Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Nonprofit Advocacy Tactics: Thinking Inside The Box?

Abstract

As part of a social change agenda, nonprofit organisations engage in activities that contribute to debate and influence the development of public policy. This article presents the initial findings from a study investigating whether nonprofit organisations do participate in advocacy activities and if they do, how are they advocating and engaging in public debate without risking their current and future sources of funding. The key findings from the research have identified that the extent of advocacy by the nonprofit organisations studied has not diminished. A model, built on the findings from the literature on how nonprofit organisations approach advocacy, is applied to explain the advocacy activities by the case study organisations. These nonprofit organisations are identifying what they see to be the appropriate advocacy strategies to fit their organisational objectives, policies, funding sources and resources.

Résumé

À des fins de changements sociaux, les organismes sans but lucratif participent à des activités qui alimentent le débat sur l’élaboration des politiques publiques et qui l’influencent. Le présent article introduit les résultats initiaux d’une étude qui cherche à déterminer si les organismes sans but lucratif participent à des activités de défense et si oui, quels moyens ils utilisent pour plaider leur cause et participer au débat public sans menacer leurs sources de financement actuelles et futures. Les principaux résultats de la recherche démontrent que la portée du plaidoyer des organismes sans but lucratif à l’étude n’a pas diminué. Un modèle, basé sur des données décrivant des mécanismes de défense de droits et d’intérêts, est appliqué pour décrire les activités réalisées par les organismes ciblés par les études de cas. Ces organismes sans but lucratif déterminent des stratégies de défense qu’ils jugent appropriées et conformes à leurs objectifs, politiques, sources de financement et ressources organisationnels.

Zusammenfassung

Als Teil eines Programms zum sozialen Wandel üben gemeinnützige Organisationen Tätigkeiten aus, die zur Debatte über die Entwicklung der öffentlichen Politik beitragen und diese beeinflussen. Dieser Beitrag präsentiert erste Ergebnisse einer Studie zur Untersuchung, ob sich gemeinnützige Organisationen tatsächlich an Lobbyaktivitäten beteiligen und falls ja, wie sie die Lobbyaktivitäten ausüben und an öffentlichen Debatten teilnehmen, ohne ihre gegenwärtigen und zukünftigen Finanzierungsquellen zu riskieren. Die wichtigsten Ergebnisse der Studie haben herausgestellt, dass der Umfang der Lobbytätigkeit der untersuchten gemeinnützigen Organisationen nicht abgenommen hat. Man erläutert die Lobbyaktivitäten der Organisationen in der Fallstudie anhand eines Modells beruhend auf den Ergebnissen aus der Literatur darüber, wie gemeinnützige Organisationen Lobbytätigkeiten nachgehen. Die Organisationen stellen heraus, was sie als angemessene Lobbystrategien erachten, um ihren organisatorischen Zielen, Richtlinien, Finanzierungsquellen und Ressourcen gerecht zu werden.

Resumen

Como parte de una agenda sobre el cambio social, las organizaciones sin ánimo de lucro se implican en actividades que contribuyen a debatir e influir en el desarrollo de la política pública. El presente artículo presenta los hallazgos iniciales de un estudio que investiga si las organizaciones sin ánimo de lucro participan en actividades de denuncia y si lo hacen, cómo están denunciando e implicándose en el debate público sin arriesgar sus fuentes de financiación actuales y futuras. Los hallazgos claves de la investigación han identificado que la amplitud de la denuncia por parte de las organizaciones sin ánimo de lucro estudiadas no ha disminuido. Un modelo, basado en los hallazgos del material publicado sobre cómo las organizaciones sin ánimo de lucro abordan la denuncia, se aplica para explicar las actividades de denuncia por parte de las organizaciones del estudio de caso. Estas organizaciones sin ánimo de lucro están identificando lo que ven que son las estrategias de denuncia apropiadas que se ajustan a sus objetivos organizativos, políticas, fuentes de financiación y recursos.

