us understand and better characterize complex, interconnected, and sometimes contradictory bundles of legal rules. The method utilizes Institutional Grammar (IG), which scholars have used to code legal language into comparable institutional statements. The method is amenable to any legal topic and is especially appropriate when multiple statutes simultaneously comprise the legal institution in a single jurisdiction. To illustrate, I draw on the laws regulating civil society organizations (CS0s), which offer a valuable and substantively important prism to study legal texts as the cause of social phenomena or the outcome of a political process. I discuss my proposed method in three parts: first, why using IG enhances a coding instrument's validity; second, how an IG‐based instrument allows researchers to scale up coded values of separate laws into a jurisdiction‐level value; finally, I compare techniques for estimating descriptive measures of a jurisdiction's legal institution. 法律是一种独特的原始数据类型:它们构成了我们的日常互动，并且对所有人公开可用。当多个重叠和交叉引用的法规同时约束和激励行为时，我们如何评估法律的效果?我提出一项原则性方法，用于将多个法律中编码的法律规则整合到一个单一的法律制度中，以帮助我们理解和更好地描述复杂的、相互关联的、有时相互矛盾的法律规则集。该方法利用“制度语法”(IG)，后者被学者用于将法律语言编码成可比较的制度声明。该方法适用于任何法律主题，尤其适用于多个法规同时包含单个司法管辖区的法律制度的情况。为阐明这一点，我借鉴了监管公民社会组织的法律，这些法律为研究法律文本作为社会现象的原因或政治进程的结果一事提供了有价值且具有实质性重要意义的视角。我从三个部分探讨所提出的方法:第一，为何使用IG能提高编码工具的有效性；第二，基于IG的工具如何允许研究人员将不同的单个法律的编码值扩大到管辖区层面的值；第三，我比较了一系列技术，后者用于估计司法管辖区法律制度的描述性标准。 Las leyes son un tipo único de datos primarios: estructuran nuestras interacciones cotidianas y están disponibles públicamente para todas las personas. ¿Cómo podemos evaluar el efecto de una ley cuando múltiples estatutos superpuestos y con referencias cruzadas restringen e incentivan el comportamiento simultáneamente? Presento un método basado en principios para agregar las reglas legales codificadas en múltiples leyes en una sola institución legal para ayudarnos a comprender y caracterizar mejor los paquetes de reglas legales complejos, interconectados y, a veces, contradictorios. El método utiliza la gramática institucional (IG), que los académicos han utilizado para codificar el lenguaje legal en declaraciones institucionales comparables. El método se adapta a cualquier tema legal y es especialmente apropiado cuando varios estatutos comprenden simultáneamente la institución legal en una sola jurisdicción. Para ilustrar, me baso en las leyes que regulan las organizaciones de la sociedad civil, las cuales ofrecen un prisma valioso y de importancia sustantiva para estudiar los textos legales como causa de fenómenos sociales o resultado de un proceso político. Discuto mi método propuesto en tres partes: primero, por qué el uso de IG mejora la validez de un instrumento de codificación; segundo, cómo un instrumento basado en IG permite a los investigadores aumentar los valores codificados de leyes separadas en un valor de nivel de jurisdicción; finalmente, comparo técnicas para estimar medidas descriptivas de la institución legal de una jurisdicción.
The bulk of charity regulation in the United States occurs at the state level, yet state‐level charity regulation remains relatively under‐researched within nonprofit scholarship, particularly from a comparative perspective. The complexity and variation in statutory regulation, coupled with the large volume of legal research required to study state‐level charity regulation systematically, has impeded scholarly progress toward a better understanding of the US charitable sector. We address this problem by deriving a state‐level charity regulatory breadth index (RBI) that will enable nonprofit researchers to contextualize state‐level charity research within a broader framework and to incorporate state‐level regulation into analyses across states. Policymakers can also benefit from the ability to benchmark their regulatory regimes against their peers.
In 2018, the Dutch Government proposed to establish an independent international ombudsman, known as the International Ombuds for Humanitarian and Development Aid (IOHDA), to hold non-governmental organizations (NGOs) accountable for their safeguarding and accountability failures, notably the Oxfam GB sexual abuse scandal in Haiti (March 2018) and in the Democratic Republic of Congo (April 2021). While establishing an international ombudsman would fill a regulatory and accountability gap in global governance, there are many legal and logistic challenges, some of which have been identified by the IOHDA proposal itself, that undermine the creation of this brand new body. Besides the legal and logistic challenges outlined in the proposal, this article argues that the IOHDA is unlikely to succeed because of three additional challenges. First, the IOHDA’s scope is too broad and misinterprets the ombudsman’s jurisdiction and traditional role. Second, the IOHDA neglects that existing ombudsman schemes present limitations in enacting accountability and does not learn any lessons from them. Third, the IOHDA lacks support from NGOs, a driving force, and the principal standard-setters for an international accountability mechanism, like the proposed ombudsman. This article provides a series of recommendations to mitigate these three challenges whilst identifying alternative routes to enact NGO accountability.
A growing chorus of critics have called upon transnational nongovernmental organizations (TNGOs) from the Global North to “decolonize” their practices, to “shift the power” to the Global South, and to put an end to “white saviorism” by initiating a variety of significant organizational changes. Despite these repeated calls, the TNGO sector still struggles to reform. Explanations for TNGOs’ ongoing struggles from within the field of international relations have generally centered on TNGOs themselves and the ironies and paradoxes of organizational growth and financial success. This article introduces a different argument that TNGOs’ struggles to adapt in response to their critics are the result of TNGOs’ “nonprofitness.” By virtue of being nonprofit, TNGOs are embedded in an architecture consisting of forms and norms that inherently limit the extent to which they are able to change. Using the construct of the architecture, this article provides a novel account for the challenges that TNGOs confront as they attempt to close the gap between the rhetoric and reality of inclusive and transformational socioeconomic, political, or environmental change.
This study examines the structural and policy obstacles hampering free movement of philanthropic capital across the EU’s ‘sea of generosity’. While free movement of capital is a key element in the EU single market as enshrined in the Treaty of Maastricht, this principle previously focused on the for-profit sphere and efficient markets. In 2009, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) confirmed that the free movement principle also covered philanthropic capital, with Member States being prohibited from restricting philanthropic capital movements and payments across borders. This decision should facilitate cross-border fundraising, investment, and tax-effective giving by both corporates and individuals. Yet, significant regulatory drag hinders the use of fiscal incentives, and to date, proposals for EU-wide policy solutions (e.g. a common public benefit definition) have failed. Using the theoretical construct of regulatory space, we highlight the regulatory space characteristics impacting cross-border philanthropic capital movement. This multi-regulatory space analysis finds that contrasting actions by regulators, disparate national policies and the dominance of tax evasion concerns affect the free movement of philanthropic capital across the EU. We argue EU philanthropy could be expanded if there was greater clarity regarding administrative taxation procedures and support for foreign charities and donors seeking to navigate the straits of comparability.
Environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGOs) play a significant role in contemporary governance. They act as bottom-up advocates while discussing sustainability and environmental issues. They try to engage different stakeholders and society members for common actions. Communication is cited as a very appropriate process for the cooperation and coordination of joint actions. Digital technologies provide new communication possibilities as an e-communication mode
that covers various networks. E-communication is very complex and requires strict management that is usually unaware of for small ENGOs. This study aims to propose a theoretical model of e-communication for enhancing ENGOs communication effectiveness on sustainability issues. A literature analysis was used with a content approach helping to collect components and criteria for the framework. The approach of logical classification and distribution was applied to construct the framework. The framework appeals to the idea of diversification of communication for different
audiences and is based on the e-communication objectives and measurement of messages as the results. The framework can be adapted to the particular sustainability problem such as air pollution, protection of trees, etc.
International non-governmental organizations (INGOs) are increasingly important players in global politics and development. However, they are undergoing significant adaptations as governments worldwide have instituted restrictions to regulate their activities. What explains the various ways in which they respond to these institutional pressures? In our study of INGO responses to a new restrictive law in China, we identify four strategic responses with varying levels of compliance: legal registration, provisional strategy, localization, and exit. The institutional pressures—strategic responses link is influenced by INGOs’ adaptive capacity, which is in turn shaped by an organization’s issue sensitivity, value-add, government ties, and reputational authority. The integrated framework we develop for INGO strategic responses can shed light on state-INGO relations in other countries, many of which are subject to increasingly stringent regulations and a closing political environment.
We develop the concept of the nonprofit data environment as all data collected and reported in a country resulting from law implemented into practice. We map data environments across 20 countries and propose explanations for differences between the information nongovernmental organizations report (collected) and what is made publicly available (reported). Domestic factors including regime type, civil society autonomy, and regulatory quality increase the amount of information collected and released publicly. Exposure to international political forces, including aid flows and globalization, increases the gap, which runs counter to expectations of greater openness with global engagement. Our findings point to the need for a better understanding of patterns in non-profit organizations (NPOs) data environments; while all governments collect information, countries with similar legal codes have widely varying data environments. This matters for NPOs as their ability to learn and improve depends on access to quality data and coincides with a feared global political backlash.
Why and to what extent are democratic states, including long-standing, consolidated democratic states, adopting legislation that restricts the ability of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) to operate autonomous from government control? This phenomenon is common and expected in authoritarian countries, but surprising in the context of democracies, which have historically championed and funded an independent civil society. This paper maps the full scope and spread of the so-called'closing space phenomenon'within the world's strongest democratic states. This phenomenon has been extensively mapped in the context of non-democracies but, until now, not in democracies, which alters the conventional wisdom about why this global trend has gained traction and momentum since the turn of the twenty-first century.
Recent assessments of relations between states and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) claim a global wave of state crackdowns, raising questions about the continued authority and influence of NGOs. The works reviewed here challenge the idea of a pattern of global conflict, demonstrating a range of ways in which states work with, through, and alongside NGOs. They also demonstrate that the diversity of NGO–state relations can make it difficult to generalize about these interactions across national contexts. One way to reconceptualize these relationships may be to focus on the normative commitments that states and NGOs do or do not share. Conflictual and cooperative NGO–state dynamics emerge from the many and sometimes contradictory liberal values that enabled the rise of NGOs. NGOs can embody three liberal values: visions of civil society can emphasize political freedoms, market-based visions of private action, or universalism. States may embrace some of these values while rejecting others. Thus, while the era of the unimpeded rise of NGOs may have come to an end, the shifting political spaces for NGOs do not spell an end to their influence.
How do the post-Soviet countries differ in their regulatory approaches to organized civil society? This study provides a systematic and comprehensive assessment of relative differences and similarities in the regulation of civil society organizations in seven post-Soviet countries: Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, and Ukraine. Empirically, the study offers a regulatory index that makes it possible to map and compare relative differences and similarities between these countries’ regulatory approaches to civil society. The findings show that post-Soviet authoritarian countries do not use similar levels of repression against organized civil society. The study provides an account of how different political configurations explain relative differences in the extent to which post-Soviet authoritarian countries repress their respective civil societies.
The quantitative data sources for NGO scholars are increasing, introducing new possibilities for our understanding of the global NGO population. The most frequently used data sources tend to privilege larger NGOs located in more politically open countries. We highlight two developments. First, we introduce a new Global Nonprofit Registry of Data Sources (GRNDS) dataset. GRNDS documents the information that governments collect and release to reveal variations in the data environment. Second, new sources of information from social media and donation platforms avoid the filtering and curation of reports from nonprofit regulators. These include Twitter, Google Trends, and new data from #GivingTuesday. Together, this richer information on cross-national variation in reporting and quickly available digital data should help research build a richer picture of the global NGO sector.
National political cultures can have a powerful effect on transnational NGOs, and Nelson demonstrates that even NGOs that represent transnational faith traditions express themselves quite differently in four wealthy donor societies. Four “families” of faith-based organizations (FBO) with affiliates in the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, and Japan are examined, representing Roman Catholicism, mainline Protestantism, Reform Judaism, and evangelical Christianity. Members of each family embrace some common principles and agendas, but their advocacy appears more strongly shaped by national political cultures than by universal teaching. British and German Protestant and Catholic NGOs, for example, campaign on climate, biofuels, and corporate land purchases; their US counterparts rarely mention such issues.
Gaining an audience on social media is an important goal of contemporary policy advocacy. While previous studies demonstrate that advocacy-dedicated nonprofit organizations—what we refer to as advocacy groups—use different social media tools, we still know little about what specific audiences advocacy groups set out to target on social media, and whether those audiences actually engage with these groups. This study fills this gap, deploying survey and digital trace data from Twitter over a 12-month period for the Australian case. We show that while groups target a variety of audiences online, there are differences between group types in their strategic objectives and the extent to which particular audiences engage with them. Business groups appear to target elite audiences more often compared with citizen and professional groups, whereas citizen groups receive more online engagement from mass and peer audiences.
This article analyses how and to what extent state regulation of civil society organisations (CSOs) have resulted in elitisation, i.e., the process of obtaining elite status within and beyond civil society. This is studied in the context of emerging democracy in Indonesia and shrinking civic space in Cambodia. Combining Bourdieu’s concepts of field and elite with strategic action fields, the article uses data from interviews with civil society leaders. It finds different patterns. In Indonesia, elitisation occurs through a process of CSO formalisation and bureaucratisation, with elites gaining legitimacy owing to their formal offices. As a result, competition for formal positions intensifies: This is particularly notable among national CSO leaders, who may shift their activities to the grassroots level to seek further empowerment and other capitals to legitimise their elite status, facilitate the rise of leaders in existing fields, and create pluralistic forms of elites. Regulations have also resulted in the marginalisation of non-formal elites and shifted the locus of legitimacy from activism to formalism. Meanwhile, in Cambodia, regulatory formalisation and bureaucratisation has not only reduced the space for elite competition and level of competitiveness, but also created ‘most dominant actors’ or ‘hyper-elites’ who are loyal to and support the regime and its priorities while punishing those who do not. This has resulted in a monolithic form of elites.
The work of non-profit organisations (NPOs) in non-democratic country contexts tends to be judged on their contribution to the democratisation process rather than the activities they undertake.
This neglects the potential impact NPOs have on societies within such contexts. In this study, we highlight that NPOs can influence public policy deployment in the Russian Federation even if they cannot affect public policy itself. By operationalising the very restrictions placed upon them, NPOs use their relationships with the state to effect change within their immediate environment and scope of their operational remit, even if they cannot hold authorities to account or influence policy development. The key to this is strong organising capabilities and engagement with the Russian public. We reflect on the implications of our findings to the understanding of civil society development and NPOs in Russia and in other similar non-democratic contexts.
This article explores origins, structure and functions of repatriate organisations created by Kazakh return migrants in Kazakhstan. The article examines the factors that stimulate Kazakh repatriates to self-organise, analyses the functions of repatriate organisations, and investigates their role in the integration of Kazakh repatriates in their historical homeland. It argues that, although repatriate organisations have been indispensable to the integration of Kazakh repatriates, they cannot be considered as a viable social movement. The political opportunity structure approach is used here to explain the limited ability of repatriate organisations to become a successful collective actor.
The growing pressure for service quality has led to an increase in the dissemination of quality models in nonprofit human service organizations. In spite of this, little is known about their implementation. The present study therefore examines how quality management directives imposed by public authorities affect the adoption and use of quality measurement systems under different sets of conditions. Key findings, based on survey data from 536 human service nonprofits in Switzerland, suggest that external quality requirements foster the adoption of measurement systems to the greatest degree, but simultaneously reduce their actual utilization for service improvement. The strength of these effects is contingent on the organizations' resources and the quality of indicators. Managers' commitment to quality measurement shows the strongest effect on the use of quality measurement systems. These findings and the implications for future research and practice will be discussed.
Neo-corporatist relations consist of a stabilized institutional exchange between government, civil society and other social spheres. Current research suggests a destabilization of this relationship by ongoing governance developments, especially through the competitive pressures of NPM-style reforms. This article presents survey research of 339 civil society organizations in the neo-corporatist context of Belgium. We find little evidence of increased marketization, contrary to existing literature. In fact, our data suggest that neo-corporatist relations, at least in terms of formalized exchange, are rather stable, although the nature of specific institutions (such as the nature of public funding) appears to shift.
A wave of legislative and regulatory crackdown on international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs) has constricted the legal environment for foreign advocacy groups interested in influencing domestic and global policy. Although the legal space for advocacy is shrinking, many INGOs have continued their work and found creative ways to adapt to these restrictions, sometimes even reshaping the regulatory environments of their target countries in their favor. In this article, I explore what enables INGOs to cope with and reshape their regulatory environments. I bridge international relations and interest group studies to examine the interaction between INGO resource configurations and institutional arrangements. I argue that the interaction between resources and institutions provide organizations with ‘programmatic flexibility’ that enables them to adjust their strategies without changing their core mission. I illustrate this argument with case studies of Article 19 and AMERA International, and demonstrate how organizations with high programmatic flexibility can navigate regulations and shape policy in their target country, while those without this flexibility are shut out of policy discussions and often the target country itself. I conclude by exploring how the interaction between internal characteristics and institutional environments shapes and constrains the effects of interest groups in global governance.
Global governance institutions (GGIs) increasingly rely upon NGO involvement for expertise, promotion of rules and standards, and democratic legitimacy. Yet NGO participation in GGIs is unevenly distributed by country of origin. This paper examines patterns of NGO participation in GGIs, and how participation is shaped by incentives and pressures at global and national levels. First, we map NGO participation by country of origin across 42 GGIs based on the roles that GGIs grant to NGOs and by variations in domestic conditions of income level and political regime type. Second, to delve more deeply into domestic factors, we provide an exploratory statistical regression based on NGO participation in two major GGIs, the UN Global Compact on corporate social responsibility and the UNFCCC Conferences of Parties on climate change. We find evidence that participation patterns reflect both the varying institutional design of GGIs and NGO capacity linked to domestic conditions. We observe that NGOs with constrained capacity due to domestic factors gravitate toward GGIs that offer the most significant roles for NGOs, with the greatest opportunity to influence policy. We suggest that domestic civil society factors beyond level of economic development and regime type shape NGO participation at the global level. Analysis of this wide-ranging set of GGIs provides more general confirmation of patterns of NGO engagement in global governance previously identified in studies limited to particular issue sectors or cases.
A growing number of researchers study the laws that regulate the third sector and caution the legal expansion is a global crackdown on civil society. This article asks two questions of a thoroughly researched form of legal repression: restrictions on foreign aid to CSOs. First, do institutional differences affect the adoption of these laws? Second, do laws that appear different in content also have different causes? A two-stage analysis addresses these questions using data from 138 countries from 1993 to 2012. The first analysis studies the ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and constitution-level differences regarding international treaties’ status. The study then uses competing risk models to assess whether the factors that predict adoption vary across law types. The study finds that given ICCPR ratification, constitutions that privilege treaties above ordinary legislation create an institutional context that makes adoption less likely. Competing risk models suggest different laws have different risk factors, which implies these laws are more conceptually distinct than equivalent. Incorporating these findings in future work will strengthen the theory, methods, and concepts used to understand the legal approaches that regulate civil society.
