Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-l72pf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-04T00:23:04.832Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Explaining the Advocacy Agenda: Insights from the Human Security Network

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 April 2014

Charli Carpenter ,
Sirin Duygulu ,
Alexander H. Montgomery  and
Anna Rapp
Get access

Abstract

Through a series of focus groups with human security practitioners, we examined how powerful organizations at the center of advocacy networks select issues for attention. Participants emphasized five sets of factors: entrepreneur attributes, adopter attributes, the broader political context, issue attributes, and intranetwork relations. However, the last two were much more consistently invoked by practitioners in their evaluations of specific candidate issues. Scholars of global agenda setting should pay particular attention to how intranetwork relations structure gatekeeper preferences within transnational advocacy spaces because these help constitute perceptions of issues' and actors' attributes in networks.

Type
Research Notes
Information
International Organization , Volume 68 , Issue 2 , Spring 2014 , pp. 449 - 470
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adler, Emanuel. 1991. Cognitive Evolution: A Dynamic Approach for the Study of International Relations and Their Progress. In Progress in Postwar International Relations, edited by Adler, Emanuel and Crawford, Beverly, 43–88. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Barbour, Rosaline, and Kitzinger, Jenny, eds. 1999. Developing Focus Group Research: Politics, Theory and Practice. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Berkovitch, Nitza, and Gordon, Neve. 2008. The Political Economy of Transnational Regimes: The Case of Human Rights. International Studies Quarterly 52 (4):881–904.Google Scholar
Bloodgood, Elizabeth. 2011. The Interest Group Analogy: International Non-Governmental Organisations in International Politics. Review of International Studies 37 (1):93–120.Google Scholar
Bob, Clifford. 2005. The Marketing of Rebellion: Insurgents, Media, and International Activism. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bob, Clifford. 2009. “Dalit Rights Are Human Rights”: Caste Discrimination, International Activism, and the Construction of a New Human Rights Issue. In The International Struggle for New Human Rights, edited by Bob, Clifford, 30–51. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Bob, Clifford. 2010. Packing Heat: Pro-Gun Groups and the Governance of Small Arms. In Who Governs the Globe?, edited by Avant, Deborah D., Finnemore, Martha, and Sell, Susan K., 183–201. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Borrie, John, and Thornton, Ashley. 2008. The Value of Diversity in Multilateral Disarmament Work. Geneva: UN Institute for Disarmament Research.Google Scholar
Burgerman, Susan. 2001. Moral Victories: How Activists Provoke Multilateral Action. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Busby, Joshua W. 2010. Moral Movement and Foreign Policy. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carpenter, R. Charli. 2005. “Women, Children and Other Vulnerable Groups”: Gender, Strategic Frames and the Protection of Civilians as a Transnational Issue. International Studies Quarterly 49 (2):295–334.Google Scholar
Carpenter, R. Charli. 2007a. Studying Issue (Non)-Adoption in Transnational Advocacy Networks. International Organization 61 (3):643–67.Google Scholar
Carpenter, R. Charli. 2007b. Setting the Advocacy Agenda: Theorizing Issue Emergence and Nonemergence in Transnational Advocacy Networks. International Studies Quarterly 51 (1):99–120.Google Scholar
Carpenter, R. Charli. 2010. Governing the Global Agenda: “Gatekeepers” and “Issue Adoption” in Transnational Advocacy Networks. In Who Governs the Globe?, edited by Avant, Deborah D., Finnemore, Martha, and Sell, Susan K., 202–37. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carpenter, R. Charli. 2011. Vetting the Advocacy Agenda: Networks, Centrality and the Paradox of Weapons Norms. International Organization 65 (1):69–102.Google Scholar
Carpenter, R. Charli, and Jose, Betcy. 2012. Transnational Issue Networks in Real and Virtual Space: The Case of Women, Peace and Security. Global Networks 12 (4):525–43.Google Scholar
Coley, Jonathan S. 2013. Theorizing Issue Selection in Advocacy Organizations: An Analysis of Human Rights Activism Around Darfur and the Congo, 1998–2010. Sociological Perspectives 56 (2):191–212.Google Scholar
Cooley, Alexander, and Ron, James. 2002. The NGO Scramble: Organizational Insecurity and the Political Economy of Transnational Action. International Security 27 (1):5–39.Google Scholar
Davies, Thomas R. 2007. The Possibilities of Transnational Activism: The Campaign for Disarmament Between the Two World Wars. Leiden, the Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Duygulu, Sirin, and Carpenter, R. Charli. 2013. The Gatekeeper Effect in Global Issue Networks. Unpublished manuscript, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Finnemore, Martha. 1996. National Interests in International Society. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Finnemore, Martha, and Sikkink, Kathryn. 1998. International Norm Dynamics and Political Change. International Organization 52 (4):887–918.Google Scholar
Fleiss, Joseph L. 1971. Measuring Nominal Scale Agreement Among Many Raters. Psychological Bulletin 76 (5):378–82.Google Scholar
Forman, Shepard, and Segaar, Derk. 2006. New Coalitions for Global Governance: The Changing Dynamics of Multilateralism. Global Governance 12 (2):205–25.Google Scholar
Glasius, Marlies. 2002. Expertise in the Cause of Justice: Global Civil Society Influence on the Statute for an International Criminal Court. In Global Civil Society Yearbook 2002, edited by Glasius, Marlies, Kaldor, Mary, and Anheier, Helmut K., 137–68. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goddard, Stacie E. 2009. Brokering Change: Networks and Entrepreneurs in International Politics. International Theory 1 (2):249–81.Google Scholar
Haas, Peter. 1992. Introduction: Epistemic Communities and International Policy Coordination. International Organization 46 (1):1–35.Google Scholar
Hadden, Jennifer. 2014. Explaining Variation in Transnational Climate Change Activism. Global Environmental Politics 14 (2):1–26.Google Scholar
Hafner-Burton, Emilie, Kahler, Miles, and H. Montgomery, Alexander. 2009. Network Analysis for International Relations. International Organization 63 (3):559–92.Google Scholar
Hafner-Burton, Emilie, and Ron, James. 2009. Seeing Double: Human Rights Impact Through Qualitative and Quantitative Eyes. World Politics 61 (2):360–401.Google Scholar
Hertel, Shareen. 2006. Unexpected Power: Conflict and Change Among Transnational Activists. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Hubert, Don. 2000. The Landmine Ban: A Case Study in Humanitarian Advocacy. Occasional Paper No. 42. Providence, RI: Watson Institute for International Studies.Google Scholar
Hubert, Don. 2007. Humanitarian Advocacy Campaigns: Lessons on Government Civil-Society Collaboration. In Joint Action for Prevention: Civil Society and Government Cooperation on Conflict Prevention and Peace Building, edited by van Tongeren, Paul and van Empel, Christine, 79–86. Den Haag, the Netherlands: European Center for Conflict Prevention.Google Scholar
Huliaras, Asteris, and Tzifakis, Nikolaos. 2010. Celebrity Activism in International Relations: In Search of Framework for Analysis. Global Society 24 (2):255–74.Google Scholar
Joachim, Jutta. 2007. Agenda Setting, the UN, and NGOs: Gender Violence and Reproductive Rights. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Kahler, Miles, ed. 2009. Networked Politics: Agency, Power, and Governance. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Keck, Margaret, and Sikkink, Kathryn. 1998. Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Khagram, Sanjeev, Riker, James, and Sikkink, Kathryn, eds. 2002. Restructuring World Politics: Transnational Social Movements, Networks and Norms. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Kingdon, John W. 1984. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
Lord, Janet. 2009. Disability Rights and the Human Rights Mainstream: Reluctant Gate-Crashers? In The International Struggle for New Human Rights, edited by Bob, Clifford, 83–92. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Lu, Chi-Jung, and Shulman, Stuart. 2008. Rigor and Flexibility in Computer-Based Qualitative Research: Introducing the Coding Analysis Toolkit. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches 2(1):105–17.Google Scholar
Martin, Mary, and Owen, Taylor. 2010. The Second Generation of Human Security: Lessons from the UN and EU Experience. International Affairs 86 (1):211–24.Google Scholar
Mercer, Jon. 1996. Reputation in International Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Mertus, Julie. 2009. Applying the Gatekeeper Model of Human Rights Activism: The US-Based Movement for LGBT Rights. In The International Struggle for New Human Rights, edited by Bob, Clifford, 52–67. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Mische, Ann. 2003. Cross-Talk in Movements: Reconceiving the Culture-Network Link. In Social Movements and Networks: Relational Approaches to Collective Action, edited by Diani, Mario and McAdam, Doug, 258–80. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nexon, Daniel. 2009. The Struggle for Power in Early Modern Europe: Religious Conflict, Dynastic Empires, and International Change. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Oestreich, Joel. 2007. Power and Principle: Human Rights Programming in International Organizations. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Paris, Roland. 2001. Human Security: Paradigm Shift or Hot Air? International Security 26 (2):87–102.Google Scholar
Parson, Edward. 2003. Protecting the Ozone Layer: Science and Strategy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pettigrew, Thomas. 1979. The Ultimate Attribution Error. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 5 (4):461–76.Google Scholar
Prakash, Aseem, and Gugerty, Mary Kay, eds. 2010. Advocacy Organizations and Collective Action. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pralle, Sarah B. 2003. Venue Shopping, Political Strategy, and Policy Change: The Internationalization of Canadian Forest Advocacy. Journal of Public Policy 23 (3):233–60.Google Scholar
Price, Richard. 1998. Reversing the Gun Sights: Transnational Civil Society Targets Land Mines. International Organization 52 (3):613–44.Google Scholar
Price, Richard. 2003. Transnational Civil Society and Advocacy in World Politics. World Politics 55 (4):579–606.Google Scholar
Reinmann, Kim D. 2006. A View from the Top: International Politics, Norms and Worldwide Growth of NGOs. International Studies Quarterly 50 (1):45–67.Google Scholar
Shawki, Noha. 2010. Political Opportunity Structures and the Outcomes of Transnational Campaigns: A Comparison of Two Transnational Advocacy Networks. Peace and Change 35 (3):381–411.Google Scholar
Shiffman, Jeremy. 2009. A Social Explanation for the Rise and Fall of Global Health Issues. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 87 (8):608–13.Google Scholar
Slaughter, Anne-Marie. 2004. A New World Order. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Stone, Diane. 2001. Think Tanks, Global Lesson-Drawing and Networking Social Policy Ideas. Global Social Policy 1 (3):338–60.Google Scholar
Stone, Diane. 2006. Reframing the Racial Disparities Issue for State Governments. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 31 (1):127–52.Google Scholar
Tarrow, Sidney. 2005. The New Transnational Activism. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wong, Wendy. 2008. Centralizing Principles: How Amnesty International Shaped Human Rights Politics Through Its Transnational Network. Ph.D. diss., University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
Wong, Wendy. 2012. Internal Affairs: How the Structure of NGOs Transforms Human Rights. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar