Taking part: Social movements, INGOs, and global change

Alternatives

Volumn 29, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 333-372

  Eschle, Catherine ^a   Stammers, Neil ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF STRATHCLYDE   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 7544231766     PISSN: 03043754     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/030437540402900305     Document Type: Review

References (73)

1. Alejandro Colás, International Civil Society: Social Movements in World Politics (Cambridge, U.K.: Polity, 2002), p. 18. For a general discussion of the diachronic dimension of movement activism, see Neil Stammers, "Social Movements and the Challenge to Power," in Martin Shaw, ed., Politics and Globalisation: Knowledge, Ethics, and Agency (London: Routledge, 1999).
2. Alejandro Colás, International Civil Society: Social Movements in World Politics (Cambridge, U.K.: Polity, 2002), p. 18. For a general discussion of the diachronic dimension of movement activism, see Neil Stammers, "Social Movements and the Challenge to Power," in Martin Shaw, ed., Politics and Globalisation: Knowledge, Ethics, and Agency (London: Routledge, 1999).
3. Valentine Moghadam, "Transnational Feminist Networks: Collective Action in an Era of Globalization," International Sociology 15, no. 1 (1995): 57.
4. For example, Robert Keohane and Joseph S. Nye, Transnational Relations and World Politics (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1972); Richard W. Mansbach, Yale H. Ferguson, and Donald E. Lampert, The Web of World Politics: Non-State Actors in the Global System (Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1976); Peter Willetts, ed., Pressure Groups in the Global System (London: Pinter, 1982).
5. For example, Robert Keohane and Joseph S. Nye, Transnational Relations and World Politics (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1972); Richard W. Mansbach, Yale H. Ferguson, and Donald E. Lampert, The Web of World Politics: Non-State Actors in the Global System (Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1976); Peter Willetts, ed., Pressure Groups in the Global System (London: Pinter, 1982).
6. For example, Robert Keohane and Joseph S. Nye, Transnational Relations and World Politics (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1972); Richard W. Mansbach, Yale H. Ferguson, and Donald E. Lampert, The Web of World Politics: Non-State Actors in the Global System (Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1976); Peter Willetts, ed., Pressure Groups in the Global System (London: Pinter, 1982).
7. For example, Thomas Risse-Kappan, ed., Bringing Transnational Relations Back In: Non-State Actors: Domestic Structures and International Institutions (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1995).
8. For example, Marlies Glasius, Mary Kaldor, and Helmut Anheier, eds., Global Civil Society Yearbook 2002 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002); Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995); Ronnie D. Lipschutz, "Reconstructing World Politics: The Emergence of Global Civil Society," Millennium 21, no. 3 (1992): 389-420; Roger Coate et al., "The United Nations and Civil Society: Creative Partnerships for Sustainable Development," Alternatives, 21, no. 1 (1996): 93-122; Craig Murphy, "Global Governance: Poorly Done and Poorly Understood," International Affairs 76, no. 4 (2000): 789-803. Although it was not produced in the disciplinary location of international relations, see also Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, Empire (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2000) for a distinctive take on similar themes, one that has been much discussed by IR scholars. For a similar depiction of two stages of debate in international relations, more particularly with regard to NGOs, see Paul K. Wapner, Environmental Activism and World Civic Politics (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996), pp. 11-12. Colas offers overlapping categorizations, focusing more centrally on civil society, in Colas, note 1, pp. 10-15, 140-147.
9. For example, Marlies Glasius, Mary Kaldor, and Helmut Anheier, eds., Global Civil Society Yearbook 2002 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002); Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995); Ronnie D. Lipschutz, "Reconstructing World Politics: The Emergence of Global Civil Society," Millennium 21, no. 3 (1992): 389-420; Roger Coate et al., "The United Nations and Civil Society: Creative Partnerships for Sustainable Development," Alternatives, 21, no. 1 (1996): 93-122; Craig Murphy, "Global Governance: Poorly Done and Poorly Understood," International Affairs 76, no. 4 (2000): 789-803. Although it was not produced in the disciplinary location of international relations, see also Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, Empire (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2000) for a distinctive take on similar themes, one that has been much discussed by IR scholars. For a similar depiction of two stages of debate in international relations, more particularly with regard to NGOs, see Paul K. Wapner, Environmental Activism and World Civic Politics (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996), pp. 11-12. Colas offers overlapping categorizations, focusing more centrally on civil society, in Colas, note 1, pp. 10-15, 140-147.
10. For example, Marlies Glasius, Mary Kaldor, and Helmut Anheier, eds., Global Civil Society Yearbook 2002 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002); Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995); Ronnie D. Lipschutz, "Reconstructing World Politics: The Emergence of Global Civil Society," Millennium 21, no. 3 (1992): 389-420; Roger Coate et al., "The United Nations and Civil Society: Creative Partnerships for Sustainable Development," Alternatives, 21, no. 1 (1996): 93-122; Craig Murphy, "Global Governance: Poorly Done and Poorly Understood," International Affairs 76, no. 4 (2000): 789-803. Although it was not produced in the disciplinary location of international relations, see also Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, Empire (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2000) for a distinctive take on similar themes, one that has been much discussed by IR scholars. For a similar depiction of two stages of debate in international relations, more particularly with regard to NGOs, see Paul K. Wapner, Environmental Activism and World Civic Politics (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996), pp. 11-12. Colas offers overlapping categorizations, focusing more centrally on civil society, in Colas, note 1, pp. 10-15, 140-147.
11. For example, Marlies Glasius, Mary Kaldor, and Helmut Anheier, eds., Global Civil Society Yearbook 2002 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002); Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995); Ronnie D. Lipschutz, "Reconstructing World Politics: The Emergence of Global Civil Society," Millennium 21, no. 3 (1992): 389-420; Roger Coate et al., "The United Nations and Civil Society: Creative Partnerships for Sustainable Development," Alternatives, 21, no. 1 (1996): 93-122; Craig Murphy, "Global Governance: Poorly Done and Poorly Understood," International Affairs 76, no. 4 (2000): 789-803. Although it was not produced in the disciplinary location of international relations, see also Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, Empire (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2000) for a distinctive take on similar themes, one that has been much discussed by IR scholars. For a similar depiction of two stages of debate in international relations, more particularly with regard to NGOs, see Paul K. Wapner, Environmental Activism and World Civic Politics (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996), pp. 11-12. Colas offers overlapping categorizations, focusing more centrally on civil society, in Colas, note 1, pp. 10-15, 140-147.
12. For example, Marlies Glasius, Mary Kaldor, and Helmut Anheier, eds., Global Civil Society Yearbook 2002 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002); Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995); Ronnie D. Lipschutz, "Reconstructing World Politics: The Emergence of Global Civil Society," Millennium 21, no. 3 (1992): 389-420; Roger Coate et al., "The United Nations and Civil Society: Creative Partnerships for Sustainable Development," Alternatives, 21, no. 1 (1996): 93-122; Craig Murphy, "Global Governance: Poorly Done and Poorly Understood," International Affairs 76, no. 4 (2000): 789-803. Although it was not produced in the disciplinary location of international relations, see also Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, Empire (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2000) for a distinctive take on similar themes, one that has been much discussed by IR scholars. For a similar depiction of two stages of debate in international relations, more particularly with regard to NGOs, see Paul K. Wapner, Environmental Activism and World Civic Politics (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996), pp. 11-12. Colas offers overlapping categorizations, focusing more centrally on civil society, in Colas, note 1, pp. 10-15, 140-147.
13. For example, Marlies Glasius, Mary Kaldor, and Helmut Anheier, eds., Global Civil Society Yearbook 2002 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002); Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995); Ronnie D. Lipschutz, "Reconstructing World Politics: The Emergence of Global Civil Society," Millennium 21, no. 3 (1992): 389-420; Roger Coate et al., "The United Nations and Civil Society: Creative Partnerships for Sustainable Development," Alternatives, 21, no. 1 (1996): 93-122; Craig Murphy, "Global Governance: Poorly Done and Poorly Understood," International Affairs 76, no. 4 (2000): 789-803. Although it was not produced in the disciplinary location of international relations, see also Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, Empire (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2000) for a distinctive take on similar themes, one that has been much discussed by IR scholars. For a similar depiction of two stages of debate in international relations, more particularly with regard to NGOs, see Paul K. Wapner, Environmental Activism and World Civic Politics (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996), pp. 11-12. Colas offers overlapping categorizations, focusing more centrally on civil society, in Colas, note 1, pp. 10-15, 140-147.
14. For example, Marlies Glasius, Mary Kaldor, and Helmut Anheier, eds., Global Civil Society Yearbook 2002 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002); Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995); Ronnie D. Lipschutz, "Reconstructing World Politics: The Emergence of Global Civil Society," Millennium 21, no. 3 (1992): 389-420; Roger Coate et al., "The United Nations and Civil Society: Creative Partnerships for Sustainable Development," Alternatives, 21, no. 1 (1996): 93-122; Craig Murphy, "Global Governance: Poorly Done and Poorly Understood," International Affairs 76, no. 4 (2000): 789-803. Although it was not produced in the disciplinary location of international relations, see also Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, Empire (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2000) for a distinctive take on similar themes, one that has been much discussed by IR scholars. For a similar depiction of two stages of debate in international relations, more particularly with regard to NGOs, see Paul K. Wapner, Environmental Activism and World Civic Politics (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996), pp. 11-12. Colas offers overlapping categorizations, focusing more centrally on civil society, in Colas, note 1, pp. 10-15, 140-147.