Scholarship and practitioners interested in civil society organizations (CSOs) around the world have drawn attention to the growing set of laws—both restrictive and permissive—governing CSO activities. To date, however, there have been limited efforts to typologize these regulations which hinders the ability to analyze their emergence and effects. This article seeks to move scholarship toward a coherent framework by first, introducing a broad typology of governance, formation, operations , and resources provisions that allows for a systematic study of CSO laws and policies across contexts; and second, proposing four ideal-types of regulatory regimes, rigid-conservatism, bureaucratic-illiberalism, permissionless-association , and legitimized-pluralism . These regulatory regimes are political institutions that consist of multiple laws and constitutional protections that govern and protect civil society. The article theorizes the effect of each ideal-type regulatory regime on CSOs’ organizational ecology. To provide a concrete example, I apply the typology to the case of Kenya to show how its regulatory regime has changed incrementally over time. Methodologically, the article uses an iterative, inductive review and analysis of academic articles, book chapters, and practitioner reports contributing to our understanding of the laws and policies that regulate CSOs, or what I call CSO regulatory regimes .
Most studies examining gender and development programs in international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs) consider how these organizations construct global policy agendas, or how such policies are implemented in local contexts. However, INGOs originate in specific countries. Drawing on the varieties of capitalism literature, this article analyzes the impact of “national gender imaginaries” on gender and development programs implemented by INGOs in Cambodia. Based on 43 in-depth interviews, I argue that INGOs from Scandinavia, the United States, and South Korea, informed by different gender imaginaries, pursue different ways of promoting women in development. Local Cambodian nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), aware of this variation in national models among INGOs, employ distinct strategies to appeal to donors while adapting the models to the Cambodian context.
How significant were popular mobilizations like the colour revolutions and the Arab Spring in raising legal regulatory barriers for non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in Eastern Europe and the Middle East? How do different types of nondemocratic regimes approach NGO laws and state-society relations? This paper investigates and provides a comparative analysis of the NGO regulatory environment of nondemocratic regimes in Eastern Europe and the Middle East from 1995 to 2013, based on an original dataset measuring the severity of laws for the registration and operation of civic groups. We examine whether the uprisings instigated the passage of legal initiatives designed to curb NGO activism in each region, and assess whether patterns emerge based on differences in nondemocratic regime types. We determined that while NGO regulations have largely increased in Eastern Europe, they have actually declined in the Middle East on average. Moreover, greater NGO regulations exist in authoritarian and closed regimes that approach civil society by erecting clear legal blockades to civic activism. In contrast, hybrid regimes employ more-intricate legal strategies in order to raise the costs of entering and working in the NGO sector without necessarily overtly stifling civic activism.
While they are often lumped together as one sector, nonprofit organizations represent diverse activities and objectives in the policy process. It is surprising that given this diversity, there are limited studies about the “multiple realities” that exist within a “nonprofit sector”. This article examines the multiple realities found among nonprofit organizations. It explores how government creates regulatory policy targeting nonprofit organizations and how nonprofit organizations interpret and respond using the case of Ecuador in South America. The article asks: What do regulatory policies do and what target populations do they create? How do different nonprofit organizations interpret these policies? Given the answers to these questions, what are the political and social consequences for the development of civil society? Through an interpretive framework, the article contributes to the literature about how government creates target populations through policy, how policies act upon different nonprofits in different ways and how they interpret and respond to policy. The research considers what this might mean for organized civil society and development in general.
In this thesis, I consider the trend of increasing backlash against civil society around the world. I focus on Ecuador and Peru, both democratic countries that have placed restrictions on NGOs receiving foreign funding. I examine both countries in terms of changes over time in the regulatory environment for NGOs. I ask: What factors motivated these changes? I analyze the countries with respect to three possible explanations: defending sovereignty against foreign powers, stifling internal dissent, and seeking rents. In answering this question, I draw upon the laws in question, press releases, and news reports as well as interviews with NGO personnel and government regulators, among other sources. I conclude that while there is evidence for the stifling dissent explanation in both countries, there is no evidence for the defending sovereignty explanation in Peru and only circumstantial evidence for it in Ecuador. In Ecuador, there is contradictory evidence for the rent-seeking explanation while there is clearer evidence for it in Peru.
This study seeks to evaluate whether interorganizational trust and interpersonal trust influence the nature of state control in Brazilian public/non-profit partnerships (PNPs) by considering the social organization model with a non-profit partner that did not evolve organically from civil society as an equal and interdependent partner but instead was engineered by the state. We conducted qualitative research on two PNPs and analysed their historical trajectories through participant observation, documentary analysis and semi-structured interviews with the state and non-profit partners as well as other actors involved indirectly in the PNPs. Our findings call into question the assumption of current studies that trust tends to be built over time and reveal that PNPs embedded in state-dominant and low-social-capital contexts are more vulnerable to the effects of interpersonal trust. This vulnerability influences the volatile patterns of the PNPs’ trajectories and leads to strong informal state-partner control as reflected by PNP disruptions and lower levels of interorganizational trust.
Communities of civil society organizations are characterized by substantial volatility, as new organizations are continuously established and old ones are regularly disbanded. This article aims to improve our understanding of the dynamic nature of civil society by focusing on a particular aspect of organizational maintenance, namely, mortality anxiety. Building upon previous work that assesses actual and perceived survival chances of civil society organizations, we examine how inter-organizational competition, ties with public authorities, and the internal institutionalization of civil society organizations shape how these groups assess their survival chances. Our results demonstrate that high levels of inter-organizational competition and a strong reliance on government funding significantly increase mortality anxiety. Furthermore, they highlight the importance of a professionalized and internally differentiated structure. We rely on survey data and focus on the case of Belgium, in this way providing a first assessment of mortality anxiety in a neo-corporatist political system.
The scope of the participation of civil society organizations (CSOs) in providing public services as well as the models and formats of implementing State–CSO partnerships have varied both in sectorial terms and from a historical perspective. The discussion on State–CSO partnerships in service delivery has recently produced many studies, especially related to public management reform agenda, although many ideas based on public governance have appeared in recent years within the Brazilian context. This study features a historical analysis of the State–CSO partnerships in three different areas: AIDS, social assistance, and culture, and seeks to identify the main characteristics of each management model (bureaucratic, managerial, and new public governance), based on an analysis of sectorial norms produced by the federal government to regulate these relationships.
