Negotiating the NGO/Social Movement Dichotomy: Evidence from Punjab, India

Brown, Trent

doi:10.1007/s11266-012-9324-7

Cited by 14 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We distinguish between the following CSOs: NGOs as professional organisations with a paid staff base; CBOs as voluntary local organisations working at district level or lower and People's movements campaigning at state or national level through their loose network of activists and CBOs. As we note the over-simplicity of an NGO/ people's (or social) movements binary (Batley, 2011;Brown, 2014) we use these definitions purely as an identification tool and make no assumptions as to the activities in which they engage.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advocating for Change? How a Civil Society-led Coalition Influences the Implementation of the Forest Rights Act in India

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forest policy implementation is a political endeavor involving both state and non-state actors. We observe that civil society organizations (CSOs) often federate into civil society-led coalitions (CSCs) in order to shape forest policies in their favor. They appear to be successful in doing this during the policy design phase but we know little about whether they are able to see through to implementation the changes they have put in motion. Analyzing CSC strategies during policy implementation could help to explain variation in the extent to which forest policies are successfully implemented. This paper analyzes the strategy choices and potential impact during policy implementation of a loose CSC comprised of CSOs, activists, people's movements, researchers, and lawyers that advocates for the full implementation of the Forest Rights Act in India. Drawing from the Advocacy Coalition Framework's focus on belief systems, complemented by insights from political ecology and civil society/social movements literature, we develop a framework to analyze CSC strategy choices. Our analysis is conducted at the national level and in two states, Andhra Pradesh and Odisha. We employ qualitative research methods, including 38 interviews with CSC and non-CSC members, and a comprehensive analysis of the main CSC listserv and 1000 relevant English language newspaper articles. Our study reveals that the CSC employs a range of conflictive and collaborative strategies in its attempts to influence state-led implementation processes, at both national and state levels. It draws on a loose, heterogeneous network with ability to connect internally and a clear moral justification of its involvement in FRA implementation. However the diverse range of views on the implementation issues held by CSC members, lack of dedicated funding for coordination, limited legitimacy in the eyes of some state actors and a constricting wider institutional setting, impedes the CSC's ability to make coalition-level strategy decisions. Our results lead us to argue that CSCs are undoubtedly active in forest policy implementation at the national level and in the two states analyzed, though limited coordination of strategies potentially restricts their impact on the policy implementation process.

show abstract

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advocating for Change? How a Civil Society-led Coalition Influences the Implementation of the Forest Rights Act in India

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The term ‘civil society’ includes a vast array of different organizations, movements, concerns and opinions together (Brown, ; Tvedt, ). The organizations/networks are self‐selecting in this case; these are the ones engaging with the EU on these topics.…”

Section: Institutional and Policy Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Finding Common Ground? European Union and European Civil Society Framing of the Role of Trade in the Sustainable Development Goals

Holden

2019

J of Common Market Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The debate on the Sustainable Development Goals framework offered a set piece for civil society organizations/CSOs to challenge institutions such as the EU. This article maps and analyzes how the EU's framing of trade policy in the SDGs related to that of European CSOs. The process is understood in terms of the interaction of different forms of ideational power. Key lines of contestation emerged over the question of constraining market forces. The lead EU institutions adopted some of the CSO's moral economy discourse but used various techniques to insulate trade policy from interventionist thought. They allocated a new range of responsibilities to developing countries, ignored numerous political issues and rejected calls for more regulatory global governance from CSOs and the European Parliament. To do so they were able to deploy a range of ideational and institutional powers. However, EU trade policy remains full of contradictions and potential 'rhetoric traps'.

show abstract

“…This, of course, reflects the countries' different historical trajectories and role of civil society in post-colonial and post-apartheid developments. Yet, we contend that these narratives -in themselves perhaps hegemonic -conceal more than they reveal in terms of the actual workings of civil society in both countries This article is our first step in rethinking a civil society agenda through combining organization and social movement terminologies (Davis et al, 2005;Brown, 2014). As researchers working within these two fields (Kontinen with organisation theory and Millstein with social movement theories), we think that the relatively limited dialogue between these strands of theory and literature has strengthened the tendencies of treating NGOs, social movements and grassroots organizing as separate, if related entities, rather than exploring their complex, multiscalar and situated dynamics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking Civil Society in Development: Scales and Situated Hegemonies

Kontinen

Millstein

2016

Forum for Development Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The new development agenda formulated through the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is rich with issues such as women empowerment, inclusive society, environment, and decent work that have been high on the agenda of civil society actors. However, civil society itself gets only a scant attention among other implementing bodies. We argue for nuanced investigation of civil society in the context of SDGs, and its rethinking in the arena of development research, and propose an approach that pays attention to situated hegemonies at different scales, and engages with empirical complexities in a non-normative tone. We illustrate the proposed agenda by reviewing literature on local organizing, established organizations, and networks and alliances especially in the contexts of South Africa and Tanzania. In conclusion we suggest that paying attention to situated hegemonies at different scales provides a fruitful framework for discussing civil society in both development research and practice in the threshold of new global development era.

show abstract

Negotiating the NGO/Social Movement Dichotomy: Evidence from Punjab, India

Cited by 14 publications

References 20 publications

Advocating for Change? How a Civil Society-led Coalition Influences the Implementation of the Forest Rights Act in India

Advocating for Change? How a Civil Society-led Coalition Influences the Implementation of the Forest Rights Act in India

Finding Common Ground? European Union and European Civil Society Framing of the Role of Trade in the Sustainable Development Goals

Rethinking Civil Society in Development: Scales and Situated Hegemonies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About