Related Links:

Transnational Advocacy Networks and International Policy

When Are Transnational Advocacy Networks Most Likely to Be Effective?

Overview: Aspects of Diffusing Law Globally

Five Challenges to Diffusing Women's Rights Law

Businesses Play Key Roles in Globalizing Business Regulations

How do transnational advocacy networks make a difference in international policy and practice?

Advocates of principled causes, ideas and values (like human rights or the environment) do not work alone. Nor are they limited by national boundaries. The last several decades has witnessed significant growth in the number loose coalitions or networks of advocates building bridges across borders to bring about social change. Scholars Margaret Keck and Kathryn Sikkink call these transnational advocacy networks.

These advocacy networks have changed the face of international policy making and practice.

But how?

Redefining the Field in International Politics

Advocacy networks do not rely on traditional bases of power like military or economic muscle. In the traditional sense of “power” within the international arena, advocacy networks are relatively “weak” players. However, these groups have become increasingly influential. They have become major players on the field of international politics.

The larger approach of transnational advocacy groups has not been to simply force their way into international politics-as-usual. Rather, they have sought to change the way the game is played in international politics. They reshape the terms of international debate. They redefine and sometimes create the issues that gain international attention. They work to realign alliances and coalitions of powerful players. In short, they change fundamentally the way that international policy and practice occurs.

Prior to the involvement of transnational advocacy networks the game of international politics was one where the field was well defined, the teams were known and where the rules were set—all favoring the largest and most muscular players. Enter networks of activists who built bridges across national boundaries to advocate for principled causes.

• Activists change the structure of the field. Activists bring new issues to the table, and, more importantly, give these issues a moral and emotional force. They redefine what is and should be talked about.
• Activists reshape alliances among players. Standard ways of thinking about an issue (like the environment) reinforce existing positions. Activists redefine and repackage issues. They reframe causes in ways that may appeal to players across traditional cleavages. By doing this, advocacy networks change the “teams” and so may tip the balance of influence in favor of their cause.
• Activists redefine the rules of the game of international politics. Time was when states were about the only players that mattered in international politics. Governments controlled information, defined what “counted” as an issue worth discussing and determined whose voices were heard. Advocacy networks harness the power of credible information with an emotional and moral appeal. In so doing, activists reframe issues and open the door to alternative voices.
• Activists open the field to weak players. By mobilizing public sentiment, advocating for vulnerable groups, telling personal stories and pressing for moral (and not just expedient) action, advocacy networks have given weak and vulnerable populations a voice in international politics.

Advocacy networks realized that politics-as-usual in the international arena excluded important issues and populations. Knowing that the traditional game was closed to them, they have worked to redefine the game (issues, players, dialogue and practice) in such a way that international policy making and practice is now more open.

Political Tools

How do transnational advocacy networks influence international policy and practice? Keck and Sikkink identify four types of politics that these advocacy networks use.

Information Politics

Control over information is the strongest tool in the advocacy network repertoire. They gain influence by mobilizing information as a strategy for advocacy.

What Is Going On?

Information on events and issues used to be controlled primarily by governments. Because of this, an event on one side of the world might seem like an isolated incident. Transnational advocacy networks provide a much broader scope of information that does not necessarily cater to the good image of states. However, this information is influential not just because of its content, but also because of the ways in which it is communicated.

• Quickly. Because advocacy networks are linked to like-minded networks across the globe, they are able to gain access to information that would otherwise be lost or suppressed. Information sharing within networks is enhanced by developments in communication technology. Email, faxes, the Internet and cell phones make sharing important information around the globe inexpensive and virtually instantaneous.
• Credibly. In order to be taken seriously, information must be credible. Advocacy networks often use sophisticated information gathering and analysis methods. They attract the manpower to be able to carry this out. Networks often involve scholars and experts as well as the people on the ground to be able to gather and present trustworthy information.
• Dramatically. Technical reports may provide important information, but they do not have the ability to capture the hearts and imaginations of the readers. Advocacy networks have become adept at communicating information (such as stories and testimonials) that present the facts with a human face. The goal is not merely to let you know, but to make you feel.

Why Does It Matter?

In order to motivate people to action, they need to understand why the issue at hand matters. Sometimes, in order to do this, advocacy networks change the ways that issues are defined. They change the terms and so change the nature of the politics.

For instance, before 1976, the practice of female genital cutting was known in the U.S., but primarily by the medical and anthropological communities. It was sometimes known as "female circumcision" creating an association with the widely accepted practice of male circumcision. However, that changed when advocacy networks renamed the practice "female genital mutilation." By changing the name (and therefore the mental associations) activists were not only able to communicate the information, but communicate it in a way that called up strong negative emotions.

Symbolic Politics

Symbols link one idea to another. When a striking event is made into a symbol for a cause, it can become a powerful tool for conveying information. By linking the 1973 coup in Chile to Vietnam and Watergate, U.S. activists were able to make the coup a powerful symbol of the fight for human rights.

Leverage Politics

As relatively weak players, advocacy networks have only limited ability to change things on their own. However, by creating links to other, more powerful actors, advocacy networks can gain greater influence or leverage for change.

For instance, by creating and mobilizing links to international financial institutions, NGOs may link access to loans to environmental protection. By linking causes to things that people value (like money, trade or prestige) advocacy networks can create material leverage for their cause.

Advocacy networks also exercise moral leverage. When states know that they risk public shaming because of their actions (for instance, torturing prisoners), they may think twice about tarnishing their reputation on the international stage. In democratic countries, politicians depend on votes and the threat of a damaged reputation can put the politician's job in jeopardy.

Accountability Politics

States and companies make commitments in support of causes. Sometimes, however, these commitments are given simply to remove them from public scrutiny. If a state or company can pay lip service to a cause, then it may deflect criticism.

However, advocacy networks monitor the actions of states and companies. If the state or corporation does not live up to its commitment, advocacy networks can make this public. By highlighting the discrepancies between what an actor says and what it does, activists can marshal public sentiment and motivate the state or corporation into living up to its word.

Bottom Line

Although transnational advocacy networks are not traditionally powerful players in international politics, they can exercise considerable influence. Their main tool is information. By mobilizing information in support of a cause, they can change the nature of international policy and practice.

Full Text Availability:

Available for purchase at

Other Keytexts from this source

Transnational Advocacy Networks and International Policy

When Are Transnational Advocacy Networks Most Likely to Be Effective?