15. There is some discussion of nonglobal social-movement theories in Matthias Finger, "NGOs and Transformation: Beyond Social Movement Theory," in Thomas Princen and Matthias Finger, eds., Environmental NGOs in World Politics: Linking the Local and the Global (London: Routledge, 1994); Martin Shaw, "Civil Society and Global Politics: Beyond a Social Movements Approach," Millennium 23, no. 3 (1994): 650-654; R. B. J. Walker, "Social Movements/World Politics," Millennium 23, no. 3 (1994): 669-700; Christine Chin and James H. Mittleman, "Conceptualizing Resistance to Globalization," in Barry K. Gills, ed., Globalization and the Politics of Resistance (Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave, 2002), pp. 35-36. There is a brief examination of recent efforts to globalize political-opportunity structures theory in Colas, note 1, pp. 77-78, and in Craig Murphy's conclusion to his edited volume Egalitarian Politics in the Age of Globalization (Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave, 2002), pp. 208-209.
16. There is some discussion of nonglobal social-movement theories in Matthias Finger, "NGOs and Transformation: Beyond Social Movement Theory," in Thomas Princen and Matthias Finger, eds., Environmental NGOs in World Politics: Linking the Local and the Global (London: Routledge, 1994); Martin Shaw, "Civil Society and Global Politics: Beyond a Social Movements Approach," Millennium 23, no. 3 (1994): 650-654; R. B. J. Walker, "Social Movements/World Politics," Millennium 23, no. 3 (1994): 669-700; Christine Chin and James H. Mittleman, "Conceptualizing Resistance to Globalization," in Barry K. Gills, ed., Globalization and the Politics of Resistance (Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave, 2002), pp. 35-36. There is a brief examination of recent efforts to globalize political-opportunity structures theory in Colas, note 1, pp. 77-78, and in Craig Murphy's conclusion to his edited volume Egalitarian Politics in the Age of Globalization (Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave, 2002), pp. 208-209.
17. There is some discussion of nonglobal social-movement theories in Matthias Finger, "NGOs and Transformation: Beyond Social Movement Theory," in Thomas Princen and Matthias Finger, eds., Environmental NGOs in World Politics: Linking the Local and the Global (London: Routledge, 1994); Martin Shaw, "Civil Society and Global Politics: Beyond a Social Movements Approach," Millennium 23, no. 3 (1994): 650-654; R. B. J. Walker, "Social Movements/World Politics," Millennium 23, no. 3 (1994): 669-700; Christine Chin and James H. Mittleman, "Conceptualizing Resistance to Globalization," in Barry K. Gills, ed., Globalization and the Politics of Resistance (Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave, 2002), pp. 35-36. There is a brief examination of recent efforts to globalize political-opportunity structures theory in Colas, note 1, pp. 77-78, and in Craig Murphy's conclusion to his edited volume Egalitarian Politics in the Age of Globalization (Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave, 2002), pp. 208-209.
18. There is some discussion of nonglobal social-movement theories in Matthias Finger, "NGOs and Transformation: Beyond Social Movement Theory," in Thomas Princen and Matthias Finger, eds., Environmental NGOs in World Politics: Linking the Local and the Global (London: Routledge, 1994); Martin Shaw, "Civil Society and Global Politics: Beyond a Social Movements Approach," Millennium 23, no. 3 (1994): 650-654; R. B. J. Walker, "Social Movements/World Politics," Millennium 23, no. 3 (1994): 669-700; Christine Chin and James H. Mittleman, "Conceptualizing Resistance to Globalization," in Barry K. Gills, ed., Globalization and the Politics of Resistance (Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave, 2002), pp. 35-36. There is a brief examination of recent efforts to globalize political-opportunity structures theory in Colas, note 1, pp. 77-78, and in Craig Murphy's conclusion to his edited volume Egalitarian Politics in the Age of Globalization (Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave, 2002), pp. 208-209.
19. There is some discussion of nonglobal social-movement theories in Matthias Finger, "NGOs and Transformation: Beyond Social Movement Theory," in Thomas Princen and Matthias Finger, eds., Environmental NGOs in World Politics: Linking the Local and the Global (London: Routledge, 1994); Martin Shaw, "Civil Society and Global Politics: Beyond a Social Movements Approach," Millennium 23, no. 3 (1994): 650-654; R. B. J. Walker, "Social Movements/World Politics," Millennium 23, no. 3 (1994): 669-700; Christine Chin and James H. Mittleman, "Conceptualizing Resistance to Globalization," in Barry K. Gills, ed., Globalization and the Politics of Resistance (Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave, 2002), pp. 35-36. There is a brief examination of recent efforts to globalize political-opportunity structures theory in Colas, note 1, pp. 77-78, and in Craig Murphy's conclusion to his edited volume Egalitarian Politics in the Age of Globalization (Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave, 2002), pp. 208-209.
20. Taken together, these approaches are often characterized as constituting a North American social-movement tradition. For a classic, early statement of resource-mobilization theory, see John D. McCarthy and Mayer N. Zald, "Resource Mobilization and Social Movements: A Partial Theory," American Journal of Sociology 82, no. 6 (1977): 1212-1241.
21. Perhaps the most influential exponent of political-opportunity structures theory is Sidney Tarrow, in Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics, 2d ed. (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1998).
22. For an early development of frame theory, see David A. Snow et al., "Frame Alignment Processes, Micromobilization, and Movement Participation," American Sociological Review 51 (1986): 464-481.
23. For example, Jackie Smith et al., Transnational Social Movements and Global Politics: Solidarity Beyond the State (Syracuse, N.Y: Syracuse University Press, 1997); Jackie Smith and Hank Johnston, eds., Globalization and Resistance: Transnational Dimensions of Social Movements (Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2002); Margaret Keck and Kathryn Sikkink, Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1998) ; Donatella della Porta and Hanspeter Kriesi, eds., Social Movements in a Globalizing World (Basingstoke, U.K.: Macmillan, 1999).
24. For example, Jackie Smith et al., Transnational Social Movements and Global Politics: Solidarity Beyond the State (Syracuse, N.Y: Syracuse University Press, 1997); Jackie Smith and Hank Johnston, eds., Globalization and Resistance: Transnational Dimensions of Social Movements (Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2002); Margaret Keck and Kathryn Sikkink, Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1998) ; Donatella della Porta and Hanspeter Kriesi, eds., Social Movements in a Globalizing World (Basingstoke, U.K.: Macmillan, 1999).
25. For example, Jackie Smith et al., Transnational Social Movements and Global Politics: Solidarity Beyond the State (Syracuse, N.Y: Syracuse University Press, 1997); Jackie Smith and Hank Johnston, eds., Globalization and Resistance: Transnational Dimensions of Social Movements (Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2002); Margaret Keck and Kathryn Sikkink, Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1998) ; Donatella della Porta and Hanspeter Kriesi, eds., Social Movements in a Globalizing World (Basingstoke, U.K.: Macmillan, 1999).
26. For example, Jackie Smith et al., Transnational Social Movements and Global Politics: Solidarity Beyond the State (Syracuse, N.Y: Syracuse University Press, 1997); Jackie Smith and Hank Johnston, eds., Globalization and Resistance: Transnational Dimensions of Social Movements (Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2002); Margaret Keck and Kathryn Sikkink, Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1998) ; Donatella della Porta and Hanspeter Kriesi, eds., Social Movements in a Globalizing World (Basingstoke, U.K.: Macmillan, 1999).
27. Della Porta and Kriesi briefly namecheck IR authors associated with transnationalism, global governance, and global civil-society perspectives in their introduction to della Porta and Kriesi, note 8, p. 14. See also Tarrow's discussion of global civil-society theory in "From Lumping to Splitting: Specifying Globalization and Resistance," in Smith and Johnston, eds., note 8.
28. Della Porta and Kriesi briefly namecheck IR authors associated with transnationalism, global governance, and global civil-society perspectives in their introduction to della Porta and Kriesi, note 8, p. 14. See also Tarrow's discussion of global civil-society theory in "From Lumping to Splitting: Specifying Globalization and Resistance," in Smith and Johnston, eds., note 8.
29. This is evident, for example, in the introductory discussion in John A. Guidry, Michael D. Kennedy, and Mayer N. Zald, eds., Globalizations and Social Movements: Culture, Power and the Transnational Public Sphere (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2000).
30. An oft-cited classic new social-movement-theory collection is the winter 1985 issue of Social Research 52, with articles by many key exponents. See also Alberto Melucci, Nomads of the Present: Social Movements and Individual Needs in Contemporary Society (London: Radius, 1989). Melucci takes on board the impact of globalization to some extent in both this text and his later Challenging Codes: Collective Action in the Information Age (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1996). New social-movement debates are explored, although not endorsed, in Robin Cohen and Shirin M. Rai, "Global Social Movements: Towards a Cosmopolitan Politics," in their edited volume Global Social Movements (London: Athlone Press, 2000), pp. 4-7.
31. An oft-cited classic new social-movement-theory collection is the winter 1985 issue of Social Research 52, with articles by many key exponents. See also Alberto Melucci, Nomads of the Present: Social Movements and Individual Needs in Contemporary Society (London: Radius, 1989). Melucci takes on board the impact of globalization to some extent in both this text and his later Challenging Codes: Collective Action in the Information Age (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1996). New social-movement debates are explored, although not endorsed, in Robin Cohen and Shirin M. Rai, "Global Social Movements: Towards a Cosmopolitan Politics," in their edited volume Global Social Movements (London: Athlone Press, 2000), pp. 4-7.
32. An oft-cited classic new social-movement-theory collection is the winter 1985 issue of Social Research 52, with articles by many key exponents. See also Alberto Melucci, Nomads of the Present: Social Movements and Individual Needs in Contemporary Society (London: Radius, 1989). Melucci takes on board the impact of globalization to some extent in both this text and his later Challenging Codes: Collective Action in the Information Age (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1996). New social-movement debates are explored, although not endorsed, in Robin Cohen and Shirin M. Rai, "Global Social Movements: Towards a Cosmopolitan Politics," in their edited volume Global Social Movements (London: Athlone Press, 2000), pp. 4-7.
33. An oft-cited classic new social-movement-theory collection is the winter 1985 issue of Social Research 52, with articles by many key exponents. See also Alberto Melucci, Nomads of the Present: Social Movements and Individual Needs in Contemporary Society (London: Radius, 1989). Melucci takes on board the impact of globalization to some extent in both this text and his later Challenging Codes: Collective Action in the Information Age (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1996). New social-movement debates are explored, although not endorsed, in Robin Cohen and Shirin M. Rai, "Global Social Movements: Towards a Cosmopolitan Politics," in their edited volume Global Social Movements (London: Athlone Press, 2000), pp. 4-7.
34. Of course, analytical pragmatists, too, tend to have a normative interest in the success of the movements they study and to be imbued with values of pluralism and participation. Nonetheless, they tend not to be overtly normative in terms of the declared focus of the IR research. See, for example, Keohane and Nye, eds., note 3; Risse-Kappan, note 4; Tarrow, note 7; Keck and Sikkink, note 8; della Porta and Kriesi, note 8; Leon Gordenker and Thomas Weiss, "Pluralizing Global Governance: Analytical Approaches and Dimensions," in Gordenker and Weiss, eds., NGOs, the UN, and Global Governance (Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner, 1996), 17-47; Willetts, introduction and conclusion to Willetts, note 3; and also Willetts, Transnational Actors and International Organizations," in John Baylis and Steve Smith, eds., The Globalization of World Politics, 2d ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), pp. 356-383. Willetts moves toward a more explicitly normative concern with the capacity for democratization in "From Consultative Arrangements to Partnership: The Changing Status of NGOs in Diplomacy at the UN," Global Governance 6, no. 2 (2000): 191-212. Normative pragmatist elements can also be found in Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood; in several of the essays in Smith et al., eds., note 8; and in Barbara Adams, "The People's Organisations and the UN-NGOs in International Civil Society," in Erskine Childers, Challenges to the United Nations: Building a Safer World (London: Catholic Institute for International Relations, 1995), pp. 176-187. Perhaps the strongest statement of normative pragmatism can be found in Elizabeth Riddell-Dixon, "Social Movements and the United Nations," International Social Science Journal 144 (1995): 289-303.
35. Of course, analytical pragmatists, too, tend to have a normative interest in the success of the movements they study and to be imbued with values of pluralism and participation. Nonetheless, they tend not to be overtly normative in terms of the declared focus of the IR research. See, for example, Keohane and Nye, eds., note 3; Risse-Kappan, note 4; Tarrow, note 7; Keck and Sikkink, note 8; della Porta and Kriesi, note 8; Leon Gordenker and Thomas Weiss, "Pluralizing Global Governance: Analytical Approaches and Dimensions," in Gordenker and Weiss, eds., NGOs, the UN, and Global Governance (Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner, 1996), 17-47; Willetts, introduction and conclusion to Willetts, note 3; and also Willetts, Transnational Actors and International Organizations," in John Baylis and Steve Smith, eds., The Globalization of World Politics, 2d ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), pp. 356-383. Willetts moves toward a more explicitly normative concern with the capacity for democratization in "From Consultative Arrangements to Partnership: The Changing Status of NGOs in Diplomacy at the UN," Global Governance 6, no. 2 (2000): 191-212. Normative pragmatist elements can also be found in Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood; in several of the essays in Smith et al., eds., note 8; and in Barbara Adams, "The People's Organisations and the UN-NGOs in International Civil Society," in Erskine Childers, Challenges to the United Nations: Building a Safer World (London: Catholic Institute for International Relations, 1995), pp. 176-187. Perhaps the strongest statement of normative pragmatism can be found in Elizabeth Riddell-Dixon, "Social Movements and the United Nations," International Social Science Journal 144 (1995): 289-303.
36. Of course, analytical pragmatists, too, tend to have a normative interest in the success of the movements they study and to be imbued with values of pluralism and participation. Nonetheless, they tend not to be overtly normative in terms of the declared focus of the IR research. See, for example, Keohane and Nye, eds., note 3; Risse-Kappan, note 4; Tarrow, note 7; Keck and Sikkink, note 8; della Porta and Kriesi, note 8; Leon Gordenker and Thomas Weiss, "Pluralizing Global Governance: Analytical Approaches and Dimensions," in Gordenker and Weiss, eds., NGOs, the UN, and Global Governance (Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner, 1996), 17-47; Willetts, introduction and conclusion to Willetts, note 3; and also Willetts, Transnational Actors and International Organizations," in John Baylis and Steve Smith, eds., The Globalization of World Politics, 2d ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), pp. 356-383. Willetts moves toward a more explicitly normative concern with the capacity for democratization in "From Consultative Arrangements to Partnership: The Changing Status of NGOs in Diplomacy at the UN," Global Governance 6, no. 2 (2000): 191-212. Normative pragmatist elements can also be found in Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood; in several of the essays in Smith et al., eds., note 8; and in Barbara Adams, "The People's Organisations and the UN-NGOs in International Civil Society," in Erskine Childers, Challenges to the United Nations: Building a Safer World (London: Catholic Institute for International Relations, 1995), pp. 176-187. Perhaps the strongest statement of normative pragmatism can be found in Elizabeth Riddell-Dixon, "Social Movements and the United Nations," International Social Science Journal 144 (1995): 289-303.
37. Of course, analytical pragmatists, too, tend to have a normative interest in the success of the movements they study and to be imbued with values of pluralism and participation. Nonetheless, they tend not to be overtly normative in terms of the declared focus of the IR research. See, for example, Keohane and Nye, eds., note 3; Risse-Kappan, note 4; Tarrow, note 7; Keck and Sikkink, note 8; della Porta and Kriesi, note 8; Leon Gordenker and Thomas Weiss, "Pluralizing Global Governance: Analytical Approaches and Dimensions," in Gordenker and Weiss, eds., NGOs, the UN, and Global Governance (Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner, 1996), 17-47; Willetts, introduction and conclusion to Willetts, note 3; and also Willetts, Transnational Actors and International Organizations," in John Baylis and Steve Smith, eds., The Globalization of World Politics, 2d ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), pp. 356-383. Willetts moves toward a more explicitly normative concern with the capacity for democratization in "From Consultative Arrangements to Partnership: The Changing Status of NGOs in Diplomacy at the UN," Global Governance 6, no. 2 (2000): 191-212. Normative pragmatist elements can also be found in Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood; in several of the essays in Smith et al., eds., note 8; and in Barbara Adams, "The People's Organisations and the UN-NGOs in International Civil Society," in Erskine Childers, Challenges to the United Nations: Building a Safer World (London: Catholic Institute for International Relations, 1995), pp. 176-187. Perhaps the strongest statement of normative pragmatism can be found in Elizabeth Riddell-Dixon, "Social Movements and the United Nations," International Social Science Journal 144 (1995): 289-303.
38. Of course, analytical pragmatists, too, tend to have a normative interest in the success of the movements they study and to be imbued with values of pluralism and participation. Nonetheless, they tend not to be overtly normative in terms of the declared focus of the IR research. See, for example, Keohane and Nye, eds., note 3; Risse-Kappan, note 4; Tarrow, note 7; Keck and Sikkink, note 8; della Porta and Kriesi, note 8; Leon Gordenker and Thomas Weiss, "Pluralizing Global Governance: Analytical Approaches and Dimensions," in Gordenker and Weiss, eds., NGOs, the UN, and Global Governance (Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner, 1996), 17-47; Willetts, introduction and conclusion to Willetts, note 3; and also Willetts, Transnational Actors and International Organizations," in John Baylis and Steve Smith, eds., The Globalization of World Politics, 2d ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), pp. 356-383. Willetts moves toward a more explicitly normative concern with the capacity for democratization in "From Consultative Arrangements to Partnership: The Changing Status of NGOs in Diplomacy at the UN," Global Governance 6, no. 2 (2000): 191-212. Normative pragmatist elements can also be found in Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood; in several of the essays in Smith et al., eds., note 8; and in Barbara Adams, "The People's Organisations and the UN-NGOs in International Civil Society," in Erskine Childers, Challenges to the United Nations: Building a Safer World (London: Catholic Institute for International Relations, 1995), pp. 176-187. Perhaps the strongest statement of normative pragmatism can be found in Elizabeth Riddell-Dixon, "Social Movements and the United Nations," International Social Science Journal 144 (1995): 289-303.
39. Of course, analytical pragmatists, too, tend to have a normative interest in the success of the movements they study and to be imbued with values of pluralism and participation. Nonetheless, they tend not to be overtly normative in terms of the declared focus of the IR research. See, for example, Keohane and Nye, eds., note 3; Risse-Kappan, note 4; Tarrow, note 7; Keck and Sikkink, note 8; della Porta and Kriesi, note 8; Leon Gordenker and Thomas Weiss, "Pluralizing Global Governance: Analytical Approaches and Dimensions," in Gordenker and Weiss, eds., NGOs, the UN, and Global Governance (Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner, 1996), 17-47; Willetts, introduction and conclusion to Willetts, note 3; and also Willetts, Transnational Actors and International Organizations," in John Baylis and Steve Smith, eds., The Globalization of World Politics, 2d ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), pp. 356-383. Willetts moves toward a more explicitly normative concern with the capacity for democratization in "From Consultative Arrangements to Partnership: The Changing Status of NGOs in Diplomacy at the UN," Global Governance 6, no. 2 (2000): 191-212. Normative pragmatist elements can also be found in Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood; in several of the essays in Smith et al., eds., note 8; and in Barbara Adams, "The People's Organisations and the UN-NGOs in International Civil Society," in Erskine Childers, Challenges to the United Nations: Building a Safer World (London: Catholic Institute for International Relations, 1995), pp. 176-187. Perhaps the strongest statement of normative pragmatism can be found in Elizabeth Riddell-Dixon, "Social Movements and the United Nations," International Social Science Journal 144 (1995): 289-303.
