Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T14:26:23.833Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Do members make a difference? A study of Transnational Civil Society Organizations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2012

Peter Kotzian  and
Jens Steffek
Peter Kotzian*
Affiliation:
Institut für Politikwissenschaft, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Residenzschloss, Darmstadt, Germany
Jens Steffek*
Affiliation:
Institut für Politikwissenschaft, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Residenzschloss, Darmstadt, Germany
*
* E-mails: [email protected], [email protected]
* E-mails: [email protected], [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) play an active role in European and global governance, and many commentators see them as a link that connects the international level with citizens. But not all CSOs active at the international level do have a substantial number of members. The question we investigate in this article is to what extent membership distinguishes these CSOs from other transnational actors. To what extent do member and non-member CSOs differ in their roles and activities? Is it plausible to argue, as it quite often happens, that CSOs with members are more legitimate than others? On the basis of a survey of 60 exemplary CSOs we find that membership CSOs neither differ substantially from non-member CSOs in their political behavior, nor do they differ in important aspects of legitimacy, such as transparency or efforts to include beneficiaries.

Keywords

civil societyinternational politicsNGOsinternational organizationlegitimacydemocracy
Type
Research Article
Information
European Political Science Review , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , March 2013 , pp. 55 - 81
Copyright
Copyright © European Consortium for Political Research 2012

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

Alger, C. (2002), ‘The emerging roles of NGOs in the UN system: from Article 71 to a people's millennium assembly’, Global Governance 8(1): 93–117.Google Scholar
Altides, C. (2011), ‘Der Beitrag der organisierten Zivilgesellschaft zur Veröffentlichung europäischer Politik’, in B. Kohler-Koch and C. Quittkat (eds), Die Entzauberung partizipativer Demokratie, Frankfurt/New York: Campus Verlag, pp. 211–240.Google Scholar
Arts, B. (1998), The Political Influence of Global NGOs: Case Studies on the Climate and Biodiversity Conventions, Utrecht: International Books.Google Scholar
Beyers, J. (2004), ‘Voice and access: political practices of European interest associations’, European Union Politics 5(2): 211–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouwen, P. (2002), ‘Corporate lobbying in the European Union: the logic of access’, Journal of European Public Policy 9(3): 365–390.Google Scholar
Bouwen, P. (2004), ‘Exchanging access goods for access: a comparative study of business lobbying in the European Union Institutions’, European Journal of Political Research 43(3): 337–369.Google Scholar
Bovens, M. (2007), ‘Analysing and assessing accountability: a conceptual framework’, European Law Journal 13(4): 447–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broscheid, A.Coen, D. (2003), ‘Insider and outsider lobbying of the European Commission: an informational model of forum politics’, European Union Politics 4(2): 165–189.Google Scholar
Brown, L.D.Fox, J.A. (2001), ‘Transnational civil society coalitions and the World Bank: lessons from project and policy influence campaigns’, in M. Edwards and J. Gaventa (eds), Global Citizen Action, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, pp. 43–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brühl, T. (2010), ‘Representing the people? NGOs in international negotiations’, in J. Steffek and K. Hahn (eds), Evaluating Transnational NGOs, Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 181–199.Google Scholar
Collingwood, V.Logister, L. (2006), ‘Transnational governance and legitimacy’, Political Studies Review 3(2): 175–192.Google Scholar
Dingwerth, K. (2007), Nichtstaatliche Akteure und der Wandel der Governance-Norm, Delmenhorst: Hanse-Wissenschaftskolleg.Google Scholar
Dür, A. (2008), ‘Interest groups in the European Union: How powerful are they?’, West European Politics 31(6): 1212–1230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eising, R. (2008), ‘Clientilism, committees, pluralism and protest in the European Union: matching patterns’, West European Politics 31(6): 1166–1187.Google Scholar
Follesdal, A., Hix, S. (2005). Why there is a democratic deficit in the EU: a response to Majone and Morvacsik. European Governance Papers C-05-02. Retrieved 07 November 2011 from http://www.connex-network.org/eurogov/pdf/egp-connex-C-05-02.pdfGoogle Scholar
Glasius, M. (2008), ‘Does the involvement of global civil society make international decision-making more democratic? The case of the international criminal court’, Journal of Civil Society 4(1): 43–60.Google Scholar
Goodin, R.E. (2003). Democratic accountability: the third sector and all. Hauser Center for Nonprofit Organizations Working Paper No. 19. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government. Retrieved 07 November 2011 from http://www.hks.harvard.edu/hauser/PDF_XLS/workingpapers/workingpaper_19.pdfGoogle Scholar
Grant, W. (1978). Insider groups, outsider groups and interest group strategies in Britain. Working Paper No. 19, Department of Politics, University of Warwick, Coventry.Google Scholar
Greenwood, J. (2004), ‘The search for input legitimacy through organised civil society in the EU’, Transnational Associations 2(1): 145–155.Google Scholar
Greenwood, J. (2007), ‘Review article: organized civil society and democratic legitimacy in the European Union’, British Journal of Political Science 37(2): 333–357.Google Scholar
Greenwood, J.Halpin, D.R. (2007), ‘The European Commission and the public governance of interest groups in the European Union: seeking a niche between accreditation and laissez-faire’, Perspectives on European Politics and Society 8(2): 189–210.Google Scholar
Gustavsson, S., Karlsson, C.Persson, T. (eds) (2009), The Illusion of Accountability in the European Union, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Halpin, D.McLaverty, P. (2010), ‘Legitimating INGO advocacy: the case of internal democracy’, in J. Steffek and K. Hahn (eds), Evaluating Transnational NGOs, Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 55–73.Google Scholar
Johns, G. (2003), The NGO Challenge: Whose Democracy Is It Anyway?, Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.Google Scholar
Kohler-Koch, B. (2010), ‘How to put matters right? Assessing the role of Civil Society in EU accountability’, West European Politics 33(5): 1117–1141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kohler-Koch, B.Buth, V. (2011), ‘Der Spagat der europäischen Zivilgesellschaft – Zwischen Professionalität und Bürgernähe’, in B. Kohler-Koch and C. Quittkat (eds), Die Entzauberung partizipativer Demokratie, Frankfurt/New York: Campus Verlag, pp. 167–210.Google Scholar
Lahusen, C. (2004), ‘Joining the cocktail circuit: social movement organizations at the European Union’, Mobilization 9(1): 55–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martens, K. (2005), NGOs and the United Nations: Institutionalization, Professionalization, and Adaptation, Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillian.Google Scholar
Pleines, H.Buskova, K. (2007), ‘Capacity building for Czech environmental NGOs to participate in EU governance’, in H. Pleines (ed.), Good Governance Requirements for the Participation of Interest Groups in EU Consultations, Bremen: Forschungsstelle Osteuropa, pp. 151–161.Google Scholar
Risse, T. (2006), ‘Transnational governance and legitimacy’, in A. Benz and Y. Papadopoulos (eds), Governance and Democracy, London: Routledge, pp. 179–199.Google Scholar
Saurugger, S. (2006), ‘The professionalisation of interest representation: a legitimacy problem for civil society in the EU?’, in S. Smismans (ed.), Civil Society and Legitimate European Governance, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 260–276.Google Scholar
Saurugger, S. (2008), ‘Interest groups and democracy in the European Union’, West European Politics 31(6): 1274–1291.Google Scholar
Scholte, J.A. (2004), ‘Civil society and democratically accountable global governance’, Government and Opposition 39(2): 211–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steffek, J. (2010a), ‘Public accountability and the public sphere of international governance’, Ethics & International Affairs 24(1): 45–68.Google Scholar
Steffek, J. (2010b), ‘Explaining patterns of transnational participation: the role of policy fields’, in C. Jönsson and J. Tallberg (eds), Transnational Actors in Global Governance, Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 67–87.Google Scholar
Steffek, J.Ehling, U. (2008), ‘Civil society participation at the margins: the case of the WTO’, in J. Steffek, Claudia Kissling and P. Nanz (eds), Civil Society Participation in European and Global Governance: A Cure for the Democratic Deficit?, Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 95–115.Google Scholar
Steffek, J.Ferretti, M.P. (2009), ‘Accountability or “good decisions”? The competing goals of civil society participation in international governance’, Global Society 23(1): 37–57.Google Scholar
Steffek, J.Nanz, P. (2008), ‘Emergent patterns of civil society participation in global and European governance’, in J. Steffek, C. Kissling and P. Nanz (eds), Civil Society Participation in European and Global Governance: A Cure for the Democratic Deficit?, Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 1–29.Google Scholar
Steffek, J., Bendrath, R., Dalferth, S., Hahn, K., Piewitt, M.Rodekamp, M. (2010), ‘Assessing the democratic legitimacy of transnational CSOs: five criteria’, in J. Steffek and K. Hahn (eds), Evaluating Transnational NGOs, Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 100–125.Google Scholar
Tresch, A., Fischer, M. (2008), Political actors in search of media attention: an analysis of mobilization and communication strategies in seven European countries. Paper prepared for presentation at the 2nd ECPR Graduate Conference, August 25–27, Barcelona, Spain.Google Scholar
Vibert, F. (2007), The Rise of the Unelected: Democracy and the New Separation of Powers, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, J.Q. (1980), ‘The politics of regulation’, in J.Q. Wilson (ed.), The Politics of Regulation, New York: Basic Books, pp. 357–394.Google Scholar