The second volume of the CIVICUS Global Survey of the State of Civil Society offers a wide-ranging analysis of key issues facing civil society worldwide with contributions from prominent researchers and civil society practitioners. Comprising 24 chapters, the book draws on the information collected by the CIVICUS Civil Society Index project in more than 45 countries to explore issues such as civil society’s accountability, its relations to the state and corporate sector and its role in governance and development. It also includes regional overviews of the state of civil society in different continents. By bringing together a diversity of perspectives and themes, this book offers one of the most comprehensive and engaging analyses of civil society worldwide.
Recent research has usefully documented the contribution that nonprofit organizations make to “social capital” and to the economic and political development it seems to foster. Because of a gross lack of basic comparative data, however, the question of what it is that allows such organizations to develop remains far from settled. This article seeks to remedy this by testing five existing theories of the nonprofit sector against data assembled on eight countries as part of the Johns Hopkins Comparative Nonprofit Sector Project. The five theories are: (a) government failure/market failure theory; (b) supply-side theory; (c) trust theories; (d) welfare state theory; and (e) interdependence theory. The article finds none of these theories adequate to explain the variations among countries in either the size, the composition, or the financing of the nonprofit sector. On this basis it suggests a new theoretical approach to explaining patterns of nonprofit development among countries—the “social origins” approach—which focuses on broader social, political, and economic relationships. Using this theory, the article identifies four “routes” of third-sector development (the liberal, the social democratic, the corporatist, and the statist), each associated with a particular constellation of class relationships and pattern of state-society relations. The article then tests this theory against the eight-country data and finds that it helps make sense of anomalies left unexplained by the prevailing theories.
'Standards' are central mechanisms of international governance, but have different roles in various circumstances. These can be analyzed in terms of a simple typology.One key distinction is analytic: contrasting the Prisoners' Dilemma structure of traditional Pigovian externalities with the Coordination structure of network externalities. The second distinction is substantive: contrasting physical or technological externalities with externalities that arise in the creation of public policy. The four resulting circumstances are typically addressed by alternative governance arrangements: varying combinations of private and public governance – according to the respective interests and competencies of the two spheres – and varying levels of governance – national, regional or global – according to the scope of the problem and the capacity of institutions. Our analysis of these choices is primarily positive, but the comparative institutional framework we develop is equally useful for addressing the associated normative question – how should international standards be set?
Over the last ten years or so, an important new approach to the study of organizations has emerged within economics. It is perhaps best characterized by three elements: a contractual perspective on organizational relationships, a theoretical focus on hierarchical control, and formal analysis via principal-agent models. This paper provides political scientists with an overview of the "new economics of organization" and explores its implications for the study of public bureaucracy. So far, positive political theory has not contributed much to our understanding of public bureaucracy. In part this is due to the unsympathetic treatment that rational modeling and most other modes of quantitative analysis have long received from students of public administration. The other side of the coin, however, is that positive theorists have not made much of an effort to develop theories of bureaucracy. Their concerns have centered around two basic mechanisms of social choice, voting and markets, and they have devoted little systematic attention to a third mechanism that is clearly important for understanding how societies and other aggregates make collective decisions. This third and relatively unexplored mechanism is hierarchy. Movement toward a positive theory of hierarchies would fill a serious gap in the social choice literature, while at the same time making a theoretical contribution that strikes to the essence of public bureaucracy, indeed of all organizations. In fact, significant steps toward a positive theory of hierarchies have very recently been taken-but by economists, not political scientists. In small numbers, of course, economists made contributions to the study of public bureaucracy some time ago with the pioneering works of Downs (1967), Tullock (1965), and Niskanen (1971). But this new wave of theoretical work is different. It is already a large, complex body of literature that is the focus of innovation and excitement among a growing number of economists, and it reflects an unusual degree of theoretical coherence and cumulative effort. Work in this tradition tends to receive orientation from a distinctive economic approach to the analysis of organizations, an approach perhaps best characterized by three elements: a contractual perspective on organizational relationships, a focus on hierarchical control, and formal analysis via principal-agent models. This approach has emerged from recent attempts to move beyond the neoclassical theory of the firm, which assumes away all organizational considerations, to a theory of economic organizations that can explain why firms, corporations, and other enterprises behave as they do. Propo
Purpose
– The purpose of this paper is to discuss the emergence of social enterprise in Japan by looking at the predominant types of social enterprise in the country, their industries and target groups, their challenges and strength.
Design/methodology/approach
– The paper adopts an analytical approach, building on previous work; it is grounded on the social construction theory, which has the advantage of apprehending social phenomena from different viewpoints.
Findings
– The study identifies three different conceptual approaches to explain the emergence of social enterprise in Japan. It then demonstrates that there exists a link between the approaches identified and the emerging social enterprise types in the country. Furthermore, it discusses the strategies used by those emerging social enterprise types in choosing their particular legal forms (in the absence of a specific legal form for social enterprise in Japan) and shows how this choice is normally determined by the constraints associated with those organisational forms. From this perspective, the paper outlines the major contemporary issues affecting social enterprises in Japan and focuses on two key challenges: the systems of regulation and the financial viability. In discussing the financial challenge it presents the dual attitude of the Japanese government towards the development of the social enterprise sector.
Originality/value
– This paper builds up the theoretical foundations for the understanding of the social enterprise sector in Japan and it will stimulate further researches on the future development of the sector.
This paper asks why and how institutions change. How does an institution persist in a changing environment and how do processes that it unleashes lead to its own demise? The paper shows that the game theoretic notion of self-enforcing equilibrium and the historical institutionalist focus on process are both inadequate to answer these questions. Building on a game theoretic foundation, but responding to the critique of it by historical institutionalists, the paper introduces the concepts of quasi-parameters and self-reinforcement. With these concepts, and building on repeated game theory, a dynamic approach to institutions is offered, one that can account for endogenous change (and stability) of institutions. Contextual accounts of formal governing institutions in early modern Europe and the informal institution of cleavage structure in the contemporary world provide illustrations of the approach.
This paper analyzes, from a cross-national perspective, publicized incidents of alleged wrongdoing on the part of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Data were derived from daily, weekly, or monthly newspapers and special nonprofit newsletters accessible through websites. Analysis of media reports of scandals involving NGOs was conducted to identify issues and trends in governance and management problems associated with this sector. The paper focuses on NGOs involved in the financing or delivery of health and human services. After highlighting some of the precedent-setting cases of NGO improprieties in the United States during the 1990s, prominent global cases of wrongdoing during the period 1998–2000 are reviewed. The underlying problems that allowed these cases to occur and their implications regarding NGO credibility and public trust are identified, and strategic options for enhancing accountability presented.
