Advertisement

The Impact of the Internet on Global Networks: A Perspective

  • Shefali VirkarEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Public Administration and Information Technology book series (PAIT, volume 9)

Abstract

The last quarter of the twentieth century was a time of significant upheaval. Unprecedented advances in computer technology began to collapse vast geographical distances and differences in time and made it possible for people from different parts of the world to form connections in manner not thought possible before. Centred around information, this technological revolution has today transformed the way in which people around the world think, work, share, and communicate. The rise in the number of non-state actors, particularly the emergence of civil society bodies such as NGOs, and the increase of their political influence has thrown up significant questions about how best the Internet and its associated technologies may be harnessed to aid the activities of such organisations and facilitate the formation of international networks.

Can the Internet truly augment the effects of those activists seeking to alter the landscape of international relations and advocacy? This chapter seeks to answer this question through an examination of the impact of the Internet on two iconic global networks: the Zapatista Solidarity Movement and the campaign against the Multilateral Agreement on Investment, and the consequences that their innovative use of the World Wide Web and associated platforms in the early 1990s has had on the eventual outcome of each social movement. The work aims to contribute to that body of empirical political science which recognises the impact that information and communication technologies and digital platforms have had on transnational protest and advocacy ever since their development and rapid proliferation.

Keywords

Foreign Direct Investment Civil Society Civil Society Organisation North American Free Trade Agreement Global Civil Society 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Abbate, J. (2001). Government, business, and the making of the internet. Business History Review, 75(1), 147–176.Google Scholar
  2. Arquilla, J., & Ronfeldt, D. (2001). Networks and netwars: The future of terror, crime, and militancy. Santa Monica: RAND.Google Scholar
  3. Castells, M. (1996). The information age: Economy, society and culture: Vol. 1—The rise of the network society. Oxford, England: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  4. Castells, M. (2001). The internet galaxy: Reflections on the internet, business and society. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chandrasekaran, R., & Corcoran, E. (1997). Human errors block e-mail, web sites in internet failure: Garbled Address Files From Va. Firm Blamed. The Washington Post, July 18, p. A1.Google Scholar
  6. Cleaver, H. M., Jr. (1998). The Zapatista effect: The internet and the rise of an alternative political fabric. Journal of International Affairs, 51(2), 621–640.Google Scholar
  7. Danitz, T., & Stobel, W. P. (2001). Networking dissent: Cyber activists use the internet to promote democracy in Burma. In J. Arquilla & D. Ronfeldt (Eds.), Networks and netwars: The future of terror, crime, and militancy (pp. 129–170). Santa Monica: RAND.Google Scholar
  8. de Armond, P. (2001). Netwar in the Emerald city: WTO protest strategy and tactics. In J. Arquilla & D. Ronfeldt (Eds.), Networks and netwars: The future of terror, crime, and militancy (pp. 201–238). Santa Monica: RAND.Google Scholar
  9. Deibert, R. J. (2000). International Plug ’n play?: Citizen activism, the internet and global public policy. International Studies Perspectives, 1, 255–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Denning, D. E. (2001). Activism, hacktivism and cyberterrorism: The internet as a tool for influencing foreign policy. In J. Arquilla & D. Ronfeldt (Eds.), Networks and netwars: The future of crime, terrorism and militancy (pp. 171–199). Santa Monica: RAND.Google Scholar
  11. Fenton, N. (2007). Contesting global capital, new media, solidarity and the role of a social imaginary. In B. Cammaerts & N. Carpentier (Eds.), Reclaiming the media. Brussels, Belgium: ECREA Series-Intellect.Google Scholar
  12. Frangonikolopoulos, C. A. (2012). Global civil society and deliberation in the digital age. International Journal of Electronic Governance, 5(1), 11–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Froehling, O. (1997). The cyberspace war of ‘Ink and Internet’ in Chiapas, Mexico. Geographical Review, 87(2), 291–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gilbreth, C., & Otero, G. (2001). Democratisation in Mexico: The Zapatista uprising and civil society. Latin American Perspectives, 28(4), 7–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gilder, G. (1999). The Faith of a futurist. Wall Street Journal, 31.Google Scholar
  16. Harwood P.G., Celeste, L.J. (2001). Surfing alone: The internet as a facilitator of social and political capital? Paper prepared for delivery at the 2001 Annual Meeting of American Political Science Association, Aug–Sept. 2001.Google Scholar
  17. Huysman, M., & Wulf, V. (2004). Social capital and information technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
  18. Internet World Stats (2012). Available at: http://www.internetworldstats.com/
  19. Joint NGO Statement on the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) to the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, NGO/OECD Consultation (1997). Delivered in Paris on 27 October, 1997. Retrieved October 2, 2013, from http://bocs.hu/igaz-a-1.htm
  20. Jordan, T., & Taylor, P. A. (2004). Hacktivism and cyberwars: Rebels with a cause? London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Juris, J. S. (2005). The new digital media and activist networking within anti-corporate globalization movements. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 597, 189–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kalathil, S., & Boas, T. C. (2010). Open networks, closed regimes: The impact of the internet on authoritarian rule. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment.Google Scholar
  23. Kobrin, S. J. (1998). The MAI and the clash of globalisations. Foreign Policy, 112, 97–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kobrin, S. J. (2012). The multilateral agreement on investment (The Wiley-Blackwell encyclopedia of globalisation). London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  25. Krause, A., Stein, M., Clark, J., Chen, T., Li, J., Dimon, J., Kanouse, J., & Herschman, J. (2006). The virtual activist 2.0: A training guide. NetAction.Org. Retrieved October 1, 2013, from http://www.netaction.org/training/v-training.html
  26. Kumar, C. (2000). Transnational networks and campaigns for democracy. In A. M. Florini (Ed.), The third force: The rise of transnational civil society (pp. 115–142). Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.Google Scholar
  27. Martinez-Torres, M. E. (2001). Civil society, the internet, and the Zapatistas. Peace Review: A Journal of Social Justice, 13(3), 347–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mora, M. (2008). Zapatista anti-capitalist politics and the “Other Campaign”: Learning from the struggle for indigenous rights and autonomy. In R. Stahler-Sholk, H. E. Vanden, & G. D. Kuecker (Eds.), Latin American social movements in the twentieth century; resistance, power, and democracy (pp. 151–164). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  29. Neumayer, E. (1999). Multilateral agreement on investment: Lessons for the WTO from the failed OECD negotiations. Wirtschaftspolitische Blätter, 46(6), 618–628.Google Scholar
  30. Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide: Civic engagement, information poverty, and the internet. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. O’Brien, R. (2002). Global civil society networks online: Zapatistas, the MAI and landmines. May 2002. Retrieved October 2, 2013, from http://www.web.net/~robrien/papers/civsocnets.html#_Toc535832619
  32. Robberson, T. (1995). Mexican rebels using a high tech weapon. Washington Post, 20 Feb 2005, p. A1.Google Scholar
  33. Russell, A. (2001). The Zapatistas and computer-mediated peace. Peace Review: A Journal of Social Justice, 13(3), 357–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Smith, P., & Smythe, E. (1999). Globalization, citizenship and technology: The MAI meets the internet. Canadian Foreign Policy, 7(2), 83–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. The OECD. (1997). Towards a global information society—Global information infrastructure, global information society: Policy requirements. Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.Google Scholar
  36. Van Laer, J., & Van Aelst, P. (2010). Internet and social movement action repertoires. Information, Communication & Society, 13(8), 1146–1171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Virkar, S. (2014). Re-engaging the public in the digital age: e-consultation initiatives in the Government 2.0 landscape (Encyclopedia of information science and technology 3rd ed.). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.Google Scholar
  38. Virkar, S. (2014). Consulting the British public in the Digital Age: Emerging synergies and tensions in the Government 2.0 Landscape. In L. Anthopoulos & C. G. Reddick (Eds.), Government e-strategic planning and management: Practices, planning, and roadmaps. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  39. Wall, M. A. (2007). Social movements and email: Expressions of online identity in the globalization protests. New Media Society, 9(2), 258–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wartenkin, C. (2001). Reshaping world politics: NGOs, the internet and global civil society. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  41. Zinnbauer, D. (2001). Internet, civil society and global governance: The neglected political dimension of the digital divide. Information and Security: An International Journal, 7, 45–64.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Politics and International RelationsKeble College, University of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations