Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

International Policy Partnerships with Civil Society: Risks and Opportunities

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Partnerships in International Policy-Making

Part of the book series: International Series on Public Policy ((ISPP))

Abstract

In global governance, cooperation between intergovernmental and civil society organizations takes many forms, including multi-stakeholder initiatives, private–public partnerships, sub-contracting, political alliances, hybrid coalitions, multi-sectoral networks, pluralist co-governance, and even foreign policy by proxy. This chapter identifies the main transformations taking place in global governance to make it more accessible to non-state actors, examines the key characteristics of policy partnerships between international organizations) and non-governmental organizations, and discusses the risks and opportunities entailed in this interaction. In particular, the openings from the United Nations and the European Union are analysed, together with the reasons why civil society organizations seek partnership with such institutions.

This publication derives from a three-year-long Jean Monnet Module on EU’s Engagement with Civil Society and its final conference held at LUISS in Rome in May 2015. Many thanks to all those who took part in the lively debates. Financial contribution for this project was provided by EACEA (529096-LLP-1-2012-1-IT-529096-AJMMO), by the US Department of State via its Embassy in Rome (S-IT700-15-GR-016), by the LUISS Department of Political Science, and the LUISS School of Government.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alemanno, A. (2014). Stakeholder engagement in regulatory policy. Paris: OECD (GOV/RPC(2014)14/ANN2).

