Coversheet for Thesis in Sussex Research Online
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Sussex Research Online A University of Sussex DPhil thesis Available online via Sussex Research Online: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/ This thesis is protected by copyright which belongs to the author. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the Author The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the Author When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given Please visit Sussex Research Online for more information and further details An integrated strings model of transnational advocacy: case studies from Romania and the United Kingdom Maria-Cristina Panţîru DPhil Thesis University of Sussex September 2010 1 Statement I hereby declare that this thesis has not been and will not be submitted in whole or in part to another University for the award of any other degree. Signature …Maria-Cristina Panţîru…….. Date …30/09/2010… 2 Acknowledgements I am very grateful for the support of Prof. Marie-Bénédicte Dembour and Prof. Richard Black during my DPhil research. Their encouragement and critical comments helped and motivated me to refine this thesis. In addition, I would like to thank the people and organizations listed in Appendix 1 for the information provided. My research was supported by the scholarships I received from the Ministry of Education, Romania (the Romanian Government Special Scholarship 2005-2009), Raţiu Family Charitable Foundation (Raţiu Scholarship 2005-2006) and Open Society Institute (OSI Global Supplementary Grant 2006-2007). I would like to thank these organizations for their support. I am also grateful for the stimulating intellectual environment at the School of Global Studies, Sussex Centre for Migration Research and SPRU – Science and Technology Policy Research at the University of Sussex. The usual disclaimer applies: the views expressed in this thesis are based on my analysis of data from numerous sources and might not reflect views endorsed by the organizations and people I refer to. 3 An integrated strings model of transnational advocacy: case studies from Romania and the United Kingdom Maria-Cristina Panţîru DPhil summary Studies of transnational advocacy mainly explore separate processes – e.g. the use of persuasion, socialization, leverage, incentives and penalties – through which specific actors influence policy and law at national and transnational levels. These processes can be seen as strings pulled by the actors involved in order to promote their aims. However, the existing literature stops short of explaining the dynamics of advocacy across time, the number of strings necessary for inducing change and the failure of advocacy. In order to address these shortcomings this thesis analyses the interactions between various processes that constitute transnational advocacy and proposes a conceptual model – labelled the integrated strings model of advocacy – to facilitate the understanding of the dynamics of advocacy. This model suggests that transnational advocacy is constituted by the following interlinked processes, labelled stages and strings in order to emphasize their dynamics: - The stages are: the making of pilot or past solutions-in-practice, problematization, the development of a common frame for possible solutions, the creation of solutions-on-paper and the making of solutions-in-practice; - These stages are constituted by six strings: the creation of social enterprises, the use of expertise, regulations, technology, the formation of alliances and the marketization of ideas and services. This model provides a more comprehensive understanding of the dynamics of advocacy than the existing literature and explains why some advocacy processes were successful while other failed. The model is illustrated through three case studies of advocacy focused on: (a) heritage conservation and sustainable development in Romania; (b) children’s rights in Romania; and (c) access to the UK’ labour market for Romanian migrants in Britain. The integrated model was developed through empirical multi-sited research conducted in Romania and the UK. My methodology was influenced by multi-sited ethnography (Marcus 1998), grounded theory (Strauss and Corbin 1990) and actor-network theory (Callon 1986; Latour 2005). 4 Table of Contents List of Abbreviations............................................................................................8 List of Figures ...................................................................................................11 1 Introduction..................................................................................................12 1.1 Why transnational advocacy?..................................................................12 1.2 From advocacy networks to the network of advocacy .............................13 1.3 Methodology: an integrated multi-sited approach....................................16 1.4 An aggregated strings model...................................................................22 1.5 An integrated strings model.....................................................................23 1.6 Illustrations through three case studies ...................................................23 2 The aggregated strings model based on literature review.......................27 2.1 Transnational actors................................................................................28 2.2 Advocacy tools ........................................................................................32 2.2.1 Persuasion........................................................................................32 2.2.2 Negotiation........................................................................................33 2.2.3 Socialization......................................................................................35 2.2.4 Leverage...........................................................................................36 2.2.5 Incentives and penalties ...................................................................39 2.3 Pitfalls of the existing literature................................................................39 2.3.1 Conceptual fragmentation and overlaps ...........................................40 2.3.2 The allegation of causality ................................................................41 2.3.3 The neglect of transnational markets of aid and services .................42 2.3.4 An uncritical acceptance of expert knowledge ..................................44 2.3.5 The overlooking of the way advocacy issues are constituted ...........46 2.3.6 The reliance on ‘opportunity structures’ ............................................48 2.3.7 The decoupling of advocacy and policy-making from practice..........50 2.3.8 The ‘orientalization’ of actors based in the target countries ..............52 2.3.9 The neglect of ‘unsuccessful’ transnational advocacy ......................54 2.4 Conclusion...............................................................................................54 5 3 The integrated strings model of advocacy ................................................56 3.1 Multi-sited data collection ........................................................................57 3.2 (De)coding of the data: multi-sited conceptual analysis ..........................60 3.3 Refining coding in parallel with a multi-sited literature review..................66 3.4 The integrated strings model – a conceptual story line of advocacy .......72 3.5 Comparison with the aggregated model..................................................80 3.6 The making of three case studies............................................................81 3.7 Research, participation, ethics and validity..............................................83 4 Promoting heritage conservation and ‘integrated and sustainable development’ in Transylvania........................................................................86 4.1 Ad-hoc social entrepreneurs and cultural pilot solutions-in-practice........88 4.1.1 Enterprise, expertise, alliances and marketization............................88 4.2 Problematization: cultural heritage ..........................................................93 4.2.1 Enterprise and the marketization of identity ......................................93 4.2.2 Enterprise, expertise and international regulations ...........................98 4.2.3 Enterprise, competing alliances and marketization.........................102 4.3 Common frame for possible solutions: conference, declaration and projects........................................................................................................105 4.3.1 Alliances, expertise and marketization for a revised problematization: integrated and sustainable development .................................................106 4.3.2 Alliances, expertise and marketization of the common frame.........110 4.4 Solutions-on-paper ................................................................................112 4.5 Solutions-in-practice..............................................................................113 4.5.1 Enterprise, expertise, alliances and technology..............................114 4.5.2 Enterprise, expertise, marketization and alliances..........................116 4.6 Conclusion.............................................................................................120