This article examines the regulation of international non-governmental organizations (INGOs) in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, and Japan to answer two questions. First, to what extent has the domestic institutional context facing INGOs changed following dramatic attacks by transnational terrorists on Western liberal democracies? Second, what effect has new counterterrorism legislation had on the organizational and strategic decisions of INGOs, and thus their locations and operations, since 2001? We argue that formal regulations on non-profits have changed less than expected, given widespread alarm about counterterrorism legislation in non-profit communities around the world. However, a new climate of uncertainty has hampered INGOs ability to adjust appropriately to their new institutional environment. Counterterrorism regulations have thus generated unintended consequences, including inefficiencies, redistribution of resources, and self-censorship that may outweigh the benefits for national security given the limited nature of much of the regulatory change.
Describes the rapid economic growth of the Republic of Korea since World War Two, which is seen as an example of "late industrialisation', achieved most successfully by Japan, but also occurring to some extent in Brazil, India, Mexico and Turkey. The author assesses the process of industrialisation, education, and technology transfer, and demonstrates the ability of the Korean economy to repay borrowed capital as a result of rapid productivity increases, thereby avoiding the debt problems of many other developing nations. Finally, future economic challenges are considered, with the conclusion that late industrialising countries cannot sustain their position in the long term, due to threats of new technological innovations from more advanced economies, and of lower wage costs from less advanced economies. -P.Hardiman
In Borders among Activists, Sarah S. Stroup challenges the notion that political activism has gone beyond borders and created a global or transnational civil society. Instead, at the most globally active, purportedly cosmopolitan groups in the world-international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs)-organizational practices are deeply tied to national environments, creating great diversity in the way these groups organize themselves, engage in advocacy, and deliver services. Stroup offers detailed profiles of these "varieties of activism" in the United States, Britain, and France. These three countries are the most popular bases for INGOs, but each provides a very different environment for charitable organizations due to differences in legal regulations, political opportunities, resources, and patterns of social networks. Stroup's comparisons of leading American, British, and French INGOs-Care, Oxfam, Médicins sans Frontières, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and FIDH-reveal strong national patterns in INGO practices, including advocacy, fund-raising, and professionalization. These differences are quite pronounced among INGOs in the humanitarian relief sector, and are observable, though less marked, among human rights INGOs. Stroup finds that national origin helps account for variation in the "transnational advocacy networks" that have received so much attention in international relations. For practitioners, national origin offers an alternative explanation for the frequently lamented failures of INGOs in the field: INGOs are not inherently dysfunctional, but instead remain disconnected because of their strong roots in very different national environments.
Advocacy organizations are viewed as actors motivated primarily by principled beliefs. This volume outlines a new agenda for the study of advocacy organizations, proposing a model of NGOs as collective actors that seek to fulfil normative concerns and instrumental incentives, face collective action problems, and compete as well as collaborate with other advocacy actors. The analogy of the firm is a useful way of studying advocacy actors because individuals, via advocacy NGOs, make choices which are analytically similar to those that shareholders make in the context of firms. The authors view advocacy NGOs as special types of firms that make strategic choices in policy markets which, along with creating public goods, support organizational survival, visibility, and growth. Advocacy NGOs' strategy can therefore be understood as a response to opportunities to supply distinct advocacy products to well-defined constituencies, as well as a response to normative or principled concerns.
Andreas Ortmann and Mark Schlesinger, in their article “Trust, Repute, and the Role of Nonprofit Enterprise,” examine what they term “the trust hypothesis,” namely “the claim that asymmetric information in the markets for certain goods and services can explain the existence of nonprofit enterprise in those markets” (this volume). There is much that is sensible in what they say, and they have performed a valuable service in pulling together some of the more recent empirical literature on asymmetric information in markets heavily populated with nonprofit firms. I have some concerns, however, both with respect to the authors’ formulation of the trust hypothesis and with their approach to its verification.
The Special Nonprofit Organization Law that Japan passed in 1998 demands attention as a shift in state-civil society relations in a nation long characterized as a "strong state." Removing many impediments civil-society organizations faced, the law significantly expands the scope of groups that qualify for legal status and curtails stifling bureaucratic supervision. Changed electoral institutions altered incentives for politicians and produced this law. It is also part of broader changes-including an increase in Diet members' bills, a move toward a Freedom of Information Act, decentralization, and deregulation-in Japanese society and politics, all striking at centralized bureaucratic power.
Nongovernmental organizations (NGOS) both lobby states and work within and across societies to advance their interests. These latter efforts are generally ignored by students of world politics because they do not directly involve governments. A study of transnational environmental activist groups (TEAGs) such as Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, and World Wildlife Fund demonstrates that NGO societal efforts indeed shape widespread behavior throughout the world. TEAGs work through transnational social, economic, and cultural networks to shift standards of good conduct, change corporate practices, and empower local communities. This type of practice involves “world civic politics.” That is, TEAGs influence widespread behavior by politicizing global civil society—that slice of collective life which exists above the individual and below the state yet across national boundaries. This article examines the activity of world civic politics as practiced by environmental activists and evaluates its relevance for the study of NGOs and world politics in general.
This article raises the question whether corporate tax policies in Italy and the United Kingdom have been changed by the emergence of an embryonic tax regime at the European Union (EU) level. The author argues that Europeanization can occur both directly, when domestic policy is constrained by the implementation of EU directives, and indirectly, when policy makers conceive of a domestic issue in European frames of references and modify public policy, thus producing policy change. Indirect Europeanization focuses on how European policy paradigms and ideas are transmitted into the national policy process. The author finds evidence of indirect Europeanization for the United Kingdom but not for Italy. Macro-administrative variables and national attitudes do not perform well in the explanation of Europeanization. Insights provided by the literature on knowledge utilization are useful instead: The relationship between European integration and domestic policies appears to be mediated by the cognitive structure of public policy.
