2011
DOI: 10.1080/14747731.2011.585855
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Disciplining Dissent: NGOs and Community Organizations

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
37
0
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 54 publications
(50 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
37
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…increasing professionalization, fiscal responsibility, and accountability (see also Choudry and Shragge, 2011).…”
Section: Global Civil Society and Post-colonial Societiesmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…increasing professionalization, fiscal responsibility, and accountability (see also Choudry and Shragge, 2011).…”
Section: Global Civil Society and Post-colonial Societiesmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…NonGovernmental Development Organisations (NGDOs) and other social actors have adopted these ideas, becoming project implementers. In this process, some of them may have lost the more openly political profiles they had in the past (Choudry and Shragge 2011). They may also have become part of a model of cooperation that promotes the managerialisation of local organisations, sustains the status quo and reproduces unequal power relationships (Dar and Cooke 2008;Mawdsley et al 2002).…”
mentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Conversely, NGDOs embracing a more 'radical' stance should be sensible to the process of production of frames and discourses on rights, and would be opened to local knowledge and visions on rights, causes of rights violations and strategies for social change which emerge from people's everyday struggles (Choudry & Shragge, 2011). Such NGDOs would embrace notions of rights rooted in particular contexts, be they recognized by law or derived from liberal frames or not.…”
Section: Analysing Rbas: Power Participation and Accountability Frommentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Political economy allows articulating rights around issues of control, production and distribution of resources (Li, 2007) also reframing development as a contextual, conflictive and political process (McCourt, 2008), and embracing an agenda of social transformation (Choudry and Shragge, 2011;Gulrajani, 2010). From a legalist perspective of rights and RBAs, instead, experts are more easily considered as the sole agents legitimised to tackle developmental challenges (Srinivas, 2009), which can be framed ignoring political-economic issues in their diagnoses and prescriptions, representing domains in purely technical and non-political terms (Li, 2007), following the juridic jargon.…”
Section: Rbas As a Diversity Of Perspectivesmentioning
confidence: 99%