    Google Scholar 

  • Asal, V., Nussbaum, B., & Harrington, D. W. (2007). Terrorism as transnational advocacy: An organizational and tactical examination. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 30(1), 15–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Austin, J. E. (2000). The collaboration challenge: How nonprofit and business succeed through strategic alliances. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avant, D. D., Finnemore, M., & Sell, S. K. (Eds.). (2010). Who governs the globe? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bäckstrand, K., Campe, S., Chan, S., Mert, A., & Schäferhoff, M. (2012). Transnational public–private partnerships. In F. Biermann & P. Pattberg (Eds.), Global environmental governance reconsidered (pp. 123–148). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beisheim, M., & Liese, A. (Eds.). (2014). Transnational partnerships. Effectively providing for sustainable development? London: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benner, T., Ivanova, M. H., Streck, C., & Witte, J. M. (2003). Moving the partnership agenda to the next stage: Key challenges. In J. M. Witte, C. Streck, & T. Benner (Eds.), Progress and peril? Partnerships and networks in global environmental governance: The post-Johannesburg agenda (pp. 85–89). Washington, DC: Global Public Policy Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boerzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2007). Public-private partnerships: Effective and legitimate tools of international governance. In E. Grande & L. W. Pauly (Eds.), Complex sovereignty: On the reconstruction of political authority in the 21st century (pp. 195–216). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boli, J., & Thomas, G. M. (Eds.). (1999). Constructing world culture: International non-governmental organizations since 1875. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brinkerhoff, J. M. (2002a). Assessing and improving partnership relationships and outcomes: A proposed framework. Evaluation and Program Planning, 25(3), 215–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brinkerhoff, J. M. (2002b). Partnership for international development: Rhetoric or results? Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broadwater, I., & Kaul, I. (2005). Global public–private partnerships. The current landscape. New York: UNDP/ODS Background Paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, L. D. (2008). Creating credibility. Legitimacy and accountability for transnational civil society. Sterling, VA: Kumarian Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bull, H. (1977). The anarchical society: A study of order in world politics. London: Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Busby, J. W. (2007). Bono made Jesse Helms Cry: Jubilee 200, debt relief, and moral action in international politics. International Studies Quarterly, 51(2), 247–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caporaso, J. (1993). International relations theory and multilateralism: The search for foundations. In J. G. Ruggie (Ed.), Multilateralism matters. The theory and Praxis of an institutional form (pp. 51–90). New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cerny, P. G. (2010). Rethinking world politics: A theory of transnational neopluralism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Checkel, J. T. (Ed.). (2013). Transnational dynamics of civil war. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson, M. B. E. (1994). A risk based model of stakeholder theory. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Second Toronto Conference on Stakeholder Theory, Centre for Corporate Social Performance & Ethics, University of Toronto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clinton, H. R. (2010). Leading through civilian power: Redefining American diplomacy and development. Foreign Affairs, 89(6), 13–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collingwood, V., & Logister, L. (2005). State of the art: Addressing the INGO ‘Legitimacy Deficit’. Political Studies Review, 3(2), 175–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Czempiel, E. O., & Rosenau, J. N. (1992). Governance without government: Order and change in world politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2001). European Governance: A white paper. Brussels: COM (2001) 428 final.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2010). European instrument for democracy and human rights (EIDHR). Strategy Paper 2011–2013. Brussels: C(2010) 2432, 21 April.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, P. (2000). Fighting marginalisation with transnational networks: Counter-hegemonic globalisation. Contemporary Sociology, 29, 230–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, Y. H., & Mansbach, R. W. (2004). Remapping global politics. History’s revenge and future shock. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, F. (1990). Technocracy and the politics of expertise. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gary, I. (1996). Confrontation, cooperation or cooptation: NGOs and the Ghanaian State during structural adjustment. Review of African Political Economy, 23(68), 149–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hale, T., & Held, D. (Eds.). (2011). Handbook of transnational governance. New institutions and innovations. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, R. B., & Biersteker, T. J. (Eds.). (2002). The emergence of private authority in global governance. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heap, S. (1998). NGOs and the private sector: Potential for partnerships? Oxford: INTRAC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heine, J., & Thakur, R. (Eds.). (2011). The dark side of globalization. Tokyo: United Nations University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Held, D., & McGrew, A. (Eds.). (2002). Governing globalization: Power, authority and global governance. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hemmati, M. (Ed.). (2002). Multi-Stakeholder processes for governance and sustainability: Beyond deadlock and conflict. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, S. L. (2002). Selling civil society: Western aid and the nongovernmental organization sector in Russia. Comparative Political Studies, 35, 139–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgott, R. A., Underhill, G. R. D., & Bieler, A. (Eds.). (2000). Non-State actors and authority in the global system. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, K. A., & Hughes, J. E. (1998). Cyberpolitics: Citizen activism in the age of the internet. Lanham, MD: Rowan and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hulme, D., & Edwards, M. (Eds.). (1997). NGOs, states and donors: Too close for comfort? London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Imig, D. R., & Tarrow, S. (Eds.). (2001). Contentious Europeans: Protest and politics in an emerging polity. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joachim, J., & Locher, B. (Eds.). (2009). Transnational activism in the UN and the EU. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, K. (1971). Transnational relations as a threat to the democratic process. International Organization, 25(3), 706–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaldor, M., & Muro-Ruiz, D. (2003). Religious and nationalist militant groups. In M. Kaldor, H. K. Anheier, & M. Glausius (Eds.), Global civil society (pp. 151–184). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapoor, I. (2012). Celebrity humanitarianism: The ideology of global charity. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keck, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond borders: Advocacy networks in international politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keohane, R. (1984). After hegemony: Cooperation and discord in the world political economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keohane, R. (1986). Reciprocity in international relations. International Organization, 40(1), 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keohane, R., & Nye, J. (Eds.). (1971). Transnational relations and world politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keohane, R., & Nye, J. (1977). Power and interdependence. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koenig-Archibugi, M., & Zürn, M. (Eds.). (2006). New modes of governance in the global system: Exploring publicness, delegation and inclusiveness. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krasner, S. D. (1982). Structural changes and regime consequences: Regimes as intervening variables. International Organization, 36(2), 185–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liese, A., & Beisheim, M. (2011). Transnational public–private partnerships and the provision of collective goods in developing countries. In T. Risse (Ed.), Governance without a state: Policies and politics in areas of limited statehood (pp. 115–143). New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macdonald, T. (2008). Global stakeholder democracy: Power and representation beyond liberal states. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mansbach, R. W., & Rafferty, K. L. (2008). Introduction to global politics. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchetti, R. (2008). Global democracy: For and against. Ethical theory, institutional design, and social struggles. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchetti, R. (2015). The conditions for civil society participation in international decision making. In D. Della Porta & M. Diani (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of social movements (pp. 753–766). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchetti, R. (2016a). Global Strategic Engagement. The New Rules for Global Governance. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchetti, R. (Ed.). (2016b). Cooperation and competition between governments and NGOs: Perspectives from Africa, Asia, Europe, and Middle East. New Delhi: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martens, J. (2007). Multistaholder partnerships. Future models of multilateralism? Berlin: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. Dialogue on Globalization n. 29.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKeon, N. (2009). The United Nations and civil society: Legitimating global governance—Whose voice? London: Zed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naìm, M. (2007). What is a GONGO? How government-sponsored groups masquerade as civil society. Foreign Policy, 170(18), 96–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naìm, M. (2013). The end of power. From boardrooms to battlefields and churches to states, Why being in charge isn’t what it used to be. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, J. (2002). Building partnership. Cooperation between the United Nations and the private sector. New York: United National Department of Public Information.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nye, J., & Keohane, R. O. (1971). Transnational relations and world politics. International Organization, XXV(3), 329–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohmae, K. (1999). The borderless world: Power and strategy in the interlinked economy. New York: HarperBusiness.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pattberg, P. (2005). The institutionalization of private governance: How business and nonprofit organizations agree on transnational rules. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 18(4), 589–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pishchikova, K. (2014). Multi-stakeholder partnership nella ricostruzione post-conflitto: Un bilancio della letteratura e della prassi attuale. In R. Belloni, M. Cereghini, & F. Strazzari (Eds.), Costruire la pace tra Stato e territorio: I dilemmi del peacebuilding (pp. 165–180). Trento: Erickson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. D. (1988). Diplomacy and domestic politics: The logic of two-level games. International Organization, 42, 427–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reiman, K. D. (2006). A view from the top: International politics, norms, and the worldwide growth of NGOs. International Studies Quarterly, 50, 45–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Risse-Kappen, T. (Ed.). (1995). Bringing transnational relations back in: Non-State actors, domestic structure and international institutions. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Risse, T. (2011). Governance without a state? Policies and politics in areas of limited statehood. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenau, J. N. (1992). Citizenship in a changing global order. In J. N. Rosenau & E. O. Czempiel (Eds.), Governance without government: Order and change in world politics (pp. 272–294). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenau, J. N. (1997). Along the domestic-foreign frontier: Exploring governance in a turbulent world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ruggie, J. G. (1982). International regimes, transactions, and change: Embedded liberalism in the postwar economic order. International Organization, 36(2), 379–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruggie, J. G. (1993). Multilateralism: The anatomy of an institution. In J. G. Ruggie (Ed.), Multilateralism matters. The theory and Praxis of an institutional form (pp. 3–47). New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salamon, L. M. (1994). The rise of the nonprofit sector. Foreign Affairs, 73(4), 109–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sardamov, I. (2005). Civil society’ and the limits of democratic assistance. Government and Opposition, 40(3), 379–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaferhoff, M., Campe, S., & Kaan, C. (2009). Transnational public–private partnerships in international relations: Making sense of concepts, research frameworks, and results. International Studies Review, 11(2), 451–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholte, J. A. (2000). Globalization: A critical introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, A.-M. (2004). A new world order. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J., & Wiest, D. (2012). Social movements in the world-system: The politics of crisis and transformation. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommerer, T., & Tallberg, J. (2016). Transnational access to international organizations 1950–2010: A new data set. International Studies Perspectives, (0), 1–20. doi:10.1093/isp/ekv022.

  • Steger, M. B. (2003). Globalization. A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarrow, S. (1994). Power in movement. Social movements and contentious politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarrow, S. (2005). The new transnational activism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Uhlin, A., & Kalm, S. (2015). Civil society and the governance of development: Opposing global institutions. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations. (2004). We the peoples: Civil society, the United Nations and global governance (A/58/817/2004). New York: Report of the Panel of Eminent Persons on United Nations-Civil Society Relations. Commission Cardoso (UN A/58/817).

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaillancourt Rosenau, P. (Ed.). (2000). Public-private policy partnerships. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Rooy, A. (2004). The global legitimacy game: Civil society, globalization, and protest. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wapner, P. (2002). Introductory essay: Paradise lost? NGOs and global accountability. Chicago Journal of International Law, 3(1), 155–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warner, M., & Sullivan, R. (Eds.). (2004). Putting partnerships to work. Strategic alliances for development between government, the private sector and civil society. Sheffield: Greenleaf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willets, P. (2000). From ‘Consultative Arrangements’ to ‘Partnership’: The changing status of NGOs in diplomacy at the UN. Global Governance, 6, 191–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witte, J. M., Reinicke, W., & Benner, T. (2000). Beyond Multilateralism: Global Public Policy Networks. Internationale Politik und Gesellschaft, 2, 176–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woods, N. (2000). Globalization and international institutions. In N. Woods (Ed.), The political economy of globalization (pp. 202–223). New York: St. Martin’s Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, F. (2003). Environmental GONGO autonomy: Unintended consequences of state strategies in China. The Good Society, 12(1), 35–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zürn, M. (1999). The state in the post-national constellation—Societal denationalization and multi-level governance: Arena Working Papers WP 99/35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zürn, M. (2004). Global governance and legitimacy problems. Government and Opposition, 39(2), 260–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. LUISS, Roma, Italy

    Raffaele Marchetti

Authors
  1. Raffaele Marchetti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raffaele Marchetti .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. LUISS, Roma, Italy

    Raffaele Marchetti

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Marchetti, R. (2017). International Policy Partnerships with Civil Society: Risks and Opportunities. In: Marchetti, R. (eds) Partnerships in International Policy-Making. International Series on Public Policy . Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-94938-0_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation