All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.

Global Governors and Local Governance: The Transnational Campaign for Integrated Watershed Management in Ecuadorian Municipalities
Unformatted Document Text:  3 Transnational Advocacy Coalitions Going Local The process by which transnational advocacy coalitions take norms and policy agendas developed at the international level and attempt to implement them at the subnational level remains relatively under-analyzed. Subnational actors are more often analyzed in terms of their role in bringing local issues to a global discourse through a process Tarrow (2005) calls “externalization” (della Porta et al. 2006; Martin 2010; Andonova et al. 2009). To the extent the causal arrow is reversed, studies typically analyze transnational campaigns seeking policy change at the national rather than subnational level. Here, the targets are national politicians who set state policy regarding human rights (Keck and Sikkink 1998; Lutz and Sikkink 2001; Hawkins 2002), intellectual property (Deere 2009; Drahos 2007), the environment (Khagram 2002; Conca 2006; Andonova 2008), democratization (Riker 2002; Carothers 2004; Buxton 2006), and various other issues. There are three common models for describing the pathways by which transnational advocacy networks pressure national leaders, and thus influence normative and policy change within a state. The “cascade” model comes from regime theory and argues that policies reflected in international agreements flow down to states, who either implement or ignore them; the effects of this decision then flow down to the subnational level (Bulkeley and Betsill 2003). If subnational governance is addressed at all, the assumption is that local governments act under the sole influence and direction of national governments. Over the last decade the “boomerang” and related “spiral” models have become the favored framework (Keck and Sikkink 1998; Risse et al. 1999). These models ascribe some agency to subnational actors, but these are non-state actors who work with transnational allies to pressure powerful states, who in turn coerce weaker

Authors: Kauffman, Craig.
first   previous   Page 4 of 48   next   last

background image
Transnational Advocacy Coalitions Going Local 
The process by which transnational advocacy coalitions take norms and policy agendas 
developed at the international level and attempt to implement them at the subnational level 
remains relatively under-analyzed.  Subnational actors are more often analyzed in terms of their 
role in bringing local issues to a global discourse through a process Tarrow (2005) calls 
“externalization” (della Porta et al. 2006; Martin 2010; Andonova et al. 2009).  To the extent the 
causal arrow is reversed, studies typically analyze transnational campaigns seeking policy 
change at the national rather than subnational level.  Here, the targets are national politicians 
who set state policy regarding human rights (Keck and Sikkink 1998; Lutz and Sikkink 2001; 
Hawkins 2002), intellectual property (Deere 2009; Drahos 2007), the environment (Khagram 
2002; Conca 2006; Andonova 2008), democratization (Riker 2002; Carothers 2004; Buxton 
2006), and various other issues.   
There are three common models for describing the pathways by which transnational 
advocacy networks pressure national leaders, and thus influence normative and policy change 
within a state. The “cascade” model comes from regime theory and argues that policies reflected 
in international agreements flow down to states, who either implement or ignore them; the 
effects of this decision then flow down to the subnational level (Bulkeley and Betsill 2003).  If 
subnational governance is addressed at all, the assumption is that local governments act under 
the sole influence and direction of national governments. Over the last decade the “boomerang” 
and related “spiral” models have become the favored framework (Keck and Sikkink 1998; Risse 
et al. 1999).  These models ascribe some agency to subnational actors, but these are non-state 
actors who work with transnational allies to pressure powerful states, who in turn coerce weaker 

Submission, Review, and Scheduling! All Academic Convention can help with all of your abstract management needs and many more. Contact us today for a quote!
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 4 of 48   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.