Chinese

作为社会变革议程的一部分,非盈利组织参与了为讨论和影响公共政策制定作出贡献的活动。本文将介绍研究的最初调查结果,这一研究调查了非盈利组织是否参与了讨论活动;如果参与的话,他们如何进行讨论和参与公众争论而不危及当前和未来的资金来源。研究的主要调查结果已经确定,非盈利组织研究的讨论范围未缩小。使用了基于非盈利组织如何进行讨论文献的调查结果构建的模型,从而解释案例研究组织的讨论活动。这些非盈利组织正在确定是否采用了适合组织目标、政策、资金来源和资源的适当讨论策略。

Japanese

社会変化の議題の一部として、非営利組織は公共政策の進展に影響を与えて、議論に寄与する活動に従事してきた。本論文では、非営利組織が支持活動に参加するか否か、仮に参加する場合には、現在および将来の資金源を危険にさらすことなく、どのように公共の議論を擁護して主張するかという調査研究における初期発見を行ったものである。研究における主要な結果としては、非営利組織の研究の増加によって擁護の範囲が特定化される。モデルでは、非営利組織がアプローチする擁護が、事例研究の組織によって支持活動の説明に適用されることが、文献より明らかになった。この非営利組織は、組織の目的、方針、政治、資金と資金源に適合させるために、適切な支持戦略を特定する。

Arabic

كجزء من أجندة التغيير الإجتماعي، تشارك المنظمات الغير ربحية في الأنشطة التي تساهم في النقاش والتأثيرعلى تطوير السياسة العامة. تقدم هذه المقالة النتائج الأولية من دراسة تحقق في ما إذا كانت المنظمات الغير ربحية تشارك في أنشطة الدعوة، إذا كانت تفعل ذلك، كيف أنهم يقومون بالدعوة والمشاركة في النقاش العام بدون المخاطرة بمصادرهم الحالية والمستقبلية للتمويل. قد بينت النتائج الرئيسية التي توصل إليها البحث أن مدى الدعوة من قبل المنظمات الغير ربحية التي شملتها الدراسة لم يتناقص. يتم تطبيق نموذج، مبني على النتائج من الأدبيات حول كيفية أن المنظمات الغير ربحية تطبق نهج الدعوة، لشرح أنشطة الدعوة من قبل منظمات دراسة الحالة. تقوم هذه المنظمات الغير ربحية بتحديد ما تعتبره إستراتيجيات الدعوة المناسبة لتناسب أهدافها التنظيمية، سياساتها، مصادر تمويلها ومواردها.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1

Change history

  • 22 August 2018

    The PDF version of this article was reformatted to a larger trim size.

Notes

  1. 1.

    Direct quotes from participant interviews deliberately de-identified in accordance with the University Ethics approvals.

References

  1. Abdel-Samad, M. (2017). Legislative advocacy under competitive authoritarian regimes: The case of civil society in Jordan. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 28(3), 1035–1053.

  2. Ahmed, S. (2012). Effective non-profit management: Context, concepts, and competencies. Boca Raton, USA: CRC Press.

  3. Almog-Bar, M., & Schmid, H. (2014). Advocacy activities of nonprofit human service organizations: A critical review. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 43(1), 11–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764013483212.

  4. Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2015). Australian national accounts: Non-Profit institutions satellite account, 2012–13, Cat. No. 5256.0. Canberra.

  5. Baggott, R., & Jones, K. (2014). The voluntary sector and health policy: The role of national level health consumer and patients’ organisations in the UK. Social Science and Medicine, 123, 202–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.07.016.

  6. Balassiano, K., & Chandler, S. M. (2010). The emerging role of non-profit associations in advocacy and public policy: Trends, issues, and prospects. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 39(5), 946–955. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764009338963.

  7. Bass, G. D., Arons, D. F., Guinane, K., & Carter, M. F. (2007). Seen but not heard: Strengthening non-profit advocacy. Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute.

  8. Berman, G., Brooks, R., & Murphy, J. (2006). Funding the non-profit welfare sector: Explaining changing funding source 1960–1999. Economic Papers, 25(1), 83–99. http://hdl.handle.net/11343/34096.

  9. Berry, J. M., & Arons, D. F. (2003). A voice for nonprofits. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution Press.

  10. Binderkrantz, A. (2005). Interest group strategies: Navigating between privileged access and strategies of pressure. Political Studies, 53(4), 694–715. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2005.00552.x.

  11. Buchanan, J. M. (2003). Public choice: Politics without romance. Policy: A Journal of Public Policy and Ideas, 19(3), 13–18.

  12. Buchanan, J. M., & Tollison, R. D. (1984). The theory of public choice-II. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

  13. Buffardi, A. L., Pekkanen, R. J., & Smith, S. R. (2017). Proactive or protective? Dimensions of and advocacy activities associated with reported policy change by nonprofit organizations. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 28(3), 1226–1248.

  14. Chaney, P. (2015). Exploring the pathologies of one-party-dominance on third sector public policy engagement in liberal democracies: Evidence from meso-government in the UK. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 26(4), 1460–1484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-014-9493-7.

  15. Dekker, P., & Uslaner, E. M. (2003). Introduction. In P. Dekker & E. M. Uslaner (Eds.), Social capital and participation in everyday life (pp. 1–8). London: Routledge.

  16. DeSantis, G. (2010). Voices from the margins: Policy advocacy and marginalized communities. Canadian Journal of Non-profit and Social Economy Research, 1(1), 23–45.

  17. DeSantis, G. (2013). Policy advocacy experiences of Saskatchewan nonprofit organizations: Caught between rocks and hard places with multiple constituents? The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe canadien, 57(4), 457–473. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0064.2013.12043.x.

  18. Elliott, S., & Haigh, D. (2013). Advocacy in the New Zealand not-for-profit sector: ‘Nothing stands by itself’. Third Sector Review, 19(2), 157–178.

  19. Feldman, G., Strier, R., & Koreh, M. (2017). Liquid advocacy: Social welfare advocacy in neoliberal times. International Journal of Social Welfare, 26(3), 254–262. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsw.12250.

  20. Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800405284363.

  21. Fyall, R., & McGuire, M. (2015). Advocating for policy change in nonprofit coalitions. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 44(6), 1274–1291. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764014558931.

  22. Guo, C., & Saxton, G. D. (2010). Voice-in, voice-out: Constituent participation and nonprofit advocacy. Nonprofit Policy Forum. https://doi.org/10.2202/2154-3348.1000.

  23. Han, J. (2017). Social marketisation and policy influence of third sector organisations: Evidence from the UK. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 28(3), 1209–1225.

  24. Hansmann, H. B. (1980). The role of nonprofit enterprise. The Yale Law Journal, 89(5), 835–901.

  25. Hansmann, H. B. (1987). Economic theories of nonprofit organization. The Nonprofit Sector: A Research Handbook, 1, 27–42.

  26. Helmig, B., Jegers, M., & Lapsley, I. (2004). Challenges in managing nonprofit organizations: A research overview. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 15(2), 101–116. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:VOLU.0000033176.34018.75.

  27. Helmut, A. K. (2014). Nonprofit organizations: Theory, management, policy (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

  28. Johns, G. (2004). Charities reform in Australia. Agenda: A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform, 11(4), 293–306.

  29. Li, H., Lo, C. W., & Tang, S. (2017). Nonprofit policy advocacy under authoritarianism. Public Administration Review, 77(1), 103–117. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12585.

  30. Ljubownikow, S., & Crotty, J. (2016). Nonprofit influence on public policy exploring nonprofit advocacy in Russia. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 45(2), 314–332. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764015583121.

  31. Lu, J. (2016). Fear the government? A meta-analysis of the impact of government funding on nonprofit advocacy engagement. The American Review of Public Administration. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074016680024.

  32. MacIndoe, H., & Whalen, R. (2013). Specialists, generalists, and policy advocacy by charitable nonprofit organizations. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 40(2), 119–149.

  33. Maddison, S., & Denniss, R. (2005). Democratic constraint and embrace: Implications for progressive non-government advocacy organisation in Australia. Australian Journal of Political Science, 40(3), 373–389. https://doi.org/10.1080/10361140500204025.

  34. Maddison, S., Hamilton, C., & Denniss, R. (2004). Silencing dissent: Non-government organisations and Australian democracy. The Australian Institute Discussion Paper No. 65. Retrieved from: http://www.tai.org.au/documents/dp_fulltext/DP65.pdf.

  35. Mellinger, M. S. (2017). Mission and advocacy structure: A perspective from human service organizations. Journal of Policy Practice, 16, 1–18.

  36. Mosley, J. E. (2011). Institutionalization, privatization, and political opportunity: What tactical choices reveal about the policy advocacy of human service non-profits. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(3), 435–457. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764009346335.

  37. Muller, P., Arthur, D., Harvey, J., Fisher, A., & McMahon, I. (2015). The economic, social and cultural value of volunteering to Western Australia. Retrieved from: https://volunteeringwa.org.au/assets/downloads/vwa_report%20book_web.pdf.

  38. Neumayr, M., Schneider, U., & Meyer, M. (2015). Public funding and its impact on nonprofit advocacy. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 44(2), 297–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764013513350.

  39. Oakleigh, A. (2009). Not just a tool: the responses of non-profit leaders to ‘service-delivery’ relationships with governments. Third Sector Review, 15(2), 55–73.

  40. Onyx, J., Armitage, L., Dalton, B., Melville, R., Casey, J., & Banks, R. (2010). Advocacy with gloves on: The ‘Manners’ of strategy used by some third sector organizations undertaking advocacy in NSW and Queensland. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 21(1), 41–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-009-9106-z.

  41. Onyx, J., Dalton, B., Melville, R., Casey, J., & Banks, R. (2008). Implications of government funding of advocacy for third-sector independence and exploration of alternative advocacy funding models. The Australian Journal of Social Issues, 43(4), 631–648.

  42. Passey, A., & Lyons, M. (2006). Nonprofits and social capital: Measurement through organizational surveys. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 16(4), 481–495. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.122.

  43. Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper and Row.

  44. Powell, W. W., & DiMaggio, P. (1991). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

  45. Prentice, C. R., & Brudney, J. L. (2017). Nonprofit lobbying strategy: Challenging or championing the conventional wisdom? VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 28(3), 935–957.

  46. Reid, E. J. (1999). Nonprofit advocacy and political participation. In E. T. Boris & C. E. Steuerle (Eds.), Nonprofits and government: Collaboration and conflict (pp. 291–325). Washington, DC: Brookings.

  47. Ruddin, L. P. (2006). You can generalize stupid! Social scientists, Bent Flyvbjerg, and case study methodology. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(4), 797–812. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800406288622.

  48. Ruggiano, N., & Taliaferro, J. D. (2012). Resource dependency and agent theories: A framework for exploring nonprofit leaders’ resistance to lobbying. Journal of Policy Practice, 11(4), 219–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/15588742.2012.690841.

  49. Salamon, L. M., & Anheier, H. K. (1998). Social origins of civil society: Explaining the non-profit sector cross-nationally. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 9(3), 213–248. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022058200985.

  50. Schmid, H., Bar, M., & Nirel, R. (2008). Advocacy activities in nonprofit human service organizations implications for policy. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 37(4), 581–602. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764007312666.

  51. Smith, S. R., & Pekkanen, R. (2012). Revisiting advocacy by non-profit organisations. Voluntary Sector Review, 3(1), 35–49. https://doi.org/10.1332/204080512X632719.

  52. Warren, M. E. (2001). Democracy and association. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

  53. Weisbrod, B. A. (1977). The voluntary non-profit sector: An economic analysis. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

  54. Williams, M. (2000). Interpretivism and generalisation. Sociology, 34(2), 209–224. https://doi.org/10.1177/S0038038500000146.

  55. Worth, M. J. (2017). Nonprofit management: Principles and practice (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  56. Zchout, S. L., & Tal, A. (2017). Conflict versus consensus strategic orientations among environmental NGOs: An empirical evaluation. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 28(3), 1110–1134.

  57. Zhan, X., & Tang, S. Y. (2016). Understanding the implications of government ties for nonprofit operations and functions. Public Administration Review, 76(4), 589–600. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12515.

  58. Zhang, Z., & Guo, C. (2012). Advocacy by Chinese nonprofit organisations: Towards a responsive government? Australian Journal of Public Administration, 71(2), 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8500.2012.00766.x.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Anne Clear.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Clear, A., Paull, M. & Holloway, D. Nonprofit Advocacy Tactics: Thinking Inside The Box?. Voluntas 29, 857–869 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-017-9907-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Advocacy
  • Policy engagement
  • Nonprofit
  • Funding