How Foundations' Field-Building Helped the Reproductive Health

How Foundations’ Field-Building Helped the Reproductive Health Movement Change the International Population and Development Paradigm By Perrin Liana Elkind A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Ann Swidler, Chair Professor Kim Voss Professor Harley Shaiken Fall 2015 Abstract How Foundations’ Field-Building Helped the Reproductive Health Movement Change the International Population and Development Paradigm by Perrin Liana Elkind Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology University of California, Berkeley Professor Ann Swidler, Chair Scholars have demonstrated that foundation grants channel social movements by encouraging professionalization and favoring moderate tactics, but they have overlooked critical mechanisms of foundation influence. Advancing Tim Bartley’s (2007) field-building framework, I identify new mechanisms—including grants and activities other than grantmaking—through which five foundations helped channel the international Reproductive Health movement between 1990 and 2005, shaping its composition, trajectory, and outcomes. The first of its kind, this study combines an analysis of an original data set including 8,103 grants made by five major philanthropic foundations from 1990-2005, interviews with foundation staff and leadership, and archival data, with an historical narrative of the population field and the Reproductive Health movement. I explain foundations’ roles in the Reproductive Health movement’s successful campaign targeting the 1994 United Nations International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD). There the movement transformed the population field’s frame from Family Planning—reducing fertility through increasing access to contraceptives—to Reproductive Health—meeting women’s broader reproductive health needs and advancing gender equality. Unlike scholars who focus on movement organizations that receive grants, I analyze the grants themselves, including those to both movement and non-movement actors. Through examining the grants’ purposes and the movement’s trajectory, I find that foundations’ field-building mechanisms included grants for research; communications; capacity-building, technical assistance, and training; networks/conference; and policy work. Grants to non-movement actors indirectly contributed to the movement’s success by supporting the movement’s strategy or shaping its context. In addition to their material resources, foundations apply unique human and symbolic resources toward field-building. Mechanisms other than grantmaking that foundations used included brokerage, advocacy, and coordination. The foundations’ field-building work helped to certify movement actors and frames and to diffuse frames. 1 Foundations’ operations and programs were influenced by the historical eras in which the foundations were established and by the founders’ involvement. Staff and board members’ professional and personal networks were also influential, as was the presence of movement actors on staff. Status pressures within the foundation, the philanthropic sector, and the program area further shaped the foundations’ work. From the 1950s through the 1980s, the Ford and Rockefeller foundations helped establish the population field and the frame that the Reproductive Health movement later challenged at ICPD. Ford, MacArthur, and Rockefeller aided the ICPD campaign, including by intervening to afford the movement critical access to the United Nations. Following ICPD, these three foundations plus Packard and Hewlett helped institutionalize the Reproductive Health frame. Two of the funders actively promoted the frame; three resisted the movement but also inadvertently helped advance its frame. Major funders of movements are themselves movement actors. Foundations were not the most important actors in the Reproductive Health movement field but their support at critical junctures was instrumental to the movement’s success. Understanding the funder-movement relationship requires close examination of how foundations strategically use their material, human, and symbolic resources to build a movement field. 2 Acknowledgements The many contributions of others made this project possible. I am especially grateful to those who generously shared their thoughts and experiences with me in interviews. Each one provided essential information and insights that guided me through my research. I am also deeply grateful to the Hewlett Foundation grantees from around the world who took the trouble to read my letter, sign the consent form, and mail it back so that I could view their files at the foundation. Some added kind notes of support that buoyed me throughout my research. Hewlett president Paul Brest has my gratitude for permitting me to request the grantees’ consent to view the files. I also thank Kim Brehm of Hewlett’s Population program who was unfailingly gracious as I intruded on her time and space for weeks while poring through the archives. Individuals at each of the five foundations in this study went out of their way to assist me in locating data. One day I received a surprise package from the MacArthur Foundation containing sixteen years of annual reports. Another day I opened an email containing an Excel file of Packard Foundation data I had been fruitlessly seeking for several years. My research depended on such help. As an exclusively qualitative researcher who found herself mired in a quantitative project, I am deeply indebted to those who guided me through that treacherous situation. Although not on my dissertation committee, Sam Lucas freely offered his time and expertise to me and was an important faculty advisor. His walking me through a mystifying process involving FileMaker Pro and Stata was vital to this project’s success. I tremendously appreciated his expertise, generosity, and patience. In addition, Pat Hastings’ guidance on how to extract meaningful numbers from Stata was key to my making sense of the data. I simply could not have done this project without both Sam’s and Pat’s help. I also relied on Douglas Allen’s expertise in designing and programming my database, and I benefitted from Randy Trigg’s early guidance in designing it. I thank my dissertation committee for allowing me the freedom to aim high and to find my way to the answers I was seeking. In the process I also discovered countless answers I had not thought to seek. I am especially grateful to Ann Swidler, my committee chair, for having firmly believed in this project’s value despite my unorthodox approach and despite the many obstacles that emerged along the way. Ann’s encouragement and patience consistently reassured me, especially at times when they may have seemed unwarranted. Her genuine interest in what I was learning helped motivate me, and I truly enjoyed our conversations and reflecting on the questions she asked. Kim Voss has my gratitude for her early nudge to be rigorous in recording the decisions I made while coding grants. Many times this rescued me from confusion I would not have anticipated. Kim’s excitement about my research findings was also heartening, as was Harley Shaiken’s warmth and kindness as the outside member of my committee. I am grateful to Ruth Dixon-Mueller for providing valuable insight into the history of the Reproductive Health movement and the evolution of UN population agreements. I thank John Wilmoth for providing valuable critiques of the ICPD Programme of Action. Additionally, the insights and perspectives of classmates in Demography 260 informed my understanding of many i of the events described in this dissertation. Comments from Zawadi Rucks Ahidiana and Tara McKay on an article draft helped me gain clarity about points I wanted to make in this project. Several individuals started me on my way. I am grateful to Esther Hewlett for supporting my initial foray into investigating the foundations, and to Steve Toben and Tamara Fox for their insight as I designed this project. I thank Kavita Ramdas first for hiring me at the Global Fund for Women where I developed the questions that led to this project, and second for generously serving as a character reference on my behalf with the foundations in this study. And it was Anne Firth Murray’s warm introduction to feminist philanthropy that set me on this path long ago. I am grateful to research assistants who provided welcome support. Cara Safon, Sharon Donnelly, and Lauren Dunford carefully entered data. Stephen Chiao, Chelsea Guerrero, Natalie Kwong, Rhianna Lee, Pallavi Trikutam, and Ivy Xin tracked down data, summarized literature and reports, and helped me clarify my coding decision rules. For all of the support, entertainment, and adventure—each at the right time, I thank Ana Villalobos, Sabrina Toback, Lissa Wentner, Randi Pallan McEntee, Mary Callahan, Sam Kolb, Erica Linson, Margot Higgins, Ryan Robinson, and Alex Morales. I am additionally grateful to Sarah Vaill for sharing my fascination with the issues my dissertation addresses; to someone overhearing us, our discussions may not sound like fun, but they are. Sailboat talks with Elizabeth Butrick about the triumphs and tribulations of grantees and about international maternal health motivated me and kept my research in perspective. For sharing the joy of waves, I thank the surf posse: Julie-Ann Burkhart, Jacob Burkhart, Heather Willis, Luke Kilpatrick, Cynthia Krueger, Carolina La Rotta Dratva, Darren Mason,

Load more