Taking control of regulations: how international advocacy NGOs shape the regulatory environments of their target countries
- 44 Downloads
A wave of legislative and regulatory crackdown on international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs) has constricted the legal environment for foreign advocacy groups interested in influencing domestic and global policy. Although the legal space for advocacy is shrinking, many INGOs have continued their work and found creative ways to adapt to these restrictions, sometimes even reshaping the regulatory environments of their target countries in their favor. In this article, I explore what enables INGOs to cope with and reshape their regulatory environments. I bridge international relations and interest group studies to examine the interaction between INGO resource configurations and institutional arrangements. I argue that the interaction between resources and institutions provide organizations with ‘programmatic flexibility’ that enables them to adjust their strategies without changing their core mission. I illustrate this argument with case studies of Article 19 and AMERA International, and demonstrate how organizations with high programmatic flexibility can navigate regulations and shape policy in their target country, while those without this flexibility are shut out of policy discussions and often the target country itself. I conclude by exploring how the interaction between internal characteristics and institutional environments shapes and constrains the effects of interest groups in global governance.
KeywordsInternational nongovernmental organizations Civil society regulations Freedom of expression Refugees Resource configurations Institutional arrangements
I thank Elizabeth Bloodgood and Lisa Dellmuth for their invaluable editorial and theoretical suggestions, Nina Hall, Laura Henry, and Lisa Sundstrom for their insightful comments, and the participants of the ‘Interest Groups, International Organizations, and Global Problem-Solving Capacity’ workshop held at Stockholm University in June 2018 for their support and assistance.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
- AMERA International. 2015. Report of the Trustees and Unaudited Financial Statements for the Year Ended 31 January 2016. Reading: AMERA International.Google Scholar
- AMERA UK. 2008. Reports and Accounts for the Year Ended 31 January 2008. Reading: AMERA UK.Google Scholar
- AMERA UK. 2009. Reports and Accounts for the Year Ended 31 January 2009. Reading: AMERA UK.Google Scholar
- AMERA UK. 2011. Reports and Accounts for the Year Ended 31 January 2011. Reading: AMERA UK.Google Scholar
- AMERA UK. 2012. Reports and Accounts for the Year Ended 31 January 2012. Reading: AMERA UK.Google Scholar
- AMERA UK. 2013. Reports and Accounts for the Year Ended 31 January 2013. Reading: AMERA UK.Google Scholar
- AMERA UK. 2014. Reports and Accounts for the Year Ended 31 January 2014. Reading: AMERA UK.Google Scholar
- Article 19. 2005a. Annual Review 2004. London.Google Scholar
- Article 19. 2005b. Report and Consolidated Financial Statements for the Year Ended 31st December 2004. London.Google Scholar
- Article 19. 2006. 2005 Annual Implementation Report. London.Google Scholar
- Article 19. 2008. 2007 Annual Report. London.Google Scholar
- Article 19. 2009. 2008 Annual Report. London.Google Scholar
- Article 19. 2013. Implementation Report for 2012. London.Google Scholar
- Article 19. 2015. Protecting Civic Space: Annual Report 2014. London.Google Scholar
- Barry, Colin M., K. Sam Bell, Chad Clay, Michael E. Flynn, and Amanda Murdie. 2015. Choosing the Best House in a Bad Neighborhood: Location Strategies of Human Rights INGOs in the Non-Western World. International Studies Quarterly 59 (1): 86–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/isqu.12172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Chaudhry, Suparna, and Andrew Heiss. 2019. Charity During Crackdown: Analyzing the Impact of State Repression of NGOs on Philanthropy. Working paper.Google Scholar
- CIVICUS. 2017. People Power Under Attack: Findings from the CIVICUS Monitor.Google Scholar
- Dellmuth, Lisa M., and Elizabeth A. Bloodgood. 2019. Advocacy Groups in Global Governance: Global and Domestic Opportunity Structures. Working Paper.Google Scholar
- Heiss, Andrew. 2017. Amicable Contempt: The Strategic Balance Between Dictators and International NGOs. Ph.D. thesis, Durham, NC: Duke University.Google Scholar
- Heiss, Andrew. 2019. NGOs and Authoritarianism. In Routledge Handbook of NGOs and International Relations, ed. Thomas Davies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Henry, Laura A., Lisa McIntosh Sundstrom, Priya Bala-Miller, and Carla Winston. 2019. NGO Participation in Global Governance Institutions: International and Domestic Drivers of Engagement. Working Paper.Google Scholar
- IFEX Tunisia Monitoring Group. 2005. Tunisia: Freedom of Expression Under Siege. https://www.ifex.org/tunisia/2010/02/16/tmg_report_feb_05_free_expression_under_seige_en.pdf. Accessed 20 June 2019.
- IFEX Tunisia Monitoring Group. 2010. Behind the Façade: How a Politicised Judiciary & Administrative Sanctions Undermine Tunisian Human Rights. https://www.ifex.org/tunisia/2010/06/18/ifextmgmissionreport_june2010.pdf. Accessed 20 June 2019.
- International Refugee Rights Initiative. 2015. Reports and Accounts for the Year Ended 31 January 2015. Reading: International Refugee Rights Initiative.Google Scholar
- Kerlin, Janelle. 2006. U.S.-based International NGOs and Federal Government Foreign Assistance: Out of Alignment? In Nonprofits and Government: Collaboration and Conflict, ed. Elizabeth T. Boris and C. Eugene Steuerle, 373–98. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute.Google Scholar
- Landman, Todd, and Meghna Abraham. 2004. Evaluation of Nine Non-Governmental Human Rights Organisations. IOB Working Document. The Hague: Inspectie Ontwikkelingssamenwerking en Beleidsevaluatie (IOB).Google Scholar
- Renz, David O. 2004. Governance of Nonprofits. In Philanthropy in America: A Comprehensive Historical Encyclopedia, ed. Dwight F. Burlingame, 191–199. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.Google Scholar
- Stiles, Kendall W. 2002. Civil Society by Design: Donors, NGOs, and the Intermestic Development Circle in Bangladesh. Westport: Praeger.Google Scholar
- Watson, Mary R., and Rikki Abzug. 2010. Recruitment and Retention in Nonprofit Organizations. In The Jossey-Bass Handbook of Nonprofit Leadership and Management, ed. David O. Renz. 3rd Edition, 669–708. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Witesman, Eva, and Heiss Andrew. 2016. Nonprofit Collaboration and the Resurrection of Market Failure: How a Resource-Sharing Environment Can Suppress Social Objectives. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-016-9684-5.Google Scholar