Advertisement

The Rise of International Nongovernmental Organizations: A Top-Down or Bottom-Up Explanation?

  • Taedong LeeEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

This study examines the conditions that facilitate the growth of international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs) in 126 countries, from 1982 to 2000. To explain the uneven growth of INGOs around the world, I test two competing theoretical approaches. The “top-down” perspective of growth focuses on the degree of a country’s integration into the world polity and international economy. The “bottom-up” perspective emphasizes the development of democracy and the prosperity of the domestic economy as significant factors in facilitating INGO growth within a given country. An econometric analysis of panel data with ordinary least squares (OLS) suggests that both economic and political factors at the global and national level explain the rise of INGOs, rather than viewing either in an isolated fashion.

Keywords

International nongovernmental organizations Political globalization Democracy Communication technology Global civil society 

Résumé

Cette étude examine les conditions qui facilitent le développement des organisations internationales non gouvernementales (OING) dans 126 pays, de 1982 à 2000. Afin d’expliquer la croissance inégale des OING à travers le monde, j’utilise à titre expérimental deux approches théoriques concurrentes. L’approche dite « descendante » de la croissance met l’accent sur le degré d’intégration du pays dans le système institutionnel mondial et l’économie internationale. L’approche dite « ascendante » souligne le développement de la démocratie et la prospérité de l’économie nationale en tant que facteurs essentiels facilitant l’essor des OING dans un pays donné. Il ressort de l’analyse économétrique des données de panel réalisée avec la méthode des moindres carrés (MMC) que des facteurs à la fois économiques et politiques aux niveaux national et mondial, plutôt que de les étudier séparément, viennent expliquer le développement des OING.

Zusammenfassung

Diese Studie untersucht die Bedingungen, die das Wachstum internationaler nicht-staatlicher Organisationen in 126 Ländern im Zeitraum von 1982 bis 2000 ermöglichten. Zur Erklärung des weltweit ungleichen Wachstums der internationalen nicht-staatlichen Organisationen werden zwei konkurrierende Theorieansätze getestet. Die „Top-down”-Wachstumsperspektive konzentriert sich auf das Ausmaß der Integration eines Landes in der Weltgesellschaft und der internationalen Wirtschaft. Die „Bottom-up”-Perspektive betont die Entwicklung der Demokratie und den Wohlstand der inländischen Wirtschaft als bedeutende Faktoren zur Förderung des Wachstums internationaler nicht-staatlicher Organisationen in einem Land. Eine ökonometrische Analyse von Paneldaten mittels der Methode der kleinsten Quadrate (ordinary least squares, OLS) deutet darauf hin, dass sowohl die wirtschaftlichen als auch politischen Faktoren auf globaler und nationaler Ebene den Anstieg internationaler nicht-staatlicher Organisationen erklären und nicht getrennt voneinander betrachtet werden sollten.

Resumen

El presente estudio analiza las condiciones que han facilitado la proliferación de organizaciones internacionales no gubernamentales (OING) en 126 países, desde 1982 a 2000. Para explicar el desigual crecimiento de las OING en todo el mundo, pongo a prueba dos enfoques teóricos contradictorios: la perspectiva descendente del crecimiento, que se centra en el grado de integración de un país en la política mundial y en la economía internacional; y la perspectiva ascendente, que enfatiza el desarrollo de la democracia y la prosperidad de la economía doméstica como factores importantes a la hora de facilitar la aparición de OING dentro de un país determinado. Un análisis econométrico de datos de panel con mínimos cuadrados ordinarios sugiere que los factores económicos y políticos, tanto internacionales como nacionales, permiten explicar mejor la proliferación de OING que si las consideramos de forma aislada.

摘要

本研究探讨了从 1982 到 2000 年间在 126 个国家中促进国际非政府组织(英语缩写 INGO)增长的条件。为了解释全球 INGO 不均匀增长的情况,我检验了两个相互竞争的理论方法 。 “自上而下”增长观点的重点在于一个国家融入世界政体和国际经济的程度。 “自下而上”的观点则强调在一个给定国家中,民主发展和国内经济繁荣是促进 INGO 增长的重要因素。用普通最小二乘法(英语缩写 OLS)对专家小组数据进行的经济计量分析表明,在全球和国家一级,只有经济和政治因素两者同时计入方能解释 INGO 的兴起,并不能以孤立的方式仅看待任何一个。

要約:

本研究では、1982年から2000年間に、126ケ国の国際的な非政府団体(INGO)の成長向上における状況について研究する。2つの矛盾する理論上のアプローチを用いて、世界中のINGOの起伏のある成長を説明する。成長の「トップダウン」における見解では、世界政治と国際経済への統合の程度に焦点を合わせる。「ボトムアップ」における見解では、特定の国の中でINGOの成長を可能にする重要な要素として、民主主義の発展と国内経済の繁栄を強調する。 最小二乗法(OLS)を用いたパネルデータのエコノメトリック分析では、グローバルな国家レベルでの経済的・政治的要因の両方の要素において、それぞれ個別にみるとINGOの成長を見ることができる。

ملخص:

تبحث هذه الدراسة في الظروف التي تيسر نمو المنظمات الغير حكومية الدولية(INGOs) في 126 بلد، من 1982 حتي 2000. لشرح النمو الغير متكافئ للمنظمات الدولية الغير حكومية(INGOs) في جميع أنحاء العالم ، وأنا أقوم بإختبار اثنين من نهج النظريات المتنافسة. “من أعلى إلى أسفل” منظور النمو يركز على درجة من التكامل في أي بلد في كيان العالم السياسي والاقتصاد الدولي. “من أسفل إلى أعلى” منظور يؤكد على تنمية الديمقراطية والإزدهار للإقتصاد المحلي كعوامل هامة في تسهيل نمو المنظمات الدولية الغير لحكومية(INGO) داخل بلد معين. تحليل اقتصادي قياسي للوحة البيانات مع المربعات الصغرى العادية (OLS) يقترح أن كلاً من العوامل الاقتصادية والسياسية على المستويين العالمي والوطني يفسر صعود المنظمات الغير حكومية الدولية(INGOs)، بدلا من النظر بطريقة منعزلة.

مصطلحات:

Notes

Acknowledgments

I am grateful for comments from Aseem Prakash, Christopher Adolph, Katherine Bank, Hsiaochi Hsu, Karen Litfin, Peter May, and Christi Siver. I am also indebted to participants and discussants at the 48th Annual Meeting of the International Studies Association.

References

  1. Bandy, J., & Smith, J. (2005). Coalitions across borders: Transnational protest and the neoliberal order. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
  2. Bebbington, A. (1997). New states, new NGOs? Crises and transitions among rural development NGOs in the Andean region. World Development, 25(11), 1755–1765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beck, N., & Katz, J. N. (1995). What to do (and not to do) with time-series cross-section data. American Political Science Review, 89(3), 634–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beckfield, J. (2003). Inequality in the world polity: The structure of international organization. American Sociological Review, 68, 401–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boli, J., & Thomas, G. (1997). World culture in the world polity: A century of international non-governmental organization. American Sociological Review, 62, 171–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boli, J., & Thomas, G. (1999). INGOs and the organization of world culture. In J. Boli & G. Thomas (Eds.), Constructing world culture. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Boli, J., et al. (1999). National participation in World-Polity Organization. In J. Boli, G. Thomas, et al. (Eds.), Constructing world culture. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Brady, H. E., et al. (1995). Beyond SES: A resource model of political participation. American Political Science Review, 89(2), 271–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burstein, P. (1999). Social movement and public policy. In M. Giugni, D. McAdam, & C. Tilly (Eds.), How social movements matter. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  10. Clark, J. D. (2003a). World apart: Civil society and the battle for ethical globalization. Bloomfield: Kumarian Press, Inc.Google Scholar
  11. Clark, J. D. (2003b). Globalizing civic engagement: Civil society and transnational action. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  12. Coleman, W. D., & Sarah, W. (2006). The origins of global civil society and nonterritorial governance: Some empirical reflections. Global Governance, 12, 241–261.Google Scholar
  13. Connor, T. (2004). Time to scale up cooperation? Trade unions, NGOs, and the international anti-sweatshop movement. Development in Practice, 14(1), 61–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. de Soysa, I., & Neumayer, E. (2005). False prophet or genuine savior? Assessing the effect of economic openness on sustainable development. International Organization, 59, 731–772.Google Scholar
  15. DeMars, W. E. (2005). NGOs and transnational networks: Wild cards in world politics. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
  16. Deslauriers, J., & Kotschwar, B. (2003). After seattle: How NGOs are transforming the global trade and finance agenda. In J. Doh & H. Teegen (Eds.), Globalization and NGOs. Westport: Praeger.Google Scholar
  17. Dichter, T. W. (1999). Globalization and its effects on NGOs: Efflorescence or a blurring of roles and relevance? Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 28(4), 38–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Doh, J. (2003). Nongovernmental organizations, corporate strategy, and public policy: NGOs as agent of change. In J. Doh & H. Teegen (Eds.), Globalization and NGOs. Praeger: Westport.Google Scholar
  19. Eade, D. (2004). International NGOs and unions in the south: Worlds apart or allies in the struggle. Development in Practice, 14(1), 71–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Edwards, M., & Gaventa, J. (2001). Global citizen action. Boulder: Lynne Rienner publishers.Google Scholar
  21. Edwards, M., & Hulme, D. (1996). Beyond the magic bullet: NGO performance and accountability in the post-cold war world. West Hartford: Kumarian Press.Google Scholar
  22. Evans, P. (2000). Fighting marginalization with transnational networks: Counter-hegemonic globalization. Contemporary Sociology, 29 (January), 230–241.Google Scholar
  23. Fisher, J. (1998). Nongovernments: NGOs and the political development of the third world. West Hartford: Kumarian Press.Google Scholar
  24. Florini, A. M. (2000). The third force: The rise of transnational civil society. Tokyo: JCIE.Google Scholar
  25. Fox, J. (1996). How does civil society thicken? The political construction of social capital in rural Mexico. World Development, 24(6), 1089–1104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. FreedomHouse. (2006). Methodology/freedom in the world. http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=35&year=2006.
  27. Frey, B. S. (1971). Why do high income people participate more in politics? Public Choice, 11(1), 101–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Friedman, E. J., et al. (2005). Sovereignty, democracy, and global civil society. New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  29. Garret, G. (2000). Global markets and national politics: Collision course or virtuous circle? International Organization, 54(4), 787–824.Google Scholar
  30. Goldsmith, A. (2001). Foreign aid and statehood in Africa. International Organization, 55(1), 123–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Heinrich, V. (2007). CIVICUS global survey of the state of civil society. Bloomfield: Kumarian Press.Google Scholar
  32. Jalali, R. (2008). International funding of NGOs in India: Bringing the state back in. Voluntas, 19, 161–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kapstein, E. B. (2000). Winners and losers in the global economy. International Organization, 54(2), 359–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Karns, M. P., & Mingst, K. A. (2004). International organizations: The politics and process of global governance. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
  35. Keck, M. E., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond borders. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (2001). Power and interdependence. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  37. Khagram, S., et al. (2002). Restructuring world politics: Transnational social movements, networks, and norms. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  38. King, G. (1989). Unifying political methodology: The likelihood theory of statistical inference. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  39. Kopecky, P., & Mudde, C. (2003). Rethinking civil society. Democratization, 10(3), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kumar, K. (1993). Civil society: An inquiry into the usefulness of an historical term. The British Journal of Sociology, 44(3), 375–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McAdam, D., et al. (1996). Comparative perspectives on social movements. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Meyer, J., et al. (1997). World society and the nation-state. American Journal of Sociology, 103, 144–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Milner, H. (2004). Partisanship, trade policy, and globalization: Is there a left–right divide on trade policy? International Studies Quarterly, 48, 95–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Milner, H., & Kubota, K. (2005). Why the move to free trade? Democracy and trade policy in the developing countries. International Organization, 59, 584–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mosse, G. M. (1997). US constitutional freedom of association: Its potential for human rights NGOs at home and abroad. Human Rights Quarterly, 19(4), 738–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Newell, P. (2001). Campaigning for corporate change: Global citizen action on the environment. In M. Edwards & J. Gaventa (Eds.), Global citizen action. Boulder: Lynne Rienner publishers.Google Scholar
  47. Nye, J. S., & Keohane, R. O. (1971). Transnational relations and world politics. Boston: World Peace Foundation.Google Scholar
  48. O’loughlin, J., et al. (1998). The diffusion of democracy, 1946–1994. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 88(4), 545–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ottaway, M., & Cartothers, T. (2001). Funding virtue: Civil society aid and democracy promotion. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.Google Scholar
  50. Paxton, P. (2002). Social capital and democracy: An interdependent relationship. American Sociological Review, 67, 254–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Petrova, V. P. (2007). Civil society in post-communist eastern Europe and Eurasia: A cross national analysis of micro and macro factors. World Development, 35(7), 1277–1305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Potter, D. (1996). NGOs and environmental policies: Asia and Africa. London: Frank Cass Publisher.Google Scholar
  53. Prakash, A., & Potoski, M. (2006). Racing to the bottom? Trade, environmental governance, and ISO 14001. American Journal of Political Science, 50(2), 350–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Reimann, K. (2006). A view from the top: International politics, norms and the worldwide growth of NGOs. International Studies Quarterly, 50, 45–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rogowki, R. (1987). Political cleavages and changing exposure to trade. The American Political Science Review, 81(4), 1121–1137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rohrschneider, R., & Dalton, R. J. (2002). A global network? Transnational cooperation among environmental groups. The Journal of Politics, 64(2), 510–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Rooy, A. V. (2004). The global legitimacy game: Civil society, globalization, and protest. New York: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Salm, J. (1999). Coping with globalization: A profile of the northern NGO sector. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 28(4), 87–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Scott, M. (2001). Danger-landmines! NGO-government collaboration in the Ottawa process. In M. Edwards & J. Gaventa (Eds.), Global citizen action. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.Google Scholar
  60. Sikkink, K., & Smith, J. (2002). Infrastructures for changes: Transnational organizations; 1953–93. In S. Khagram, J. V. Riker, & K. Sikkink (Eds.), Restructuring world politics: Transnational social movements, networks, and norms. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  61. Skjelsbaek, K. (1971). The growth of international nongovernmental organization in the twentieth century. International Organization, 25(3), 420–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Smith, J. (2000). Social movements, international institutions and local empowerment. In P. Unvin (Ed.), Global institutions and local empowerment. London: MacMillan and St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  63. Smith, J. (2004). Exploring connections between global integration and political mobilization. Journal of World-Systems Research, 10(1), 255–285.Google Scholar
  64. Smith, J., & Wiest, D. (2005). The uneven geography of global civil society: National and global influences on transnational association. Social Forces, 84(2), 621–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Tarrow, S. (2001). Transnational politics: Contention and international politics. Annual Review of Political Science, 4, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Tarrow, S. (2005). The new transnational activism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  67. Tusalem, R. F. (2007). A boon or a bane? The role of civil society in third and fourth wave democracies. International Political Science Review, 28(3), 361–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wapner, P. (1995). Politics beyond the state: Environmental activism and world civic politics. World Politics, 47(3), 311–340.Google Scholar
  69. Waterman, P. (2005). Monitoring multinationals: Corporate codes of conduct. In J. Bandy & J. Smith (Eds.), Coalitions across borders: Transnational protest and the neoliberal order. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
  70. Weiss, T. G., & Gordenker, L. (1996). NGOs, the UN, & global governance. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.Google Scholar
  71. Wiest, D., & Smith, J. (2007). Explaining participation in regional transnational social movement organizations. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 48(2), 137–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Wood, L. J. (2005). Transnational campaign against child labor: The garment industry in Bangladesh. In J. Bandy & J. Smith (Eds.), Coalitions across borders: Transnational protest and the neoliberal order. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
  73. UIA. (various years). Yearbook of international organizations, Brussels: Union of International Associations.Google Scholar
  74. Yamamoto, T. (1996). Emerging civil society in the Asia Pacific community. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society for Third-Sector Research and The John's Hopkins University 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of WashingtonSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations