Pub Date : 2021-10-21DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780197530238.003.0006
Laura A. Henry, L. Sundstrom
NGOs from Brazil and Russia participate in the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), a global private governance initiative that promotes sustainable forestry using certification and labeling, contributing to increases in certified forest territory and certified companies in both more democratic Brazil and less democratic Russia. The chapter argues that while Brazilian NGOs participate in FSC more robustly at the national and international levels, FSC has been a more consequential site for mediation in Russia. It argues that differences in Russian and Brazilian NGO engagement with FSC are linked in part to the timing of global governance intervention. Brazilian NGOs achieved some policy goals during earlier efforts to save the Amazon rainforest, while in Russia NGOs leveraged the FSC at a crucial moment following post-Soviet market reforms when forestry companies sought export markets.
{"title":"The Forest Stewardship Council: Private Governance in Brazil and Russia","authors":"Laura A. Henry, L. Sundstrom","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780197530238.003.0006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197530238.003.0006","url":null,"abstract":"NGOs from Brazil and Russia participate in the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), a global private governance initiative that promotes sustainable forestry using certification and labeling, contributing to increases in certified forest territory and certified companies in both more democratic Brazil and less democratic Russia. The chapter argues that while Brazilian NGOs participate in FSC more robustly at the national and international levels, FSC has been a more consequential site for mediation in Russia. It argues that differences in Russian and Brazilian NGO engagement with FSC are linked in part to the timing of global governance intervention. Brazilian NGOs achieved some policy goals during earlier efforts to save the Amazon rainforest, while in Russia NGOs leveraged the FSC at a crucial moment following post-Soviet market reforms when forestry companies sought export markets.","PeriodicalId":292287,"journal":{"name":"Bringing Global Governance Home","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129570892","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-21DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780197530238.003.0007
Laura A. Henry, L. Sundstrom
This chapter compares participation of NGOs from India and Russia in the UN Global Compact (UNGC). It identifies a puzzling difference: Indian NGOs have joined the UNGC with equal enthusiasm to Indian companies, while Russian companies vastly outnumber NGOs. The UNGC is an example of a governance initiative that attracted robust NGO participation at first, but offers relatively low authority and lacks specific tools for NGOs to engage in domestic mediation and participate in decision-making, which may lead to stagnation. In addition, competing domestic CSR initiatives may provide alternative venues for NGOs and business actors that disperse their participation. However, domestic government policy measures may stimulate NGOs’ engagement with parallel global governance institutions. Indian NGO mediation efforts have been more effective than those of Russian NGOs due to different industrial profiles and export orientations, domestic government policies on CSR, and traditions of corporate philanthropy.
{"title":"The UN Global Compact: Corporate Social Responsibility in India and Russia","authors":"Laura A. Henry, L. Sundstrom","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780197530238.003.0007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197530238.003.0007","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter compares participation of NGOs from India and Russia in the UN Global Compact (UNGC). It identifies a puzzling difference: Indian NGOs have joined the UNGC with equal enthusiasm to Indian companies, while Russian companies vastly outnumber NGOs. The UNGC is an example of a governance initiative that attracted robust NGO participation at first, but offers relatively low authority and lacks specific tools for NGOs to engage in domestic mediation and participate in decision-making, which may lead to stagnation. In addition, competing domestic CSR initiatives may provide alternative venues for NGOs and business actors that disperse their participation. However, domestic government policy measures may stimulate NGOs’ engagement with parallel global governance institutions. Indian NGO mediation efforts have been more effective than those of Russian NGOs due to different industrial profiles and export orientations, domestic government policies on CSR, and traditions of corporate philanthropy.","PeriodicalId":292287,"journal":{"name":"Bringing Global Governance Home","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125338208","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-21DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780197530238.003.0005
Laura A. Henry, L. Sundstrom
This chapter compares the efforts of NGOs in Russia and South Africa to mediate global approaches to tackling the HIV/AIDS epidemic in their home contexts. It illustrates both the benefits and drawbacks of engaging with GGIs that offer significant levels of authority to NGOs along with very specific rules and standards. Such strong tools, when placed in NGOs’ hands, can help them to mediate effectively in a welcoming domestic political environment; but if dominant political actors oppose global norms, they can lead to pitched battles between civil society and government actors. NGO activists who persevere in a relatively open democratic regime that protects civil and political rights, such as South Africa, can contribute to domestic normative change over time, leading eventually to government policies that align with global principles. Where the political environment is relatively closed and repressive of civil society, as in Russia, NGOs may struggle to muster sufficient authority to mediate effectively.
{"title":"The Global Fund","authors":"Laura A. Henry, L. Sundstrom","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780197530238.003.0005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197530238.003.0005","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter compares the efforts of NGOs in Russia and South Africa to mediate global approaches to tackling the HIV/AIDS epidemic in their home contexts. It illustrates both the benefits and drawbacks of engaging with GGIs that offer significant levels of authority to NGOs along with very specific rules and standards. Such strong tools, when placed in NGOs’ hands, can help them to mediate effectively in a welcoming domestic political environment; but if dominant political actors oppose global norms, they can lead to pitched battles between civil society and government actors. NGO activists who persevere in a relatively open democratic regime that protects civil and political rights, such as South Africa, can contribute to domestic normative change over time, leading eventually to government policies that align with global principles. Where the political environment is relatively closed and repressive of civil society, as in Russia, NGOs may struggle to muster sufficient authority to mediate effectively.","PeriodicalId":292287,"journal":{"name":"Bringing Global Governance Home","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114175670","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-21DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780197530238.003.0002
Laura A. Henry, L. Sundstrom
This theoretical chapter summarizes how scholars in international relations and comparative politics have conceptualized the roles of NGOs in global governance and offers a new approach for studying NGO mediation. First, it surveys literatures on transnational advocacy networks, INGOs, and global governance institutions. Next, it introduces the concept of NGO mediation and incorporates insights from scholarship on regime type, state-society relations, and domestic social movements to enhance our insights into how NGOs mediate between domestic and global levels of governance. NGO mediation involves adapting and translating global governance norms and principles to domestic contexts. We identify three common mediation challenges and link these challenges to features of the domestic political context. Finally, the chapter previews the book’s argument and describes our research design.
{"title":"Theorizing NGO Mediation in Global Governance","authors":"Laura A. Henry, L. Sundstrom","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780197530238.003.0002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197530238.003.0002","url":null,"abstract":"This theoretical chapter summarizes how scholars in international relations and comparative politics have conceptualized the roles of NGOs in global governance and offers a new approach for studying NGO mediation. First, it surveys literatures on transnational advocacy networks, INGOs, and global governance institutions. Next, it introduces the concept of NGO mediation and incorporates insights from scholarship on regime type, state-society relations, and domestic social movements to enhance our insights into how NGOs mediate between domestic and global levels of governance. NGO mediation involves adapting and translating global governance norms and principles to domestic contexts. We identify three common mediation challenges and link these challenges to features of the domestic political context. Finally, the chapter previews the book’s argument and describes our research design.","PeriodicalId":292287,"journal":{"name":"Bringing Global Governance Home","volume":"121 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130865407","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：