The Politics of Transnational Advocacy Against Chinese, Indian, and Brazilian Extractive Projects in the Global South

Abstract

Activists in the global South have been navigating two powerful trends since the mid-1990s: intensifying state repression and rising investment in extractive projects from the emerging economies of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS). In this context, this article explores the underlying forces determining the formation, endurance, and power of BRICS–South transnational advocacy networks (TANs) opposed to BRICS-based corporate extraction in the global South. By analyzing activism against Chinese, Indian, and Brazilian extractive projects in Ecuador, Ethiopia, and Mozambique, respectively, the research reveals the critical importance of domestic politics and civil society characteristics in both the BRICS and host states for shaping BRICS–South TANs, including which groups assume leadership, the extent of cross-national cooperation, and the role of nonprofits headquartered in the global North. The findings uncover core reasons for the variable resiliency and capacity of BRICS–South TANs, opening up new avenues of research and offering valuable insights for activists and policymakers.

Navigating turbulence for sustainability

“…Transnational civil society power and solidarity will be critical for advancing these transformative strategies, even as worsening state repression stifles some nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and transnational advocacy networks (Matejova et al 2018;Shipton and Dauvergne 2021b). While Philip Schleifer in Chapter 13 emphasizes the importance of local authority and uptake for the success of jurisdictional approaches to tropical forest governance, he also finds that international NGOs have played a key role in orchestrating a "transnational community of practice" that supports local governments and civil society organizations striving to develop and participate in jurisdictional programs.…”

Engaged Scholarship in a ‘Minefield’: On the Challenges of Studying Resistance to Resource Extraction in Kenya

“…transnational advocacy purposes the China and South Africa connections are problematic. If the ownership trail ran to a Dutch company, for instance, Kenyan civil society could make use of a 'boomerang' strategy, where it would engage a Dutch civil society counterpart to confront the Dutch owners within its own jurisdiction(Shipton and Dauvergne 2021). However, opportunities for such transnational advocacy partnering are slim in China and South Africa, as civil society organizations in emerging economies might operate under too many restrictions or be too absorbed in domestic rights violations to take on a foreign case (ibid.).…”