Search

Animal agriculture, despite being a substantial contributor to climate change, is often neglected in discussions around solutions to climate change. Animal agriculture is a prominent contributor to global deforestation, air pollution, water pollution, biodiversity loss, degradation of arable land, public health threats, animal cruelty, worker exploitation, and ocean pollution. This thesis attempts to understand why more environmental, and in particular environmental justice organizations do not prioritize the issue of animal agriculture. Furthermore, this thesis attempts to understand the relationship between the environmental justice and animal rights movements in the US and the UK, what tensions have emerged historically and presently between these movements, how organizations and activists are attempting to overcome these tensions and to understand successful instances of collaboration between the two movements. Through my research findings, I declare that despite decades of peer-reviewed research exposing that animal agriculture accounts for 10-17% of global GHGs, policymakers and advocates have neglected the issue at the global, national, and local levels. It is imperative to look at each level to illustrate how the attitudes and perceptions towards animal agriculture permeate national borders and space. I align with David Pellow and many other BIPOC leaders as a part of a normative stance, that the only way to tackle the climate crisis truly is to embrace a Total or Collective Liberation framework (used interchangeably) of justice to begin to heal tensions between AR and EJ movements. A crucial part of working towards an interspecies Total Liberation framework and overcoming these tensions, paradoxically, is to center human rights issues present in industrial animal agriculture and work to integrate food sovereignty principles in outreach efforts to bridge the gap. embrace reduceterianism, engage in intersectional advocacy, promote resource redistribution, and embrace the movement ecosystem.

We analyse coalition-building in feminist mobilisations in times of crisis in two similar cases: Spain and Italy. Based on social movement literature, we develop two key arguments. First, in austerity-ridden scenarios, connecting socio-economic grievances and feminist demands is key for the feminist mass mobilisations to follow. Second, anti-austerity struggles must resonate across different dimensions of coalition-building, both within the feminist movements and across feminists and other actors, such as LGBTQ collectives and anti-austerity challengers. The data used throughout the article come from semi-structured interviews with activists in Italian and Spanish feminist grass-roots organisations. Our results suggest that times of neoliberal crisis may present opportunities not only to advance the feminist agenda, but also to foster alliances within the feminist milieus and between feminists and other relevant collective actors. These alliances might well extend beyond the period of greatest hardship.

This exploratory study examines union-civil alliances in New Zealand (NZ). It focuses on the involvement of NZ’s peak union body, the Council of Trade Unions, in three civil group coalitions around the Living Wage Campaign, Decent Work Agenda and Environmental Agenda. It assesses how the CTU and its affiliates’ coalition involvement are informed by and seek to progress liberal (representative), participatory and/or more radical democratic principles, and what this means for organizational practice; the relations between the coalition parties; workplaces; and beyond.Through case discussions, the study finds that civil alliances involving the CTU and its affiliates do not reflect a core trait of union activity in NZ. Among the union-civil alliances that do exist, there is a prevailing sense of their utility to progress shared interests alongside, and on the union side, a more instrumental aim to encourage union revival. However, the alliances under examination reflect an engagement with various liberal and participatory democratic arrangements at different organizational levels. More radical democratic tendencies emerge in relation to ad hoc elements of activity and the aspirational goals of such coalitions as opposed to their usual processes and institutional configurations.In essence, what emerges is a labour centre and movement which, on the one hand, is in a survivalist mode primarily concerned with economistic matters, and on the other, in a position of relative political and bargaining weakness, reaching out to other civil groups where it can so as to challenge the neo-liberal hegemony. Based on our findings, we conclude that Laclau and Mouffe’s (2001) view of radical democracy holds promise for subsequent coalitions involving the CTU, particularly in the context of NZ workers’ diverse interests and the plurality of other civil groups and social movements’ interests. This view concerns on-going agency, change, organizing and strategy by coalitions to build inclusive (counter-) hegemony, arguing for a politic from below that challenges existing dominant neo-liberal assumptions in work and other spheres of life., Cette étude prospective évalue les accords entre syndicats et groupes civils en Nouvelle-Zélande (NZ). Elle se concentre sur la participation du Conseil des syndicats néo-zélandais (Council of Trade Unions-CTU) aux trois coalitions relatives au salaire minimum vital, au travail décent et au programme environnemental. Elle examine trois courants d’idées (soit la démocratie libérale, la démocratie participative et la pensée radicale) dans le cadre de ces coalitions auxquelles le CTU et ses syndicats affiliés participent, ainsi que leur signification au niveau des pratiques syndicales, des relations entre les participants de la coalition, des milieux de travail et, enfin, de la société en général.Grâce à ces études de cas, nous constatons que les coalitions civiles auxquelles participent le CTU et ses affiliés ne constituent pas des traits déterminants des activités syndicales en Nouvelle-Zélande. Parmi les alliances existantes, un sentiment domine quant à leur contribution au progrès des intérêts communs, mais, du côté syndical, un but davantage orienté vers le renouveau du syndicalisme prédomine. Toutefois, les alliances étudiées traduisent un engagement envers divers principes démocratiques à différents niveaux de l’organisation. Pour leur part, les tendances radicales émergent grâce aux activités ad hoc et aux objectifs recherchés par ces alliances, et non pas par leurs procédés ou configurations institutionnels. Fondamentalement, il appert que le mouvement syndical s’efforce, d’une part, de survivre en se concentrant sur les salaires et les conditions de travail, et, d’autre part, étant donné sa position de faiblesse, il tente de tendre la main aux groupes civils dans le but de contrecarrer l’hégémonie néo-libérale. À partir de nos observations, nous concluons que le concept de démocratie radicale de Laclau et Mouffe (2001) pourrait être prometteur dans le cadre de futures coalitions auxquelles participerait le CTU, particulièrement sur le plan des divers intérêts communs partagés par le syndicalisme et les autres groupes civils. Cette vision concerne, notamment, les engagements moraux, le changement social, l’organisation et la stratégie des coalitions visant à bâtir une contre-hégémonie basée sur une participation qui va du bas vers le haut et qui pourrait, ainsi, venir contrecarrer les thèses néo-libérales dominantes dans les milieux de travail et dans les autres sphères de la vie., Este estudio exploratorio evalúa las alianzas entre sindicatos y grupos civiles en Nueva Zelandia (NZ). El estudio se concentra en la implicación del Consejo de sindicatos neo-zelandeses (Council of Trade Unions - CTU) en tres coaliciones en torno a los temas del salario mínimo vital, el trabajo decente y la agenda del medio ambiente. Se examina hasta qué punto la participación del CTU y de sus afiliados en la coalición se inspira de los principios de tres corrientes de ideas, esto es, la democracia liberal, la democracia participativa y el pensamiento radical. Se aborda igualmente, la significación de dichas influencias a nivel de la práctica organizacional, de las relaciones entre participantes de la coalición, de los medios de trabajo y de la sociedad en general.Gracias a estos estudios de casos, se constata que las coaliciones civiles a las cuales participaron la CTU y sus afiliados no constituyen una característica central de la actividad sindical en Nueva Zelandia. En el seno de las alianzas existentes, domina un sentimiento respecto a su contribución al progreso de los intereses comunes, pero, del lado sindical, predomina un objetivo más instrumental de promover la renovación sindical. Sin embargo, las alianzas estudiadas traducen un compromiso con los diversos principios de la democracia liberal y participativa a diferentes niveles de la organización. Por su lado, las tendencias más radicales emergen gracias a actividades ad hoc y a las aspiraciones formuladas por las alianzas en oposición a los procedimientos habituales y las configuraciones institucionales.Aparece de manera fundamental, que el movimiento sindical se esfuerza, de un lado, por sobrevivir concentrándose en los trabajadores asalariados y las condiciones de trabajo, y, de otro lado, dada la posición de debilidad el intenta tender la mano a los grupos civiles con el objetivo de desafiar la hegemonía neo-liberal. A partir de estas observaciones, se concluye que el concepto de democracia radical de Laclau y Mouffe (2001) podría ser prometedor en el marco de futuras coaliciones a las cuales participaría el CTU, particularmente en el plano de diversos intereses comunes compartidos por el sindicalismo y los otros grupos civiles. Esta visión concierne, especialmente, los compromisos morales, el cambio social, la organización y la estrategia de coaliciones con miras a construir una contra-hegemonía inclusiva que fomente una política que va de abajo hacia arriba y que podría ser capaz de desafiar las concepciones neoliberales dominantes en los medios de trabajo y en las otras esferas de la vida.

The purpose of this study was to determine if and to which extent there has been a shift in the position of the Netherlands in European Union coalition-building, focusing on the pre-Brexit phase that began with the Brexit referendum in the United Kingdom (23 June 2016) and finished with the UK’s formal withdrawal (31 January 2020). The UK’s departure from the EU has ensued an economic and demographic shift towards the EU’s south and east. This raises questions about the position of the Netherlands in a post-Brexit EU. Using the lenses of Liberal Intergovernmentalism and Constructivism, we found a more assertive attitude of the Netherlands towards the EU as a direct result of the loss of an important liberal and heavyweight partner. We have witnessed an increase in networking events during the pre-Brexit phase, aimed at enhancing diplomatic relations with other Member States, as well as in political discourse and events in which visions for (the future of) the EU were explicitly addressed. It was shown that the Netherlands has come to the fore by undertaking an active leadership role in forging new coalitions to secure its interest in a post-Brexit EU. A prime outcome of this is the New Hanseatic League, comprised of small and medium-sized northern EU Member States. A second result is the apparent Dutch leading role within the so-called Frugal Four. These findings corroborate the assumptions that the Netherlands primarily partakes in ad-hoc, theme-specific coalitions. O objetivo deste estudo consistiu em determinar se, e em que medida, houve uma mudança na posição dos Países Baixos no processo de formação de coligações da União Europeia, centrando-se na fase pré-Brexit, com início no referendo Brexit no Reino Unido (23 de Junho de 2016) e desfecho na retirada formal do Reino Unido (31 de Janeiro de 2020). A saída do Reino Unido da UE resultou numa reorientação económica e demográfica para o sul e leste da UE. Isso suscita algumas questões sobre a posição dos Países Baixos numa UE pós-Brexit. Sob as lentes do intergovernamentalismo liberal e construtivismo, verificámos uma atitude mais assertiva dos Países Baixos em relação à UE como resultado direto da perda de um importante parceiro liberal e um peso-pesado. Assistimos a um aumento de eventos de networking durante a fase pré-Brexit, que visavam reforçar as relações diplomáticas com outros Estados-Membros, e o mesmo se verificou no discurso político e nos eventos em que as visões para a UE (e o seu futuro) foram explicitamente abordadas. Constatou-se que os Países Baixos têm vindo a assumir um papel de liderança ativa na formação de novas coligações para assegurar os seus interesses numa UE pós-Brexit. Um importante resultado deste processo é a Nova Liga Hanseática, composta por pequenos e médios Estados-Membros do Norte da UE. Um segundo resultado é o aparente papel de liderança dos neerlandeses no seio dos chamados Frugal Four. Estas conclusões corroboram os pressupostos de que os Países Baixos participam sobretudo em coligações ad-hoc e orientadas para temas específicos.

Communities across the United States face a widespread water crisis including risks of contamination, rate increases, shut-offs for non-payment, and dilapidating infrastructure. Against this background, a right to water movement has emerged which has found its strength in coalition-building and collectivity. Activists demand change using the framing of “water is a human right”, socially constructing the right to water from below. Based on more than 25 semi-structured interviews with water advocates and activists, our article explores how movement participants used the human rights framework to advocate for clean and affordable water for all. We used political opportunity theory and conceptions of government “openness” and “closedness” to examine when and how advocates decided to use confrontational and cooperative approaches. We identified a push and pull of different strategies in three key spaces: in the courts, on the streets, and at the Capitols. Advocates used adversarial approaches including protests and civil disobedience, reliance on human rights mechanisms, and to a more limited extent litigation simultaneously with cooperative approaches such as engaging with legislators and the development of concrete proposals and plans for ensuring water affordability. This adaptiveness, persistence, and ability to identify opportunities likely explains the movement’s initial successes in addressing the water crisis.

Successful prevention and control of the epidemic of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) cannot be achieved by the health sector alone: a wide range of organisations from multiple sectors and across government must also be involved. This requires a new, inclusive approach to advocacy and to coordinating, convening and catalysing action across civil society, best achieved by a broad-based network. This comment maps the experience of the NCD Alliance (NCDA) on to Shiffman’s challenges for global health networks – framing (problem definition and positioning), coalition-building and governance – and highlights some further areas overlooked in his analysis.

This study contributes to the literature on informal governance by examining politics of informal agenda-setting in the European Commission. As a ‘hard case’, the paper examines how the European Commission exceeds limited legal Treaty provisions in foreign and security policy (CFSP). This system, where the Commission has come to play a more prominent role than stipulated in the treaties, is interpreted as a normalization of CFSP governance. Three complementary propositions on the informal agenda-setting role of the Commission are developed: agenda leadership (#1), coalition-building (#2), and community framing (#3). To illuminate these propositions, we examine their relevance across three empirical cases: (i) EU’s Maritime Security Strategy (EUMSS), (ii) EU’s Arctic policies, and (iii) EU’s naval mission against human smuggling in the Mediterranean, EU Sophia. These cases suggest that informal agenda governance by the European Commission is mainly shaped by agenda leadership in combination with EU-level coalition-building, but also strengthened by community framing.

Place-based health efforts account for the role of the community environment in shaping decisions and circumstances that affect population well-being. Such efforts, rooted as they are in the theory that health is socially determined, mobilize resources for health promotion that are not typically used, and offer a more informed and robust way of promoting health outcomes within a community. Common criticisms of place-based work include the difficulty of replication, since engagement is so specific to a place, and limited sustainability of the work, in the absence of continued institutional structures, both within the community and supporting structures outside the community, to keep these initiatives resilient. This paper describes a place-based initiative, GO! Austin/VAMOS! Austin (GAVA), which was designed to harness the strengths of place based work – namely its specificity to place and community. From the start, the project was designed to balance this specificity with a focus on developing and utilizing a standardized set of evidence-informed implementation and evaluation approaches and tools that were flexible enough to be modified for specific settings. This was accompanied by an emphasis on leadership and capacity building within resident leaders, which provided for informed intervention and demand building capacity, but also for longevity as partners, philanthropic and otherwise, moved in and out of the work.

Num sistema internacional desordenado e de já prolongada turbulência política nas relações entre os países europeus, os Estados Unidos, a Rússia e a Turquia, em que as expetativas de liderança recaem cada vez mais sobre a Alemanha, ocorreram as eleições legislativas alemãs. As eleições de 24 de setembro de 2017 penalizaram os dois maiores partidos e representam uma mudança do sistema partidário e da estabilidade política na Alemanha. Passados dois meses e meio depois das eleições, e do fracasso das pré-negociações entre CDU/CSU, FDP e Verdes, discute-se agora as opções de uma nova grande coligação CDU/CSU-SPD, um governo minoritário ou a realização de novas eleições. Esta demora na escolha de uma solução governativa é inesperada e tem implicações para a Europa, porque a estabilidade política na Alemanha é o pressuposto da estabilidade política europeia, e coloca o resto da Europa perante um compasso de espera. O artigo analisa o resultado eleitoral, a evolução desde então e argumenta que as transformações do sistema partidário na Alemanha ajudam a explicar o atual impasse pós-eleitoral: a crescente fragmentação do sistema partidário articulado com a volatilidade eleitoral e com uma acentuada polarização ideológica, o que se reflete, no contexto pós-eleitoral, na existência de sete partidos políticos com representação parlamentar e afirmação de um sistema multipartidário. The German Bundestag elections took place amidst a disorderly international system and ongoing political turmoil in relations between European countries, the United States, Russia and Turkey, where leadership expectations increasingly fall on Germany. The elections of 24 September 2017 penalized the two largest parties and confirmed a change of the party system and of German political stability. Two and a half months after the elections, and the failure of prenegotiations between CDU/CSU, FDP and the Greens, the options for a new CDU/CSU-SPD grand coalition, a minority government or new elections are still open. This delay in finding a solution for government formation is unexpected and has implications for Europe because political stability in Germany is the prerequisite of European political stability and because it puts the rest of Europe on hold. The article analyses the electoral outcome, the evolution of the party system since then, and argues that the transformations of the German party system help explain the current post-election impasse: increased fragmentation of the party system, electoral volatility and a marked ideological polarization, which is reflected, in the post-election context, in the existence of now seven political parties with parliamentary representation and the affirmation of a multiparty system.

Global health networks, webs of individuals and organizations with a shared concern for a particular condition, have proliferated over the past quarter century. They differ in their effectiveness, a factor that may help explain why resource allocations vary across health conditions and do not correspond closely with disease burden. Drawing on findings from recently concluded studies of eight global health networks—addressing alcohol harm, early childhood development (ECD), maternal mortality, neonatal mortality, pneumonia, surgically-treatable conditions, tobacco use, and tuberculosis—I identify four challenges that networks face in generating attention and resources for the conditions that concern them. The first is problem definition: generating consensus on what the problem is and how it should be addressed. The second is positioning: portraying the issue in ways that inspire external audiences to act. The third is coalition-building: forging alliances with these external actors, particularly ones outside the health sector. The fourth is governance: establishing institutions to facilitate collective action. Research indicates that global health networks that effectively tackle these challenges are more likely to garner support to address the conditions that concern them. In addition to the effectiveness of networks, I also consider their legitimacy, identifying reasons both to affirm and to question their right to exert power.

The literature on democratization emphasises how authoritarian constraints usually lead genuine opposition parties and movements to form alliances in order to make demands for reform to the authoritarian regime. There is significant empirical evidence to support this theoretical point. While this trend is partly visible in the Middle East and North Africa, such coalitions are usually short-lived and limited to a single issue, never reaching the stage of formal and organic alliances. This article, using the case of Morocco, seeks to explain this puzzle by focusing on ideological and strategic differences that exist between the Islamist and the secular/liberal sectors of civil society, where significant opposition politics occurs. In addition, this article also aims to explain how pro-democracy strategies of the European Union further widen this divide, functioning as a key obstacle to democratic reforms.

When core national interests are at stake, EU member states optimize their strategic activities on the European level in order to advance national preferences. Two cases are used in this study to shed light on such dynamics. The first case is Sweden’s strategic action within the transparency issue area, which in part defined the country’s Council Presidency in early 2001. The second case is the EU chemicals policy where Sweden, as in the transparency case, harbours strong interests. The two studies provide opportunities for in-depth studies of the complex institutional setting and related EU negotiations within the co-decision context. Armed with a theoretical framework based on what is labelled institutional possibilities and network opportunities, the author proceeds to analyze Swedish strategic activities in the studied cases. These activities are categorized as framing; the use of expertise; manipulation; procedural tactics; leadership; mediation and coalition-building. The framework developed to analyze Sweden’s strategies is additionally used to trace and analyze the activities of other member states (i.e., France, Italy, the UK and Finland), EU bodies, and non-governmental actors. This multi-actor approach significantly broadens the empirical and theoretical scope of analysis and understanding. The theoretical contribution consists of a synthesis of rational institutionalism and network theory – informed by the sizable literature about negotiations in international relations. The author concludes that within co-decision procedures, the European Parliament has become an important ally – or opponent – for member states advancing national interests. The role and influence of the Council Presidency is identified as a uniquely powerful when promoting national interests through the European system. The study also demonstrates that strategies vary greatly across stages of decision-making, and that tactical approaches are configured differently depending on the context. Avhandlingens utgångspunkt är att EU:s medlemsstater agerar mer taktiskt när starka nationella intressen står på spel. I den här studien analyseras Sveriges strategiska agerande i öppenhetsfrågan och i relation till en ny europeisk kemikalielagstiftning. Det första fallet, öppenhetsfrågan, slutförhandlades under Sveriges ordförandeskap våren 2001. Det andra fallet, kemikalielagstiftningen (förkortad REACH, vilket står för Registration, Evaluation, and Authorisation of Chemicals), är ett omfattande lagstiftningsförslag där Sverige, liksom i öppenhetsfrågan, har haft starka intressen. Det teoretiska ramverket baseras på nyckelbegreppen institutional possibilities och network opportunities. Rationell institutionalism kombinerat med nätverksteori och teoribildning kring internationella förhandlingar ligger till grund för analysen. Strategiskt agerande för att tillvarata institutionellt givna möjligheter (institutional possibilities) och nätverka (network opportunities) med andra aktörer kategoriseras utifrån begreppen framing, tillhandahållande av expertis, manipulation, proceduriell taktik, ledarskap, medling samt koalitionsbyggande. Detta ramverk används även för att diskutera andra staters agerande inom samma områden liksom för att inkludera EUs institutioner samt andra ickestatliga aktörer. Författaren kommer fram till att när ministerrådet och parlamentet gemensamt fattar beslut (co-decision procedures), så har parlamentet blivit en allt viktigare samarbetspartner och en central förhandlingsarena jämte rådet för medlemsstaterna. Vikten av ordförandeskapet i Ministerrådet för medlemsländernas möjlighet att agera taktiskt belyses. Studien visar också på att medlemsstaternas strategiska agerande varierar under olika stadier av beslutsfattande samt att olika strategier används i kombination beroende på hur beslutsproceduren utvecklas.