Abstract
This chapter outlines the methodological choices as well as the case selection which guide the subsequent analysis. The first part elucidates why a qualitative case study was conducted. It discusses its advantages and pitfalls and demonstrates why it is the appropriate method for the present work. Furthermore, it sheds light on the research methods, namely semi-structured interviews and document analysis (3.1). The second part is dedicated to the case selection, which comprises three different sets of choices: first, the selection of EU policy fields in which CSOs are active, second, the selection of CSOs, and third, the selection of the CSOs’ member organisations located at the national level. It also provides detailed information about the CSOs that are analysed (3.2). Subsequently, I briefly demonstrate the professionalisation of the CSOs under study by providing some illustrative data. The argument was made that professionalisation leads CSOs to diverge from their constituencies. It is therefore useful to show that the CSOs subject to this study are, in fact, professionalised. This is done by providing information on the duration of their existence, the organisational size in terms of staff numbers, the budgets of selected CSOs, and the dependence on EU funding (3.3). In the final part of this chapter, the CSO sample is related to the overall population of CSOs in the EU, as well as to the CSO population in the policy fields in which the selected organisations are active (3.4).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The details of the case selection are presented in chapter 3.2.
- 2.
http://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/cgi/welcome.pl (last accessed: 16 February 2013)
- 3.
The first set of interviews was conducted in the framework of the research project B5 “Participation and Legitimation in International Organizations” in the framework of the Collaborative Research Center 597 “Transformations of the State”, which is funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG). Several pre-tests with interview partners were performed in the framework of this research project. On average, the interviews lasted one hour. They comprised 52 questions, 23 of which were used for this study.
- 4.
This was not deemed necessary for the manageable number of 13 Brussels-level CSOs.
- 5.
Art. 207(3, 4) TFEU
- 6.
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2008/august/tradoc_140089.pdf (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 7.
14 general meetings on trade policy issues, 9 sustainability impact assessment meetings, 8 meetings on bilateral and multilateral trade negotiations, 3 contact group meetings, 2 meetings with the director general for trade, and one seminar (European Commission 2010: 3).
- 8.
Art. 24(1) TEU
- 9.
The high representative wears a third “hat” besides her role as high representative and as vice president of the Commission, namely as the chairperson of the Foreign Affairs Council. See Wessels and Bopp (2008) for a detailed account of the institutional architecture of CFSP following the changes introduced by the Lisbon Treaty.
- 10.
Art. 22(2) TEU
- 11.
Art. 21(3) TEU
- 12.
www.eplo.org/role-of-civil-society (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 13.
http://act4europe.horus.be/module/FileLib/EPLO%20presentation.pdf (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 14.
The International Crisis Group, the European Peacebuilding Liaison Office (EPLO), International Alert, and the European Policy Centre.
- 15.
The involved CSOs are Adelphi Research, the Netherlands Institute for International Relations (Clingendael), the Crisis Management Initiative (CMI), the Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP), the European Peacebuilding Liaison Office (EPLO), La Fundación para las Relaciones Internacionales y el Diálogo Exterior (FRIDE), International Alert, the International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ), Partners for Democratic Change International (PDCI), and Saferworld (www.initiativeforpeacebuilding.eu, last accessed 16 February 2013).
- 16.
www.eplo.org/civil-society-dialogue-network.html (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 17.
Art. 27(3) TEU
- 18.
Ideally, the influence of the selected CSOs would be proven. However, this cannot be done here and the greatest likelihood of being able to influence decision-making processes has to serve as a proxy.
- 19.
Author’s count, August 2011.
- 20.
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/civilsoc/contactgroup.cfm#_list-of-members (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 21.
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/civilsoc/contactgroup.cfm#_terms-of-reference (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 22.
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/civilsoc/meeting_archive.cfm (last accessed 14 November 2011)
- 23.
For a long time, foreign policy was reserved to states. This is reflected by the still overwhelmingly state-centric literature on the issue, expectedly from the realist (Posen 2004) and liberal-institutionalist camps (Moravcsik 2003), but also from neo-functionalist (Øhrgaard 1997) and constructivist (Aggestam 1999; 2008; Manners 2002; Sjursen 2003) perspectives. The scope for action by non-governmental actors in security policy has been limited, not least due to a lack of funding for their activities (Anders 2003: 6). Only recently has a shift from government to governance also been acknowledged in security policy, including increased attention to non-state actors (Krahmann 2003; Joachim 2004; Stie 2007; Mayer 2008). To explain the lack of civil society involvement in foreign affairs, it has been argued that foreign policy issues are far away from citizens’ lives as compared with economic policies and that the public has little knowledge about them (Almond 1950; Herman and Chomsky 1988; Page and Shapiro 1983: 182; Rosenau 1961).
- 24.
One organisation, the Quaker Council for European Affairs (QCEA), is treated as a CSO active in CSDP although it also participates in External Trade Policy. It fulfils the selection criteria applied in the case selection for CSOs in CSDP, i.e. high institutional access. It does not enjoy high institutional access in ETP.
- 25.
The two remaining CSOs are not legally registered in Belgium or in another country.
- 26.
For an etymology of the term “public good” and a detailed discussion of the concept, see Mansbridge (1998).
- 27.
The pair of terms general-special interests and public-private interests are used synonymously. Concentrated versus diffuse interests is a third alternative which is sometimes used (see e.g. Pollack 1997).
- 28.
Most EU-level CSOs in CSDP are not member-based (see chapter 3.4.2 for details).
- 29.
www.eplo.org/member-organisations.html (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 30.
www.eplo.org (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 31.
www.encps.org/Resources/EN.CPS_documents?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=statement_of_purpose_english.pdf (last accessed 8 November 2011)
- 32.
http://www.en-cps.org/Civil_Peace_Services (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 33.
www.en-cps.org/Resources/EN.CPS_documents?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=statement_of_purpose_english.pdf (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 34.
http://www.en-cps.org/The_European_Network_for_Civil_Peace_Services/EN.CPS_History (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 35.
www.nonviolentpeaceforce.org/about/mission (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 36.
http://www.haguepeace.org/index.php?action=AbtUs (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 37.
www.npeurope.org/about/organizational-structure/member-organizations (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 38.
www.pdci-network.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=60&Itemid=54 (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 39.
www.qcea.org (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 40.
www.paxchristi.net/international/eng/about.php (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 41.
www.paxchristi.net/international/eng/about_cont.php?wat=basic (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 42.
http://www.paxchristi.net/international/eng/work.php (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 43.
www.foeeurope.org/about/english.htm (last accessed 8 November 2011)
- 44.
ibid (last accessed 8 November 2011)
- 45.
http://www.solidar.org/Overview,33.html (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 46.
http://www.solidar.org/History.html (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 47.
http://www.solidar.org/Overview,33.html (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 48.
www.wide-network.org/index.jsp?id=42 (last accessed 21 July 2010)
- 49.
www.wide-network.org/index.jsp?id=40 (last accessed 8 November 2011)
- 50.
www.wide-network.org/index.jsp?id=42 (last accessed 8 November 2011).
- 51.
www.businesseurope.eu/content/default.asp?PageID=582 (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 52.
www.eurocommerce.be/default.aspx?PageId=1606&lang=EN (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 53.
www.eurocommerce.be/content.aspx?PageId=39882&lang=EN (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 54.
www.esf.be/new/who-we-are/ (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 55.
www.esf.be/new (last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 56.
ETUC Constitution, p. 7 (www.etuc.org/IMG/pdf_CES-Statuts_CES-Uk_def-3.pdf, last accessed 16 February 2013)
- 57.
www.etuc.org/r/2 (16 February 2013)
- 58.
The Cypriot employers’ federation OEB became a full member in 2007, for example, but joined BusinessEurope as an associate member as early as 1980.
- 59.
The shift from individuals to organisations as the central constituting elements of the CSO is clearly an effect of the European Commission’s preference of working with federatively structured organisations, as will be set out in more detail in chapter 4.
- 60.
Usually, new members cooperate intensely with WIDE for several years before they officially join as platforms. Also, they are associate members for one year before potentially becoming full members. The purpose is to ensure that they share the vision, mission, and values of WIDE (WIDE 2010: 58).
- 61.
At that time, it was still called the Union of Industrial and Employers' Confederation of Europe (UNICE).
- 62.
Berkhout and Lowery (2010: 455) report a 188 percent increase in non-profit organisations in the EU from 1996 to 2007.
- 63.
The field of CSDP is not listed as a separate category.
- 64.
Author’s count, August 2011.
- 65.
While more recent numbers still show a strong increase in CSOs registered for the dialogue compared to 2004, in the last few years (at least since 2008), the number of CSOs listed in the directory has dropped, as well as the number of organisations attending meetings organised by DG Trade (http://trade.ec.europa.eu/civilsoc/statistics.cfm, last accessed 14 November 2011).
- 66.
as of 16 August 2011
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rodekamp, M. (2014). Methods, Case Selection, and the CSO Sample. In: Their Members’ Voice. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-02213-6_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-02213-6_3
Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-658-02212-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-658-02213-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)