Legislative Advocacy Under Competitive Authoritarian Regimes: The Case of Civil Society in Jordan

Abdel-Samad, Mounah

doi:10.1007/s11266-015-9592-0

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Existing studies have distinguished advocacy strategies based on the institutional actors that NGOs target, such as legislators, administrators, courts, the media, and citizens (Boehmke, Gailmard, and Patty 2013;Buffardi, Pekkanen, and Smith 2015;Binderkrantz 2005; Gais and Walker 1991) (see table 8.1). Legislative advocacy refers to NGOs' engagement with legislators or legislative staff to produce and present research papers, testify in committees, and alert constituents (McCarthy and Castelli 2002;Abdel-Samad 2017). Administrative advocacy, or lobbying of the bureaucracy, means that NGOs participate in the formulation and implementation of bureaucratic rules (Nicholson-Crotty 2011).…”

Section: Ngo Advocacy In Democracymentioning

confidence: 99%

Lobbying the Autocrat

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Ngo Advocacy In Democracymentioning

confidence: 99%

Lobbying the Autocrat

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Analyses of non-Western advocacy, and especially in more authoritarian political contexts, remains lacking. A few exceptions include Abdel-Samad (2017) on Jordan; Guo and Zhang (2014) on Singapore and a growing body of related work on China (Zhang and Guo, 2012; Wong, 2015; Li et al , 2017). In Russia, Cook and Vinogradova (2006) provided an early analysis of organizations dedicated to advocacy, but separated them from other NGOs into a “policy/advocacy” category.…”

Section: Advocacy By Ngos In Russia's Authoritarian Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advocacy in authoritarian contexts: the case of disability NGOs in Russia

Toepler

Fröhlich

2020

IJSSP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe growing trend towards closing the political space for civil society in authoritarian regimes has primarily targeted NGOs focused on rights-based advocacy. Drawing on a study of disability NGOs in Russia, this paper seeks to contribute to a better understanding of the advocacy options that nonprofit organizations have even in repressive political contexts. The authors first review the extant literature to identify common actors, types and tactics and then trace what types of advocacy Russian NGOs are engaged in and what tactics they are able to utilize.Design/methodology/approachThe empirical part of this paper is based on 20 interviews conducted among active participants in disability NGOs in Moscow, St. Petersburg, Perm and Nizhniy Novgorod. Despite not being a representative sample of organizations, the selection of cities and organizations was intended to reflect spatial and structural factors of the field.FindingsThe authors find that NGOs are able to pursue a broad range of advocacy activities despite a generally restrictive legal environment for civil society.Research limitations/implicationsResearch on advocacy in authoritarian countries is often focused on NGOs that are primarily engaged in these activities. This has overshadowed the considerable leeway that nonprofit service providers have to engage in advocacy.Practical implicationsService-providing NGOs should not forsake advocacy activities, even in authoritarian contexts, but can find access points in the political system and should seek to utilize their voice on behalf of their clients.Social implicationsDespite general restrictions, NGOs can still find ways to successfully secure social rights, justice and solidarity, provided they accept the supremacy of the state in social policy and appeal to the state's responsibility for the welfare of its citizens without directly questioning the overall status quo too heavily.Originality/valueWe develop a broad framework for various advocacy forms and activities and apply it to nonprofit service providers.

show abstract

“…Few researchers have examined CSOs legislative advocacy in developing countries (Abdel-Samad 2015;Guo and Zhang 2014). Those that have done so have examined the efforts of CSOs in legislative advocacy -rather than legislators' perceptions about CSOs' legislative advocacy, or the demands of legislators for CSO involvement.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…CSOs may advocate for their policy preferences during either the legislative session, political campaigns, or non-sessions. During legislative sessions, CSOs can conduct one-on-one lobbying, testify in committees for legislators, produce research papers (position papers), alert constituents, provide expert testimonies, and work with legislative staff (Avner 2002;Abdel-Samad 2015;Ezell 2006). The provision of expertise through these avenues informs legislators of the impact a proposed policy might have on constituents, and allows legislators to respond to constituents by including their needs in the political agenda.…”

Section: Cso Advocacymentioning

confidence: 99%