Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenor:
-
John Cameron
(Dalhousie University)
Send message to Convenor
- Format:
- Paper panel
- Stream:
- Political change, advocacy and activism
Short Abstract:
This panel will examine the advocacy strategies of global development NGOs and the factors that shape those strategies in a range of countries and from different methodological perspectives.
Description:
This panel will examine the advocacy strategies of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in the global development sector from comparative perspectives. The primary objective of the panel is to analyse the range of advocacy strategies used by NGOs and the factors that shape those strategies. The panel will examine NGO advocacy in a range of countries with the goal of better understanding how political, legal, economic and social contexts shape NGO advocacy strategies. These questions are particularly important in the context of a growing global trend towards autocracy, democratic backsliding and conservative populism in which the political opportunities for NGOs and other civil society organizations to advocate for social and environmental justice are shrinking – thus calling for new strategies or the reinvigoration of old ones.
A secondary objective of the panel is to generate the content for a Special Issue of a development studies journal on ‘Advocacy for Global Justice.’ The panel convenor is co-editor of the Canadian Journal of Development Studies, which would be the target journal.
Papers are encouraged to address questions related to advocacy strategy (e.g., insider vs. outsider), the legal/regulatory context for advocacy, the decision-making behind advocacy strategies, and the social and political factors that inform and shape the advocacy strategies of NGOs. Papers are also encouraged that examine NGO advocacy in a range of countries and from different methodological perspectives (e.g., from case studies based on institutional ethnography to quantitative analysis of broader patterns).
Accepted papers:
Session 1Paper short abstract:
This work explores how anti-racist, decolonial, and justice-led approaches can reshape policy and advocacy in the international development sector. It offers practical strategies, insights, and resources to embed equity into organisational practice, while addressing barriers to systemic change.
Paper long abstract:
For the international development sector to meaningfully tackle systemic inequalities, it must embed anti-racist, decolonial, and justice-led approaches into the heart of policy and advocacy work. This work argues that these principles must move beyond being viewed as optional add-ons or temporary projects and instead become central to organisational practice and culture.
Drawing from resources such as This is the Work and the report on justice-led approaches to global development, the paper provides practical strategies and insights to support organisations in challenging entrenched inequities. It also addresses common misconceptions and resistance to these approaches, offering thoughtful responses to frequently raised concerns.
Key areas of focus include:
The transformative potential of anti-racist and decolonial frameworks in advocacy and policy.
The importance of sustained organisational commitment to embedding equity.
The value of feminist leadership principles and justice-led methodologies in fostering accountability and care.
Through real-world examples and actionable recommendations, the paper invites organisations to reflect on their current practices and commit to systemic change. Participants will gain practical tools, deeper understanding, and a clear sense of how anti-racist and decolonial approaches can inform ethical and impactful advocacy, ensuring equity becomes an everyday reality within the sector.
Paper short abstract:
This paper aims to explore transnational advocacy that mobilizes global norms and standards aimed at enhancing energy justice and promoting responsible mining practices. This exploration is particularly relevant in the context of the current mining rush dedicated to producing EV battery.
Paper long abstract:
Nickel is a crucial material for electric vehicle battery, and Indonesia, possessing the world's largest nickel reserves, aims to become a dominant force in global nickel production, targeting 50% of the market by 2024. This ambition has led to a significant increase in nickel production, often at the expense of labour rights, social equity, and environmental sustainability. Reports indicate widespread violations of labour rights, land appropriation, and forced displacements associated with nickel mining and smelting operations. Additionally, there is considerable evidence of environmental degradation and threats to biodiversity linked to these activities. This situation has unfolded alongside a strong central government push for resource nationalism, which has limited community and local government involvement while easing certain environmental regulations.
In response to these challenges, transnational advocacy networks—including NGOs, car producers and consumers—are working to bridge local and global efforts to promote energy justice and ensure responsible and sustainable nickel mining practices. These efforts advocate for compliance with global standards such as the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Electric vehicle manufacturers and global consumers are also pressuring mining companies to adhere to the Initiative for Responsible Mining Assurance (IRMA).
The effectiveness of this transnational advocacy remains uncertain. It raises critical questions about whether such efforts can compel mining companies to prioritize ethical practices in order to gain acceptance in international markets while also providing local communities with avenues for advocacy and rights claims.
Paper short abstract:
This case study of civil society advocacy for ‘locally-shaped solutions’ in an East-African context zooms in on relations with constituencies. The paper seeks to provide insight into the complex, context-specific dynamics shaping civil society roles in representation and voice in climate action.
Paper long abstract:
The role of civil society organizations (CSOs) in addressing climate change is acknowledged. However, there is limited engagement with questions of representation and voice. This constitutes an urgent knowledge gap. CSOs’ roles often draw legitimacy from their capacity to support and represent local people’s voices. At the same time, this role is far from evident, given CSOs’ embeddedness in relations with donors and the state. This paper explores how the challenge of ‘amplifying voices’ presents itself for CSOs working in an international NGO-led climate change advocacy programme in an East-African country, to provide insight into the complex, context-specific dynamics shaping such roles.
Based on qualitative data, the study found that CSOs in the case seek to facilitate community engagement and inclusion in climate policy through their roles as intermediaries and enablers. Two challenges complicate these roles. First, ‘local’ solutions emerge in interplay between power holders in which local communities whose voices the programme was meant to ‘amplify’ often play limited roles – with CSOs observing, challenging but also contributing to this challenge. Second, CSOs face challenges building legitimacy with communities, given perceptions of e.g., limited relevance of climate-related advocacy. Moreover, the analysis identifies a significant opportunity for building a bottom-up advocacy agenda not accommodated in the programme. Based on the analysis, the paper identifies adjustments to advocacy programming that can enhance CSO roles ‘amplifying voices’ and may help overcome limits of community engagement that form an important basis for the risk of elite capture of climate action.
Paper short abstract:
This paper examines the legal, financial, political and organizational factors that shape the decisions of international development NGOs in Canada about whether and how to engage in policy advocacy. It highlights how easily NGOs can be led to self-censor, even in an apparently strong democracy.
Paper long abstract:
This paper examines the legal, financial, political and organizational factors that shape the decisions of international development NGOs in Canada about whether and how to engage in policy advocacy. Based on analysis of quantitative data and over 100 interviews with NGO leaders conducted since 2016, the paper highlights the relative silence of Canadian NGOs in advocacy on public policy issues related to global justice. The paper argues that socially constructed misunderstandings of legal regulations, persistent fears of charity regulators, difficulties fundraising for advocacy work, and fears of jeopardizing government funding lead most Canadian NGOs to avoid policy engagement completely. The small number of NGOs that do engage in policy advocacy prefer insider strategies (lobbying) over public campaigns and rarely engage Canadian citizens in advocacy work. In the context of global concerns about the shrinking of civic space, the paper highlights the many ways that international development NGOs are led to silence themselves even in apparently strong democracies.