40. Of course, analytical pragmatists, too, tend to have a normative interest in the success of the movements they study and to be imbued with values of pluralism and participation. Nonetheless, they tend not to be overtly normative in terms of the declared focus of the IR research. See, for example, Keohane and Nye, eds., note 3; Risse-Kappan, note 4; Tarrow, note 7; Keck and Sikkink, note 8; della Porta and Kriesi, note 8; Leon Gordenker and Thomas Weiss, "Pluralizing Global Governance: Analytical Approaches and Dimensions," in Gordenker and Weiss, eds., NGOs, the UN, and Global Governance (Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner, 1996), 17-47; Willetts, introduction and conclusion to Willetts, note 3; and also Willetts, Transnational Actors and International Organizations," in John Baylis and Steve Smith, eds., The Globalization of World Politics, 2d ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), pp. 356-383. Willetts moves toward a more explicitly normative concern with the capacity for democratization in "From Consultative Arrangements to Partnership: The Changing Status of NGOs in Diplomacy at the UN," Global Governance 6, no. 2 (2000): 191-212. Normative pragmatist elements can also be found in Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood; in several of the essays in Smith et al., eds., note 8; and in Barbara Adams, "The People's Organisations and the UN-NGOs in International Civil Society," in Erskine Childers, Challenges to the United Nations: Building a Safer World (London: Catholic Institute for International Relations, 1995), pp. 176-187. Perhaps the strongest statement of normative pragmatism can be found in Elizabeth Riddell-Dixon, "Social Movements and the United Nations," International Social Science Journal 144 (1995): 289-303.
41. Of course, analytical pragmatists, too, tend to have a normative interest in the success of the movements they study and to be imbued with values of pluralism and participation. Nonetheless, they tend not to be overtly normative in terms of the declared focus of the IR research. See, for example, Keohane and Nye, eds., note 3; Risse-Kappan, note 4; Tarrow, note 7; Keck and Sikkink, note 8; della Porta and Kriesi, note 8; Leon Gordenker and Thomas Weiss, "Pluralizing Global Governance: Analytical Approaches and Dimensions," in Gordenker and Weiss, eds., NGOs, the UN, and Global Governance (Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner, 1996), 17-47; Willetts, introduction and conclusion to Willetts, note 3; and also Willetts, Transnational Actors and International Organizations," in John Baylis and Steve Smith, eds., The Globalization of World Politics, 2d ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), pp. 356-383. Willetts moves toward a more explicitly normative concern with the capacity for democratization in "From Consultative Arrangements to Partnership: The Changing Status of NGOs in Diplomacy at the UN," Global Governance 6, no. 2 (2000): 191-212. Normative pragmatist elements can also be found in Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood; in several of the essays in Smith et al., eds., note 8; and in Barbara Adams, "The People's Organisations and the UN-NGOs in International Civil Society," in Erskine Childers, Challenges to the United Nations: Building a Safer World (London: Catholic Institute for International Relations, 1995), pp. 176-187. Perhaps the strongest statement of normative pragmatism can be found in Elizabeth Riddell-Dixon, "Social Movements and the United Nations," International Social Science Journal 144 (1995): 289-303.
42. Of course, analytical pragmatists, too, tend to have a normative interest in the success of the movements they study and to be imbued with values of pluralism and participation. Nonetheless, they tend not to be overtly normative in terms of the declared focus of the IR research. See, for example, Keohane and Nye, eds., note 3; Risse-Kappan, note 4; Tarrow, note 7; Keck and Sikkink, note 8; della Porta and Kriesi, note 8; Leon Gordenker and Thomas Weiss, "Pluralizing Global Governance: Analytical Approaches and Dimensions," in Gordenker and Weiss, eds., NGOs, the UN, and Global Governance (Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner, 1996), 17-47; Willetts, introduction and conclusion to Willetts, note 3; and also Willetts, Transnational Actors and International Organizations," in John Baylis and Steve Smith, eds., The Globalization of World Politics, 2d ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), pp. 356-383. Willetts moves toward a more explicitly normative concern with the capacity for democratization in "From Consultative Arrangements to Partnership: The Changing Status of NGOs in Diplomacy at the UN," Global Governance 6, no. 2 (2000): 191-212. Normative pragmatist elements can also be found in Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood; in several of the essays in Smith et al., eds., note 8; and in Barbara Adams, "The People's Organisations and the UN-NGOs in International Civil Society," in Erskine Childers, Challenges to the United Nations: Building a Safer World (London: Catholic Institute for International Relations, 1995), pp. 176-187. Perhaps the strongest statement of normative pragmatism can be found in Elizabeth Riddell-Dixon, "Social Movements and the United Nations," International Social Science Journal 144 (1995): 289-303.
43. Of course, analytical pragmatists, too, tend to have a normative interest in the success of the movements they study and to be imbued with values of pluralism and participation. Nonetheless, they tend not to be overtly normative in terms of the declared focus of the IR research. See, for example, Keohane and Nye, eds., note 3; Risse-Kappan, note 4; Tarrow, note 7; Keck and Sikkink, note 8; della Porta and Kriesi, note 8; Leon Gordenker and Thomas Weiss, "Pluralizing Global Governance: Analytical Approaches and Dimensions," in Gordenker and Weiss, eds., NGOs, the UN, and Global Governance (Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner, 1996), 17-47; Willetts, introduction and conclusion to Willetts, note 3; and also Willetts, Transnational Actors and International Organizations," in John Baylis and Steve Smith, eds., The Globalization of World Politics, 2d ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), pp. 356-383. Willetts moves toward a more explicitly normative concern with the capacity for democratization in "From Consultative Arrangements to Partnership: The Changing Status of NGOs in Diplomacy at the UN," Global Governance 6, no. 2 (2000): 191-212. Normative pragmatist elements can also be found in Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood; in several of the essays in Smith et al., eds., note 8; and in Barbara Adams, "The People's Organisations and the UN-NGOs in International Civil Society," in Erskine Childers, Challenges to the United Nations: Building a Safer World (London: Catholic Institute for International Relations, 1995), pp. 176-187. Perhaps the strongest statement of normative pragmatism can be found in Elizabeth Riddell-Dixon, "Social Movements and the United Nations," International Social Science Journal 144 (1995): 289-303.
44. Of course, analytical pragmatists, too, tend to have a normative interest in the success of the movements they study and to be imbued with values of pluralism and participation. Nonetheless, they tend not to be overtly normative in terms of the declared focus of the IR research. See, for example, Keohane and Nye, eds., note 3; Risse-Kappan, note 4; Tarrow, note 7; Keck and Sikkink, note 8; della Porta and Kriesi, note 8; Leon Gordenker and Thomas Weiss, "Pluralizing Global Governance: Analytical Approaches and Dimensions," in Gordenker and Weiss, eds., NGOs, the UN, and Global Governance (Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner, 1996), 17-47; Willetts, introduction and conclusion to Willetts, note 3; and also Willetts, Transnational Actors and International Organizations," in John Baylis and Steve Smith, eds., The Globalization of World Politics, 2d ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), pp. 356-383. Willetts moves toward a more explicitly normative concern with the capacity for democratization in "From Consultative Arrangements to Partnership: The Changing Status of NGOs in Diplomacy at the UN," Global Governance 6, no. 2 (2000): 191-212. Normative pragmatist elements can also be found in Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood; in several of the essays in Smith et al., eds., note 8; and in Barbara Adams, "The People's Organisations and the UN-NGOs in International Civil Society," in Erskine Childers, Challenges to the United Nations: Building a Safer World (London: Catholic Institute for International Relations, 1995), pp. 176-187. Perhaps the strongest statement of normative pragmatism can be found in Elizabeth Riddell-Dixon, "Social Movements and the United Nations," International Social Science Journal 144 (1995): 289-303.
45. Of course, analytical pragmatists, too, tend to have a normative interest in the success of the movements they study and to be imbued with values of pluralism and participation. Nonetheless, they tend not to be overtly normative in terms of the declared focus of the IR research. See, for example, Keohane and Nye, eds., note 3; Risse-Kappan, note 4; Tarrow, note 7; Keck and Sikkink, note 8; della Porta and Kriesi, note 8; Leon Gordenker and Thomas Weiss, "Pluralizing Global Governance: Analytical Approaches and Dimensions," in Gordenker and Weiss, eds., NGOs, the UN, and Global Governance (Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner, 1996), 17-47; Willetts, introduction and conclusion to Willetts, note 3; and also Willetts, Transnational Actors and International Organizations," in John Baylis and Steve Smith, eds., The Globalization of World Politics, 2d ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), pp. 356-383. Willetts moves toward a more explicitly normative concern with the capacity for democratization in "From Consultative Arrangements to Partnership: The Changing Status of NGOs in Diplomacy at the UN," Global Governance 6, no. 2 (2000): 191-212. Normative pragmatist elements can also be found in Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood; in several of the essays in Smith et al., eds., note 8; and in Barbara Adams, "The People's Organisations and the UN-NGOs in International Civil Society," in Erskine Childers, Challenges to the United Nations: Building a Safer World (London: Catholic Institute for International Relations, 1995), pp. 176-187. Perhaps the strongest statement of normative pragmatism can be found in Elizabeth Riddell-Dixon, "Social Movements and the United Nations," International Social Science Journal 144 (1995): 289-303.
46. We use the structuralist label with some misgiving, given that some authors included here have relatively complex understandings of the relationship between structure and agency that grant movements some constitutive power. Nevertheless, the label accurately conveys the overriding focus on context and/or "underlying" forces. The more optimistic version of this approach can be found in the work of world-systems theorists, as with Giovanni Arrighi et al., Anti-Systemic Movements (London: Verso, 1989); and Samuel Amin et al., Transforming the Revolution: Social Movements and the World System (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1990). See also Hardt and Negri, note 5. The more pessimistic version of the structuralist approach includes much neo-Gramscian IR writing; most prominently, Robert Cox, Production, Power, and World Order (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987), pp. 368-395, and "Democracy in Hard Times: Economic Globalization and the Limits of Democracy," in Anthony McGrew, ed., The Transformation of Democracy? (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1997), pp. 64-66; and Stephen Gill, "Globalisation, Market Civilisation, and Disciplinary Neo-Liberalism, " Millennium 24, no. 3 (1995): 404-410 - reprinted in Gill, Power and Resistance in the New World Order (Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave, 2003). Other examples of pessimistic structuralism include Christoph Gorg and Joachim Hirsch, "Is International Democracy Possible?" Review of International Political Economy 5, no. 3 (1998): 585-615; Mustapha Kamal Pasha and David L. Blaney, "Elusive Paradise: The Promise and Peril of Global Civil Society," Alternatives 23, no. 4 (1998): 417-450; and Murphy, note 6. There also seem to be elements of pessimist analysis in Cecelia Lynch, "Social Movements and the Problem of Globalization," Alternatives 23, no. 2 (1998): 149-173.
47. We use the structuralist label with some misgiving, given that some authors included here have relatively complex understandings of the relationship between structure and agency that grant movements some constitutive power. Nevertheless, the label accurately conveys the overriding focus on context and/or "underlying" forces. The more optimistic version of this approach can be found in the work of world-systems theorists, as with Giovanni Arrighi et al., Anti-Systemic Movements (London: Verso, 1989); and Samuel Amin et al., Transforming the Revolution: Social Movements and the World System (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1990). See also Hardt and Negri, note 5. The more pessimistic version of the structuralist approach includes much neo-Gramscian IR writing; most prominently, Robert Cox, Production, Power, and World Order (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987), pp. 368-395, and "Democracy in Hard Times: Economic Globalization and the Limits of Democracy," in Anthony McGrew, ed., The Transformation of Democracy? (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1997), pp. 64-66; and Stephen Gill, "Globalisation, Market Civilisation, and Disciplinary Neo-Liberalism, " Millennium 24, no. 3 (1995): 404-410 - reprinted in Gill, Power and Resistance in the New World Order (Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave, 2003). Other examples of pessimistic structuralism include Christoph Gorg and Joachim Hirsch, "Is International Democracy Possible?" Review of International Political Economy 5, no. 3 (1998): 585-615; Mustapha Kamal Pasha and David L. Blaney, "Elusive Paradise: The Promise and Peril of Global Civil Society," Alternatives 23, no. 4 (1998): 417-450; and Murphy, note 6. There also seem to be elements of pessimist analysis in Cecelia Lynch, "Social Movements and the Problem of Globalization," Alternatives 23, no. 2 (1998): 149-173.
48. We use the structuralist label with some misgiving, given that some authors included here have relatively complex understandings of the relationship between structure and agency that grant movements some constitutive power. Nevertheless, the label accurately conveys the overriding focus on context and/or "underlying" forces. The more optimistic version of this approach can be found in the work of world-systems theorists, as with Giovanni Arrighi et al., Anti-Systemic Movements (London: Verso, 1989); and Samuel Amin et al., Transforming the Revolution: Social Movements and the World System (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1990). See also Hardt and Negri, note 5. The more pessimistic version of the structuralist approach includes much neo-Gramscian IR writing; most prominently, Robert Cox, Production, Power, and World Order (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987), pp. 368-395, and "Democracy in Hard Times: Economic Globalization and the Limits of Democracy," in Anthony McGrew, ed., The Transformation of Democracy? (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1997), pp. 64-66; and Stephen Gill, "Globalisation, Market Civilisation, and Disciplinary Neo-Liberalism, " Millennium 24, no. 3 (1995): 404-410 - reprinted in Gill, Power and Resistance in the New World Order (Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave, 2003). Other examples of pessimistic structuralism include Christoph Gorg and Joachim Hirsch, "Is International Democracy Possible?" Review of International Political Economy 5, no. 3 (1998): 585-615; Mustapha Kamal Pasha and David L. Blaney, "Elusive Paradise: The Promise and Peril of Global Civil Society," Alternatives 23, no. 4 (1998): 417-450; and Murphy, note 6. There also seem to be elements of pessimist analysis in Cecelia Lynch, "Social Movements and the Problem of Globalization," Alternatives 23, no. 2 (1998): 149-173.
49. We use the structuralist label with some misgiving, given that some authors included here have relatively complex understandings of the relationship between structure and agency that grant movements some constitutive power. Nevertheless, the label accurately conveys the overriding focus on context and/or "underlying" forces. The more optimistic version of this approach can be found in the work of world-systems theorists, as with Giovanni Arrighi et al., Anti-Systemic Movements (London: Verso, 1989); and Samuel Amin et al., Transforming the Revolution: Social Movements and the World System (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1990). See also Hardt and Negri, note 5. The more pessimistic version of the structuralist approach includes much neo-Gramscian IR writing; most prominently, Robert Cox, Production, Power, and World Order (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987), pp. 368-395, and "Democracy in Hard Times: Economic Globalization and the Limits of Democracy," in Anthony McGrew, ed., The Transformation of Democracy? (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1997), pp. 64-66; and Stephen Gill, "Globalisation, Market Civilisation, and Disciplinary Neo-Liberalism, " Millennium 24, no. 3 (1995): 404-410 - reprinted in Gill, Power and Resistance in the New World Order (Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave, 2003). Other examples of pessimistic structuralism include Christoph Gorg and Joachim Hirsch, "Is International Democracy Possible?" Review of International Political Economy 5, no. 3 (1998): 585-615; Mustapha Kamal Pasha and David L. Blaney, "Elusive Paradise: The Promise and Peril of Global Civil Society," Alternatives 23, no. 4 (1998): 417-450; and Murphy, note 6. There also seem to be elements of pessimist analysis in Cecelia Lynch, "Social Movements and the Problem of Globalization," Alternatives 23, no. 2 (1998): 149-173.
50. We use the structuralist label with some misgiving, given that some authors included here have relatively complex understandings of the relationship between structure and agency that grant movements some constitutive power. Nevertheless, the label accurately conveys the overriding focus on context and/or "underlying" forces. The more optimistic version of this approach can be found in the work of world-systems theorists, as with Giovanni Arrighi et al., Anti-Systemic Movements (London: Verso, 1989); and Samuel Amin et al., Transforming the Revolution: Social Movements and the World System (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1990). See also Hardt and Negri, note 5. The more pessimistic version of the structuralist approach includes much neo-Gramscian IR writing; most prominently, Robert Cox, Production, Power, and World Order (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987), pp. 368-395, and "Democracy in Hard Times: Economic Globalization and the Limits of Democracy," in Anthony McGrew, ed., The Transformation of Democracy? (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1997), pp. 64-66; and Stephen Gill, "Globalisation, Market Civilisation, and Disciplinary Neo-Liberalism, " Millennium 24, no. 3 (1995): 404-410 - reprinted in Gill, Power and Resistance in the New World Order (Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave, 2003). Other examples of pessimistic structuralism include Christoph Gorg and Joachim Hirsch, "Is International Democracy Possible?" Review of International Political Economy 5, no. 3 (1998): 585-615; Mustapha Kamal Pasha and David L. Blaney, "Elusive Paradise: The Promise and Peril of Global Civil Society," Alternatives 23, no. 4 (1998): 417-450; and Murphy, note 6. There also seem to be elements of pessimist analysis in Cecelia Lynch, "Social Movements and the Problem of Globalization," Alternatives 23, no. 2 (1998): 149-173.
51. We use the structuralist label with some misgiving, given that some authors included here have relatively complex understandings of the relationship between structure and agency that grant movements some constitutive power. Nevertheless, the label accurately conveys the overriding focus on context and/or "underlying" forces. The more optimistic version of this approach can be found in the work of world-systems theorists, as with Giovanni Arrighi et al., Anti-Systemic Movements (London: Verso, 1989); and Samuel Amin et al., Transforming the Revolution: Social Movements and the World System (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1990). See also Hardt and Negri, note 5. The more pessimistic version of the structuralist approach includes much neo-Gramscian IR writing; most prominently, Robert Cox, Production, Power, and World Order (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987), pp. 368-395, and "Democracy in Hard Times: Economic Globalization and the Limits of Democracy," in Anthony McGrew, ed., The Transformation of Democracy? (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1997), pp. 64-66; and Stephen Gill, "Globalisation, Market Civilisation, and Disciplinary Neo-Liberalism, " Millennium 24, no. 3 (1995): 404-410 - reprinted in Gill, Power and Resistance in the New World Order (Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave, 2003). Other examples of pessimistic structuralism include Christoph Gorg and Joachim Hirsch, "Is International Democracy Possible?" Review of International Political Economy 5, no. 3 (1998): 585-615; Mustapha Kamal Pasha and David L. Blaney, "Elusive Paradise: The Promise and Peril of Global Civil Society," Alternatives 23, no. 4 (1998): 417-450; and Murphy, note 6. There also seem to be elements of pessimist analysis in Cecelia Lynch, "Social Movements and the Problem of Globalization," Alternatives 23, no. 2 (1998): 149-173.
52. We use the structuralist label with some misgiving, given that some authors included here have relatively complex understandings of the relationship between structure and agency that grant movements some constitutive power. Nevertheless, the label accurately conveys the overriding focus on context and/or "underlying" forces. The more optimistic version of this approach can be found in the work of world-systems theorists, as with Giovanni Arrighi et al., Anti-Systemic Movements (London: Verso, 1989); and Samuel Amin et al., Transforming the Revolution: Social Movements and the World System (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1990). See also Hardt and Negri, note 5. The more pessimistic version of the structuralist approach includes much neo-Gramscian IR writing; most prominently, Robert Cox, Production, Power, and World Order (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987), pp. 368-395, and "Democracy in Hard Times: Economic Globalization and the Limits of Democracy," in Anthony McGrew, ed., The Transformation of Democracy? (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1997), pp. 64-66; and Stephen Gill, "Globalisation, Market Civilisation, and Disciplinary Neo-Liberalism, " Millennium 24, no. 3 (1995): 404-410 - reprinted in Gill, Power and Resistance in the New World Order (Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave, 2003). Other examples of pessimistic structuralism include Christoph Gorg and Joachim Hirsch, "Is International Democracy Possible?" Review of International Political Economy 5, no. 3 (1998): 585-615; Mustapha Kamal Pasha and David L. Blaney, "Elusive Paradise: The Promise and Peril of Global Civil Society," Alternatives 23, no. 4 (1998): 417-450; and Murphy, note 6. There also seem to be elements of pessimist analysis in Cecelia Lynch, "Social Movements and the Problem of Globalization," Alternatives 23, no. 2 (1998): 149-173.
53. We use the structuralist label with some misgiving, given that some authors included here have relatively complex understandings of the relationship between structure and agency that grant movements some
54. We use the structuralist label with some misgiving, given that some authors included here have relatively complex understandings of the relationship between structure and agency that grant movements some constitutive power. Nevertheless, the label accurately conveys the overriding focus on context and/or "underlying" forces. The more optimistic version of this approach can be found in the work of world-systems theorists, as with Giovanni Arrighi et al., Anti-Systemic Movements (London: Verso, 1989); and Samuel Amin et al., Transforming the Revolution: Social Movements and the World System (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1990). See also Hardt and Negri, note 5. The more pessimistic version of the structuralist approach includes much neo-Gramscian IR writing; most prominently, Robert Cox, Production, Power, and World Order (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987), pp. 368-395, and "Democracy in Hard Times: Economic Globalization and the Limits of Democracy," in Anthony McGrew, ed., The Transformation of Democracy? (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1997), pp. 64-66; and Stephen Gill, "Globalisation, Market Civilisation, and Disciplinary Neo-Liberalism, " Millennium 24, no. 3 (1995): 404-410 - reprinted in Gill, Power and Resistance in the New World Order (Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave, 2003). Other examples of pessimistic structuralism include Christoph Gorg and Joachim Hirsch, "Is International Democracy Possible?" Review of International Political Economy 5, no. 3 (1998): 585-615; Mustapha Kamal Pasha and David L. Blaney, "Elusive Paradise: The Promise and Peril of Global Civil Society," Alternatives 23, no. 4 (1998): 417-450; and Murphy, note 6. There also seem to be elements of pessimist analysis in Cecelia Lynch, "Social Movements and the Problem of Globalization," Alternatives 23, no. 2 (1998): 149-173.
55. We use the structuralist label with some misgiving, given that some authors included here have relatively complex understandings of the relationship between structure and agency that grant movements some constitutive power. Nevertheless, the label accurately conveys the overriding focus on context and/or "underlying" forces. The more optimistic version of this approach can be found in the work of world-systems theorists, as with Giovanni Arrighi et al., Anti-Systemic Movements (London: Verso, 1989); and Samuel Amin et al., Transforming the Revolution: Social Movements and the World System (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1990). See also Hardt and Negri, note 5. The more pessimistic version of the structuralist approach includes much neo-Gramscian IR writing; most prominently, Robert Cox, Production, Power, and World Order (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987), pp. 368-395, and "Democracy in Hard Times: Economic Globalization and the Limits of Democracy," in Anthony McGrew, ed., The Transformation of Democracy? (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1997), pp. 64-66; and Stephen Gill, "Globalisation, Market Civilisation, and Disciplinary Neo-Liberalism, " Millennium 24, no. 3 (1995): 404-410 - reprinted in Gill, Power and Resistance in the New World Order (Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave, 2003). Other examples of pessimistic structuralism include Christoph Gorg and Joachim Hirsch, "Is International Democracy Possible?" Review of International Political Economy 5, no. 3 (1998): 585-615; Mustapha Kamal Pasha and David L. Blaney, "Elusive Paradise: The Promise and Peril of Global Civil Society," Alternatives 23, no. 4 (1998): 417-450; and Murphy, note 6. There also seem to be elements of pessimist analysis in Cecelia Lynch, "Social Movements and the Problem of Globalization," Alternatives 23, no. 2 (1998): 149-173.
56. We use the structuralist label with some misgiving, given that some authors included here have relatively complex understandings of the relationship between structure and agency that grant movements some constitutive power. Nevertheless, the label accurately conveys the overriding focus on context and/or "underlying" forces. The more optimistic version of this approach can be found in the work of world-systems theorists, as with Giovanni Arrighi et al., Anti-Systemic Movements (London: Verso, 1989); and Samuel Amin et al., Transforming the Revolution: Social Movements and the World System (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1990). See also Hardt and Negri, note 5. The more pessimistic version of the structuralist approach includes much neo-Gramscian IR writing; most prominently, Robert Cox, Production, Power, and World Order (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987), pp. 368-395, and "Democracy in Hard Times: Economic Globalization and the Limits of Democracy," in Anthony McGrew, ed., The Transformation of Democracy? (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1997), pp. 64-66; and Stephen Gill, "Globalisation, Market Civilisation, and Disciplinary Neo-Liberalism, " Millennium 24, no. 3 (1995): 404-410 - reprinted in Gill, Power and Resistance in the New World Order (Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave, 2003). Other examples of pessimistic structuralism include Christoph Gorg and Joachim Hirsch, "Is International Democracy Possible?" Review of International Political Economy 5, no. 3 (1998): 585-615; Mustapha Kamal Pasha and David L. Blaney, "Elusive Paradise: The Promise and Peril of Global Civil Society," Alternatives 23, no. 4 (1998): 417-450; and Murphy, note 6. There also seem to be elements of pessimist analysis in Cecelia Lynch, "Social Movements and the Problem of Globalization," Alternatives 23, no. 2 (1998): 149-173.
57. Utopian transformationalists include Richard Falk, "The Global Promise of Social Movements: Explorations at the Edge of Time," Alternatives 12, no. 2 (1987): 173-196; Lipschutz, note 5; Dianne Otto, "Nongovernmental Organizations and the United Nations System: The Emerging Role of International Civil Society," Human Rights Quarterly 18 (1996): 107-141; Leslie Paul Thiele, "Making Democracy Safe for the World: Social Movements and Global Politics." Alternatives 8, no. 3 (1993): 273-305; Wapner, note 5. Utopian transformationalist elements are evident in R. B. J. Walker's One World/Many Worlds: Struggles for a Just World Peace (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1988), and in Manuel Castells's treatment of social movements in Castells, The Information Age, vol. 2: The Power of Identity (Oxford: Blackwell, 1997). However, the work of Castells and Walker also has a critical dimension, including a sensitivity to the differences between and within movements. Two other works that bridge our categories are Colas, note 1, and Leslie Sklair, Globalization: Capitalism and Its Alternatives (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002). The former has a critical-transformationalist insistence on the power relations stratifying social-movement activism, their interconnections with the state and capitalist system, and their demonstrated transformative capacity in particular contexts. The latter draws on sources ranging from political-opportunity structures theory to human-rights discourses in order to sketch out the complex strategies, constraints, and possibilities for countermovements to globalization. Yet both have a limited view of culturally oriented activism and an overriding concern to outline the potentialities for socialism in the context of the underlying forces of globalized capitalism, which points to affinities with optimistic structuralists. Peter Waterman, who pays close attention to the difficulties and potentialities of constructing solidarity across borders, and between movements, fits more comfortably into the critical-transformationalist category. See, for example, his Globalization, Social Movements, and the New Internationalism, 2d ed. (New York: Continuum, 2002). The introductory chapter of Guidry, Kennedy, and Zald, note 10, 1-32, with its emphasis on the interrelations of power, culture, and the global/local relationship, pushes the North American social-movement-theory tradition in a critical-transformationalist direction.
58. Utopian transformationalists include Richard Falk, "The Global Promise of Social Movements: Explorations at the Edge of Time," Alternatives 12, no. 2 (1987): 173-196; Lipschutz, note 5; Dianne Otto, "Nongovernmental Organizations and the United Nations System: The Emerging Role of International Civil Society," Human Rights Quarterly 18 (1996): 107-141; Leslie Paul Thiele, "Making Democracy Safe for the World: Social Movements and Global Politics." Alternatives 8, no. 3 (1993): 273-305; Wapner, note 5. Utopian transformationalist elements are evident in R. B. J. Walker's One World/Many Worlds: Struggles for a Just World Peace (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1988), and in Manuel Castells's treatment of social movements in Castells, The Information Age, vol. 2: The Power of Identity (Oxford: Blackwell, 1997). However, the work of Castells and Walker also has a critical dimension, including a sensitivity to the differences between and within movements. Two other works that bridge our categories are Colas, note 1, and Leslie Sklair, Globalization: Capitalism and Its Alternatives (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002). The former has a critical-transformationalist insistence on the power relations stratifying social-movement activism, their interconnections with the state and capitalist system, and their demonstrated transformative capacity in particular contexts. The latter draws on sources ranging from political-opportunity structures theory to human-rights discourses in order to sketch out the complex strategies, constraints, and possibilities for countermovements to globalization. Yet both have a limited view of culturally oriented activism and an overriding concern to outline the potentialities for socialism in the context of the underlying forces of globalized capitalism, which points to affinities with optimistic structuralists. Peter Waterman, who pays close attention to the difficulties and potentialities of constructing solidarity across borders, and between movements, fits more comfortably into the critical-transformationalist category. See, for example, his Globalization, Social Movements, and the New Internationalism, 2d ed. (New York: Continuum, 2002). The introductory chapter of Guidry, Kennedy, and Zald, note 10, 1-32, with its emphasis on the interrelations of power, culture, and the global/local relationship, pushes the North American social-movement-theory tradition in a critical-transformationalist direction.
59. Utopian transformationalists include Richard Falk, "The Global Promise of Social Movements: Explorations at the Edge of Time," Alternatives 12, no. 2 (1987): 173-196; Lipschutz, note 5; Dianne Otto, "Nongovernmental Organizations and the United Nations System: The Emerging Role of International Civil Society," Human Rights Quarterly 18 (1996): 107-141; Leslie Paul Thiele, "Making Democracy Safe for the World: Social Movements and Global Politics." Alternatives 8, no. 3 (1993): 273-305; Wapner, note 5. Utopian transformationalist elements are evident in R. B. J. Walker's One World/Many Worlds: Struggles for a Just World Peace (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1988), and in Manuel Castells's treatment of social movements in Castells, The Information Age, vol. 2: The Power of Identity (Oxford: Blackwell, 1997). However, the work of Castells and Walker also has a critical dimension, including a sensitivity to the differences between and within movements. Two other works that bridge our categories are Colas, note 1, and Leslie Sklair, Globalization: Capitalism and Its Alternatives (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002). The former has a critical-transformationalist insistence on the power relations stratifying social-movement activism, their interconnections with the state and capitalist system, and their demonstrated transformative capacity in particular contexts. The latter draws on sources ranging from political-opportunity structures theory to human-rights discourses in order to sketch out the complex strategies, constraints, and possibilities for countermovements to globalization. Yet both have a limited view of culturally oriented activism and an overriding concern to outline the potentialities for socialism in the context of the underlying forces of globalized capitalism, which points to affinities with optimistic structuralists. Peter Waterman, who pays close attention to the difficulties and potentialities of constructing solidarity across borders, and between movements, fits more comfortably into the critical-transformationalist category. See, for example, his Globalization, Social Movements, and the New Internationalism, 2d ed. (New York: Continuum, 2002). The introductory chapter of Guidry, Kennedy, and Zald, note 10, 1-32, with its emphasis on the interrelations of power, culture, and the global/local relationship, pushes the North American social-movement-theory tradition in a critical-transformationalist direction.
60. Utopian transformationalists include Richard Falk, "The Global Promise of Social Movements: Explorations at the Edge of Time," Alternatives 12, no. 2 (1987): 173-196; Lipschutz, note 5; Dianne Otto, "Nongovernmental Organizations and the United Nations System: The Emerging Role of International Civil Society," Human Rights Quarterly 18 (1996): 107-141; Leslie Paul Thiele, "Making Democracy Safe for the World: Social Movements and Global Politics." Alternatives 8, no. 3 (1993): 273-305; Wapner, note 5. Utopian transformationalist elements are evident in R. B. J. Walker's One World/Many Worlds: Struggles for a Just World Peace (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1988), and in Manuel Castells's treatment of social movements in Castells, The Information Age, vol. 2: The Power of Identity (Oxford: Blackwell, 1997). However, the work of Castells and Walker also has a critical dimension, including a sensitivity to the differences between and within movements. Two other works that bridge our categories are Colas, note 1, and Leslie Sklair, Globalization: Capitalism and Its Alternatives (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002). The former has a critical-transformationalist insistence on the power relations stratifying social-movement activism, their interconnections with the state and capitalist system, and their demonstrated transformative capacity in particular contexts. The latter draws on sources ranging from political-opportunity structures theory to human-rights discourses in order to sketch out the complex strategies, constraints, and possibilities for countermovements to globalization. Yet both have a limited view of culturally oriented activism and an overriding concern to outline the potentialities for socialism in the context of the underlying forces of globalized capitalism, which points to affinities with optimistic structuralists. Peter Waterman, who pays close attention to the difficulties and potentialities of constructing solidarity across borders, and between movements, fits more comfortably into the critical-transformationalist category. See, for example, his Globalization, Social Movements, and the New Internationalism, 2d ed. (New York: Continuum, 2002). The introductory chapter of Guidry, Kennedy, and Zald, note 10, 1-32, with its emphasis on the interrelations of power, culture, and the global/local relationship, pushes the North American social-movement-theory tradition in a critical-transformationalist direction.
61. Utopian transformationalists include Richard Falk, "The Global Promise of Social Movements: Explorations at the Edge of Time," Alternatives 12, no. 2 (1987): 173-196; Lipschutz, note 5; Dianne Otto, "Nongovernmental Organizations and the United Nations System: The Emerging Role of International Civil Society," Human Rights Quarterly 18 (1996): 107-141; Leslie Paul Thiele, "Making Democracy Safe for the World: Social Movements and Global Politics." Alternatives 8, no. 3 (1993): 273-305; Wapner, note 5. Utopian transformationalist elements are evident in R. B. J. Walker's One World/Many Worlds: Struggles for a Just World Peace (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1988), and in Manuel Castells's treatment of social movements in Castells, The Information Age, vol. 2: The Power of Identity (Oxford: Blackwell, 1997). However, the work of Castells and Walker also has a critical dimension, including a sensitivity to the differences between and within movements. Two other works that bridge our categories are Colas, note 1, and Leslie Sklair, Globalization: Capitalism and Its Alternatives (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002). The former has a critical-transformationalist insistence on the power relations stratifying social-movement activism, their interconnections with the state and capitalist system, and their demonstrated transformative capacity in particular contexts. The latter draws on sources ranging from political-opportunity structures theory to human-rights discourses in order to sketch out the complex strategies, constraints, and possibilities for countermovements to globalization. Yet both have a limited view of culturally oriented activism and an overriding concern to outline the potentialities for socialism in the context of the underlying forces of globalized capitalism, which points to affinities with optimistic structuralists. Peter Waterman, who pays close attention to the difficulties and potentialities of constructing solidarity across borders, and between movements, fits more comfortably into the critical-transformationalist category. See, for example, his Globalization, Social Movements, and the New Internationalism, 2d ed. (New York: Continuum, 2002). The introductory chapter of Guidry, Kennedy, and Zald, note 10, 1-32, with its emphasis on the interrelations of power, culture, and the global/local relationship, pushes the North American social-movement-theory tradition in a critical-transformationalist direction.
62. Utopian transformationalists include Richard Falk, "The Global Promise of Social Movements: Explorations at the Edge of Time," Alternatives 12, no. 2 (1987): 173-196; Lipschutz, note 5; Dianne Otto, "Nongovernmental Organizations and the United Nations System: The Emerging Role of International Civil Society," Human Rights Quarterly 18 (1996): 107-141; Leslie Paul Thiele, "Making Democracy Safe for the World: Social Movements and Global Politics." Alternatives 8, no. 3 (1993): 273-305; Wapner, note 5. Utopian transformationalist elements are evident in R. B. J. Walker's One World/Many Worlds: Struggles for a Just World Peace (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1988), and in Manuel Castells's treatment of social movements in Castells, The Information Age, vol. 2: The Power of Identity (Oxford: Blackwell, 1997). However, the work of Castells and Walker also has a critical dimension, including a sensitivity to the differences between and within movements. Two other works that bridge our categories are Colas, note 1, and Leslie Sklair, Globalization: Capitalism and Its Alternatives (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002). The former has a critical-transformationalist insistence on the power relations stratifying social-movement activism, their interconnections with the state and capitalist system, and their demonstrated transformative capacity in particular contexts. The latter draws on sources ranging from political-opportunity structures theory to human-rights discourses in order to sketch out the complex strategies, constraints, and possibilities for countermovements to globalization. Yet both have a limited view of culturally oriented activism and an overriding concern to outline the potentialities for socialism in the context of the underlying forces of globalized capitalism, which points to affinities with optimistic structuralists. Peter Waterman, who pays close attention to the difficulties and potentialities of constructing solidarity across borders, and between movements, fits more comfortably into the critical-transformationalist category. See, for example, his Globalization, Social Movements, and the New Internationalism, 2d ed. (New York: Continuum, 2002). The introductory chapter of Guidry, Kennedy, and Zald, note 10, 1-32, with its emphasis on the interrelations of power, culture, and the global/local relationship, pushes the North American social-movement-theory tradition in a critical-transformationalist direction.
63. Utopian transformationalists include Richard Falk, "The Global Promise of Social Movements: Explorations at the Edge of Time," Alternatives 12, no. 2 (1987): 173-196; Lipschutz, note 5; Dianne Otto, "Nongovernmental Organizations and the United Nations System: The Emerging Role of International Civil Society," Human Rights Quarterly 18 (1996): 107-141; Leslie Paul Thiele, "Making Democracy Safe for the World: Social Movements and Global Politics." Alternatives 8, no. 3 (1993): 273-305; Wapner, note 5. Utopian transformationalist elements are evident in R. B. J. Walker's One World/Many Worlds: Struggles for a Just World Peace (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1988), and in Manuel Castells's treatment of social movements in Castells, The Information Age, vol. 2: The Power of Identity (Oxford: Blackwell, 1997). However, the work of Castells and Walker also has a critical dimension, including a sensitivity to the differences between and within movements. Two other works that bridge our categories are Colas, note 1, and Leslie Sklair, Globalization: Capitalism and Its Alternatives (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002). The former has a critical-transformationalist insistence on the power relations stratifying social-movement activism, their interconnections with the state and capitalist system, and their demonstrated transformative capacity in particular contexts. The latter draws on sources ranging from political-opportunity structures theory to human-rights discourses in order to sketch out the complex strategies, constraints, and possibilities for countermovements to globalization. Yet both have a limited view of culturally oriented activism and an overriding concern to outline the potentialities for socialism in the context of the underlying forces of globalized capitalism, which points to affinities with optimistic structuralists. Peter Waterman, who pays close attention to the difficulties and potentialities of constructing solidarity across borders, and between movements, fits more comfortably into the critical-transformationalist category. See, for example, his Globalization, Social Movements, and the New Internationalism, 2d ed. (New York: Continuum, 2002). The introductory chapter of Guidry, Kennedy, and Zald, note 10, 1-32, with its emphasis on the interrelations of power, culture, and the global/local relationship, pushes the North American social-movement-theory tradition in a critical-transformationalist direction.
64. Utopian transformationalists include Richard Falk, "The Global Promise of Social Movements: Explorations at the Edge of Time," Alternatives 12, no. 2 (1987): 173-196; Lipschutz, note 5; Dianne Otto, "Nongovernmental Organizations and the United Nations System: The Emerging Role of International Civil Society," Human Rights Quarterly 18 (1996): 107-141; Leslie Paul Thiele, "Making Democracy Safe for the World: Social Movements and Global Politics." Alternatives 8, no. 3 (1993): 273-305; Wapner, note 5. Utopian transformationalist elements are evident in R. B. J. Walker's One World/Many Worlds: Struggles for a Just World Peace (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1988), and in Manuel Castells's treatment of social movements in Castells, The Information Age, vol. 2: The Power of Identity (Oxford: Blackwell, 1997). However, the work of Castells and Walker also has a critical dimension, including a sensitivity to the differences between and within movements. Two other works that bridge our categories are Colas, note 1, and Leslie Sklair, Globalization: Capitalism and Its Alternatives (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002). The former has a critical-transformationalist insistence on the power relations stratifying social-movement activism, their interconnections with the state and capitalist system, and their demonstrated transformative capacity in particular contexts. The latter draws on sources ranging from political-opportunity structures theory to human-rights discourses in order to sketch out the complex strategies, constraints, and possibilities for countermovements to globalization. Yet both have a limited view of culturally oriented activism and an overriding concern to outline the potentialities for socialism in the context of the underlying forces of globalized capitalism, which points to affinities with optimistic structuralists. Peter Waterman, who pays close attention to the difficulties and potentialities of constructing solidarity across borders, and between movements, fits more comfortably into the critical-transformationalist category. See, for example, his Globalization, Social Movements, and the New Internationalism, 2d ed. (New York: Continuum, 2002). The introductory chapter of Guidry, Kennedy, and Zald, note 10, 1-32, with its emphasis on the interrelations of power, culture, and the global/local relationship, pushes the North American social-movement-theory tradition in a critical-transformationalist direction.
65. Utopian transformationalists include Richard Falk, "The Global Promise of Social Movements: Explorations at the Edge of Time," Alternatives 12, no. 2 (1987): 173-196; Lipschutz, note 5; Dianne Otto, "Nongovernmental Organizations and the United Nations System: The Emerging Role of International Civil Society," Human Rights Quarterly 18 (1996): 107-141; Leslie Paul Thiele, "Making Democracy Safe for the World: Social Movements and Global Politics." Alternatives 8, no. 3 (1993): 273-305; Wapner, note 5. Utopian transformationalist elements are evident in R. B. J. Walker's One World/Many Worlds: Struggles for a Just World Peace (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1988), and in Manuel Castells's treatment of social movements in Castells, The Information Age, vol. 2: The Power of Identity (Oxford: Blackwell, 1997). However, the work of Castells and Walker also has a critical dimension, including a sensitivity to the differences between and within movements. Two other works that bridge our categories are Colas, note 1, and Leslie Sklair, Globalization: Capitalism and Its Alternatives (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002). The former has a critical-transformationalist insistence on the power relations stratifying social-movement activism, their interconnections with the state and capitalist system, and their demonstrated transformative capacity in particular contexts. The latter draws on sources ranging from political-opportunity structures theory to human-rights discourses in order to sketch out the complex strategies, constraints, and possibilities for countermovements to globalization. Yet both have a limited view of culturally oriented activism and an overriding concern to outline the potentialities for socialism in the context of the underlying forces of globalized capitalism, which points to affinities with optimistic structuralists. Peter Waterman, who pays close attention to the difficulties and potentialities of constructing solidarity across borders, and between movements, fits more comfortably into the critical-transformationalist category. See, for example, his Globalization, Social Movements, and the New Internationalism, 2d ed. (New York: Continuum, 2002). The introductory chapter of Guidry, Kennedy, and Zald, note 10, 1-32, with its emphasis on the interrelations of power, culture, and the global/local relationship, pushes the North American social-movement-theory tradition in a critical-transformationalist direction.
66. Richard Falk, in Predatory Globalization (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1999), has moved toward an explicit endorsement of a market system and for the need to reclaim the state, esp. in his chaps. 8, 9, Ronnie Lipschutz is a contributor to Coate et al., note 5, which, has a more institutional focus than his previous work. However, note also the marked turn toward pessimistic structuralism in Lipschutz's paper "Global Civil Society and Global Governmentality: Or, The Search for Politics and the State amidst the Capillaries of Power," presented at "The Politics of Protest in the Age of Globalisation" conference, University of Sussex, September 26-27, 2002.
67. Richard Falk, in Predatory Globalization (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1999), has moved toward an explicit endorsement of a market system and for the need to reclaim the state, esp. in his chaps. 8, 9, Ronnie Lipschutz is a contributor to Coate et al., note 5, which, has a more institutional focus than his previous work. However, note also the marked turn toward pessimistic structuralism in Lipschutz's paper "Global Civil Society and Global Governmentality: Or, The Search for Politics and the State amidst the Capillaries of Power," presented at "The Politics of Protest in the Age of Globalisation" conference, University of Sussex, September 26-27, 2002.
68. For example, Stephen Gill, "Toward a Postmodern Prince? The Battle in Seattle as a Moment in the New Politics of Globalization, " Millennium 29, no. 1 (2000): 131-140, reprinted in Gill, note 13. For crossover activist/academic texts aimed at strengthening the antisystemic, anticapitalist dimension of activism against neoliberal globalization, see Emma Bircham and John Charlton, eds., Anti-Capitalism: A Guide to the Movement, 2d ed. (London: Bookmark, 2001); John Holloway, Change the World Without Taking Power: The Meaning of Revolution Today (London: Pluto, 2002); Alex Callinicos, An Anti-Capitalist Manifesto (Cambridge: Polity, 2003).
69. For example, Stephen Gill, "Toward a Postmodern Prince? The Battle in Seattle as a Moment in the New Politics of Globalization, " Millennium 29, no. 1 (2000): 131-140, reprinted in Gill, note 13. For crossover activist/academic texts aimed at strengthening the antisystemic, anticapitalist dimension of activism against neoliberal globalization, see Emma Bircham and John Charlton, eds., Anti-Capitalism: A Guide to the Movement, 2d ed. (London: Bookmark, 2001); John Holloway, Change the World Without Taking Power: The Meaning of Revolution Today (London: Pluto, 2002); Alex Callinicos, An Anti-Capitalist Manifesto (Cambridge: Polity, 2003).
70. For example, Stephen Gill, "Toward a Postmodern Prince? The Battle in Seattle as a Moment in the New Politics of Globalization, " Millennium 29, no. 1 (2000): 131-140, reprinted in Gill, note 13. For crossover activist/academic texts aimed at strengthening the antisystemic, anticapitalist dimension of activism against neoliberal globalization, see Emma Bircham and John Charlton, eds., Anti-Capitalism: A Guide to the Movement, 2d ed. (London: Bookmark, 2001); John Holloway, Change the World Without Taking Power: The Meaning of Revolution Today (London: Pluto, 2002); Alex Callinicos, An Anti-Capitalist Manifesto (Cambridge: Polity, 2003).
71. For example, Stephen Gill, "Toward a Postmodern Prince? The Battle in Seattle as a Moment in the New Politics of Globalization, " Millennium 29, no. 1 (2000): 131-140, reprinted in Gill, note 13. For crossover activist/academic texts aimed at strengthening the antisystemic, anticapitalist dimension of activism against neoliberal globalization, see Emma Bircham and John Charlton, eds., Anti-Capitalism: A Guide to the Movement, 2d ed. (London: Bookmark, 2001); John Holloway, Change the World Without Taking Power: The Meaning of Revolution Today (London: Pluto, 2002); Alex Callinicos, An Anti-Capitalist Manifesto (Cambridge: Polity, 2003).
72. For example, Stephen Gill, "Toward a Postmodern Prince? The Battle in Seattle as a Moment in the New Politics of Globalization, " Millennium 29, no. 1 (2000): 131-140, reprinted in Gill, note 13. For crossover activist/academic texts aimed at strengthening the antisystemic, anticapitalist dimension of activism against neoliberal globalization, see Emma Bircham and John Charlton, eds., Anti-Capitalism: A Guide to the Movement, 2d ed. (London: Bookmark, 2001); John Holloway, Change the World Without Taking Power: The Meaning of Revolution Today (London: Pluto, 2002); Alex Callinicos, An Anti-Capitalist Manifesto (Cambridge: Polity, 2003).
73. We note in passing the increasing use of the terminology of "resistance" in literature on global activism. Found most frequently in structuralist texts (such as Gill, note 13; Gill, note 6; and in chapter 3.3, "Resistance, Crisis, and Transformation" in Hardt and Negri, note 5), this terminology has also found its way into the high-profile pragmatist text of Smith and Johnston, eds., note 8. Clearly an acknowledgment of the impact of oppositional activism against neoliberal aspects of the global economy, the use of this terminology raises significant questions about conceptual genealogy and political implications that are beyond the purview of this article. Useful investigations are offered in Chin and Mittleman, note 6, and Guidry, Kennedy, and Zald, note 10, pp. 17-19.