Recent scholars have broadened the study of transnational relations, once limited to political economy, to include contentious international politics. This is a refreshing trend, but most of them leap directly from globalization or some other such process to transnational social movements and thence to a global civil society. In addition, they have so far failed to distinguish among movements, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and transnational networks and do not adequately specify their relations with states and international institutions. In particular, few mechanisms are proposed to link domestic actors to transnational ones and to states and international institutions. This paper argues that mass-based transnational social movements are hard to construct, are difficult to maintain, and have very different relations to states and international institutions than more routinized international NGOs or activist networks. These latter forms may be encouraged both by states and international institutions and by the growth of a cosmopolitan class of transnational activists. Rather than being the antipodes of transnational contention, international institutions offer resources, opportunities, and incentives for the formation of actors in transnational politics. If transnational social movements form, it will be through a second-stage process of domestication of international conflict.
List of contributors Preface 1. The socialization of international human rights norms into domestic practices: introduction Thomas Risse and Kathryn Sikkink 2. Transnational activism and political change in Kenya and Uganda Hans Peter Schmitz 3. The long and winding road: international norms and domestic political change in South Africa David Black 4. Changing discourse: transnational advocacy networks in Tunisia and Morocco Sieglinde Granzer 5. Linking the unlinkable? International norms and nationalism in Indonesia and the Philippines Anja Jetschke 6. International norms and domestic politics in Chile and Guatemala Stephen C. Ropp and Kathryn Sikkink 7. The Helsinki accords and political change in Eastern Europe Daniel C. Thomas 8. International human rights norms and domestic change: conclusions Thomas Risse and Stephen C. Ropp List of references Index.
Geoffrey Garrett challenges the conventional wisdom about the domestic effects of the globalization of markets in the industrial democracies: the erosion of national autonomy and the demise of leftist alternatives to the free market. He demonstrates that globalization has strengthened the relationship between the political power of the left and organized labour and economic policies that reduce market-generated inequalities of risk and wealth. Moreover, macroeconomic outcomes in the era of global markets have been as good or better in strong left-labour regimes ('social democratic corporatism') as in other industrial countries. Pessimistic visions of the inexorable dominance of capital over labour or radical autarkic and nationalist backlashes against markets are significantly overstated. Electoral politics have not been dwarfed by market dynamics as social forces. Globalized markets have not rendered immutable the efficiency-equality trade-off.
Examines the role that institutions, defined as the humanly devised constraints that shape human interaction, play in economic performance and how those institutions change and how a model of dynamic institutions explains the differential performance of economies through time. Institutions are separate from organizations, which are assemblages of people directed to strategically operating within institutional constraints. Institutions affect the economy by influencing, together with technology, transaction and production costs. They do this by reducing uncertainty in human interaction, albeit not always efficiently. Entrepreneurs accomplish incremental changes in institutions by perceiving opportunities to do better through altering the institutional framework of political and economic organizations. Importantly, the ability to perceive these opportunities depends on both the completeness of information and the mental constructs used to process that information. Thus, institutions and entrepreneurs stand in a symbiotic relationship where each gives feedback to the other. Neoclassical economics suggests that inefficient institutions ought to be rapidly replaced. This symbiotic relationship helps explain why this theoretical consequence is often not observed: while this relationship allows growth, it also allows inefficient institutions to persist. The author identifies changes in relative prices and prevailing ideas as the source of institutional alterations. Transaction costs, however, may keep relative price changes from being fully exploited. Transaction costs are influenced by institutions and institutional development is accordingly path-dependent. (CAR)
We modestly challenge Baumgartner and Leech’s (1998) very pessimistic assessment of the state of interest group research by arguing that there has been a rich collaboration of theory and data during the 1990s, which at least points toward a new and more coherent theoretical perspective on interest representation, and one largely indigenous to political science. With some trepidation given its checkered history, we label this perspective as a neopluralist view. We explore this developing approach in three steps. We first provide a broad outline of three distinct approaches to the study of interest representation, identifying how each has understood the various stages on which organized interests have attracted the attention of scholars. We then identify six attributes of the emerging neopluralist approach that distinguish it from prior work on interest representation. Finally, we consider the appropriateness of our proposed neopluralist label and what must be done to further develop the neopluralist perspective.
From the Publisher:In recent years, debate on the state's economic role has too often devolved into diatribes against intervention. Peter Evans questions such simplistic views, offering a new vision of why state involvement works in some cases and produces disasters in others. To illustrate, he looks at how state agencies, local entrepreneurs, and transnational corporations shaped the emergence of computer industries in Brazil, India, and Korea during the seventies and eighties. Evans starts with the idea that states vary in the way they are organized and tied to society. In some nations, like Zaire, the state is predatory, ruthlessly extracting and providing nothing of value in return. In others, like Korea, it is developmental, promoting industrial transformation. In still others, like Brazil and India, it is in-between, sometimes helping, sometimes hindering. Evans's years of comparative research on the successes and failures of state involvement in the process of industrialization have here been crafted into a persuasive and entertaining work, which demonstrates that successful state action requires an understanding of its own limits, a realistic relationship to the global economy, and the combination of coherent internal organization and close links to society that Evans calls "embedded autonomy."
This research Note has two complementary theoretical objectives. First, we shall attempt to place the form of interest representation and the involvement of interest groups in policy formation known as corporatism – or as democratic, societal, liberal or neo-corporatism – in a broader political context: is corporatism systematically linked with other democratic institutions and processes? Secondly, we shall try to fill a gap in the theory of consensus democracy. This theory holds that types of party, electoral, executive and legislative systems occur in distinct clusters, but it fails to link interest group systems to these clusters.
The nature of the relationship between state and nonprofit organisations in Japan is usually described in one of two ways. It is either disparaged as an example of co-optation and state domination, with nonprofit organisations always having been the subservient partner, or lauded as the apotheosis of co-operation and interdependence. By focusing on the historical background of the welfare system in Japan, and particularly on the legal framework in which the nonprofit sector has developed, this paper attempts to explain how each has influenced the other and highlights key factors which may have been underestimated or misinterpreted in the past.
Transnational public-private partnerships (PPPs) have become a popular theme in International Relations (IR) research. Such partnerships constitute a hybrid type of governance, in which nonstate actors co-govern along with state actors for the provision of collective goods, and thereby adopt governance functions that have formerly been the sole authority of sovereign states. Their recent proliferation is an expression of the contemporary reconfiguration of authority in world politics that poses essential questions on the effectiveness and the legitimacy of global governance. In this article, we critically survey the literature on transnational PPPs with respect to three central issues: Why do transnational PPPs emerge, under what conditions are they effective, and under what conditions are they legitimate governance instruments? We point to weaknesses of current research on PPPs and suggest how these weaknesses can be addressed. We argue that the application of IR theories and compliance theories in particular opens up the possibility for systematic comparative research that is necessary to obtain conclusive knowledge about the emergence, effectiveness, and legitimacy of transnational PPPs. Furthermore, the article introduces the concept of complex performance to capture possible unintended side effects of PPPs and their implications on global governance.
Examines the role that institutions, defined as the humanly devised constraints that shape human interaction, play in economic performance and how those institutions change and how a model of dynamic institutions explains the differential performance of economies through time. Institutions are separate from organizations, which are assemblages of people directed to strategically operating within institutional constraints. Institutions affect the economy by influencing, together with technology, transaction and production costs. They do this by reducing uncertainty in human interaction, albeit not always efficiently. Entrepreneurs accomplish incremental changes in institutions by perceiving opportunities to do better through altering the institutional framework of political and economic organizations. Importantly, the ability to perceive these opportunities depends on both the completeness of information and the mental constructs used to process that information. Thus, institutions and entrepreneurs stand in a symbiotic relationship where each gives feedback to the other. Neoclassical economics suggests that inefficient institutions ought to be rapidly replaced. This symbiotic relationship helps explain why this theoretical consequence is often not observed: while this relationship allows growth, it also allows inefficient institutions to persist. The author identifies changes in relative prices and prevailing ideas as the source of institutional alterations. Transaction costs, however, may keep relative price changes from being fully exploited. Transaction costs are influenced by institutions and institutional development is accordingly path-dependent. (CAR)
In this article we examine how information problems can cause agency slippages and lead to governance failures in nonprofit organizations. Drawing on the principal–agent literature, we provide a theoretical account of an institutional mechanism, namely, voluntary regulation programs, to mitigate such slippages. These programs seek to impose obligations on their participants regarding internal governance and use of resources. By joining these programs, nonprofit organizations seek to differentiate themselves from nonparticipants and signal to their principals that they are deploying resources as per the organizational mandate. If principals are assured that agency slippages are lower in program participants, they might be more likely to provide the participants with resources to deliver goods and services to their target populations. However, regulatory programs for nonprofit organizations are of variable quality and, in some cases, could be designed to obscure rather than reveal information. We outline an analytical framework to differentiate the credible clubs from the “charity washes.” A focus on the institutional architecture of these programs can help to predict their efficacy in reducing agency problems.
Competition to attract foreign direct investment (FDI) creates opportunities for multinational enterprises (MNEs) to diffuse corporate management practices from their countries-of-origin (home countries) to countries hosting their foreign operations. We examine conditions under which MNEs transfer corporate environmental practices from home countries to host countries. Our focus is on ISO 14001, the most widely adopted voluntary environmental program in the world. We examine inward FDI stocks and ISO 14001 adoption levels for a panel of 98 countries, and a subset of 74 developing countries, for the period 1996–2002. We find support for the country-of-origin argument in that inward FDI stocks are associated with higher levels of ISO 14001 adoption in host countries only when FDI originates from home countries that themselves have high levels of ISO 14001 adoption. Countries’ ISO adoption levels are associated not with how much FDI host countries receive overall but from whom they receive it. Three implications emerge from this study: (1) FDI can become an instrument to perpetuate divergence in corporate practices across the world; (2) economic integration via FDI can create incentives for firms to ratchet up their environmental practices beyond the legal requirements of their host countries; (3) instead of racing down to match the less stringent corporate practices prevalent in developing countries, developed countries can employ FDI outflows to ratchet up corporate practices abroad given that developing countries are net recipients of developed countries’ FDI outflows.
Whose ideas matter? And how do actors make them matter? Focusing on the strategic deployment of competing normative frameworks, that is, framing issues and grafting private agendas on policy debates, we examine the contentious politics of the contemporary international intellectual property rights regime. We compare the business victory in the establishment of the 1994 Agreement on Trade-Related Intellectual Property (TRIPS) in the World Trade Organization with the subsequent NGO campaign against enforcing TRIPS to ensure access to essential HIV/AIDS medicines. Our analysis challenges constructivist scholarship that emphasizes the distinction between various types of transnational networks based on instrumental versus normative orientations. We question the portrayal of business firms as strictly instrumental actors preoccupied with material concerns, and NGOs as motivated solely by principled, or non-material beliefs. Yet we also offer a friendly amendment to constructivism by demonstrating its applicability to the analysis of business. Treating the business and NGO networks as competing interest groups driven by their normative ideals and material concerns, we demonstrate that these networks' strategies and activities are remarkably similar.
Both the private for-profit and the non-profit (or third) sectors provide what economists call public goods. The division of labour between these sectors, however, differs substantially across countries in terms of both qualitative and quantitative dimensions. Such cross-national differences are illustrated in the present paper with respect to France and West Germany. The autonomy of the state, the nature of the dominant actors and their style of interaction are identified as crucial variables shaping the linkage patterns of government/third-sector relationship. The cross-national comparison allows for the hypothesis that different patterns of government/third-sector linkages also shape different degrees of institutional adaptiveness in a changing political and economic environment.
The ongoing use of the concept of corporatism in industrial democracies has been stretched to include overlapping but still distinctive realities, which in turn often produce different lists of corporatist economies. Consequently, this analysis sets out to disentangle the concept of corporatism and to suggest a replacement. It includes a comparative classification of 24 long-term industrial democracies in terms of the corporatism scores given by 23 different scholarly analyses. The divisions in scoring certain important but problematic cases (such as Japan) can be explained by noting differing emphases in the term. I then propose an alternative, more focused summary measure of economic integration which is clearly linear and which has no problem cases. Precise scores on economic integration are given for four time periods from the late 1960s through the mid-1990s. It will be seen that the industrial democracies have always been dichotomised between integrated and non-integrated (or pluralist) economies.
This book critically examines the effects of the War on Terror on the relationships between civil society, security and aid, drawing on original fieldwork in Afghanistan, India and Kenya. Although governments are avoiding use of the term 'War on Terror', post-9/11 counter-terrorism responses have been widely legislated, institutionalized and bureaucratized. Hence, the impacts of the War on Terror will be long-lasting. Specifically, the book proposes that the War on Terror has reshaped the field of international development, which has become increasingly oriented to address issues of national and international security. This has had clear implications for how government and aid agencies engage with civil societies at home and abroad. However, in many contexts, mainstream groups supported by governments have failed to respond vigorously to counter-terrorism responses, leaving human rights and Muslim groups that have borne the brunt of scrutiny to challenge the premise and need for new security practices, measures and laws.