International Policy Partnerships with Civil Society: Risks and Opportunities

  • Raffaele MarchettiEmail author
Part of the International Series on Public Policy book series (ISPP)


In global governance, cooperation between intergovernmental and civil society organizations takes many forms, including multi-stakeholder initiatives, private–public partnerships, sub-contracting, political alliances, hybrid coalitions, multi-sectoral networks, pluralist co-governance, and even foreign policy by proxy. This chapter identifies the main transformations taking place in global governance to make it more accessible to non-state actors, examines the key characteristics of policy partnerships between international organizations) and non-governmental organizations, and discusses the risks and opportunities entailed in this interaction. In particular, the openings from the United Nations and the European Union are analysed, together with the reasons why civil society organizations seek partnership with such institutions.


Civil Society United Nations Public Institution International Criminal Court Civil Society Organization 
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.


  1. Alemanno, A. (2014). Stakeholder engagement in regulatory policy. Paris: OECD (GOV/RPC(2014)14/ANN2).Google Scholar
  2. Asal, V., Nussbaum, B., & Harrington, D. W. (2007). Terrorism as transnational advocacy: An organizational and tactical examination. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 30(1), 15–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Austin, J. E. (2000). The collaboration challenge: How nonprofit and business succeed through strategic alliances. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Google Scholar
  4. Avant, D. D., Finnemore, M., & Sell, S. K. (Eds.). (2010). Who governs the globe? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bäckstrand, K., Campe, S., Chan, S., Mert, A., & Schäferhoff, M. (2012). Transnational public–private partnerships. In F. Biermann & P. Pattberg (Eds.), Global environmental governance reconsidered (pp. 123–148). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  6. Beisheim, M., & Liese, A. (Eds.). (2014). Transnational partnerships. Effectively providing for sustainable development? London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  7. Benner, T., Ivanova, M. H., Streck, C., & Witte, J. M. (2003). Moving the partnership agenda to the next stage: Key challenges. In J. M. Witte, C. Streck, & T. Benner (Eds.), Progress and peril? Partnerships and networks in global environmental governance: The post-Johannesburg agenda (pp. 85–89). Washington, DC: Global Public Policy Institute.Google Scholar
  8. Boerzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2007). Public-private partnerships: Effective and legitimate tools of international governance. In E. Grande & L. W. Pauly (Eds.), Complex sovereignty: On the reconstruction of political authority in the 21st century (pp. 195–216). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  9. Boli, J., & Thomas, G. M. (Eds.). (1999). Constructing world culture: International non-governmental organizations since 1875. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Brinkerhoff, J. M. (2002a). Assessing and improving partnership relationships and outcomes: A proposed framework. Evaluation and Program Planning, 25(3), 215–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brinkerhoff, J. M. (2002b). Partnership for international development: Rhetoric or results? Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  12. Broadwater, I., & Kaul, I. (2005). Global public–private partnerships. The current landscape. New York: UNDP/ODS Background Paper.Google Scholar
  13. Brown, L. D. (2008). Creating credibility. Legitimacy and accountability for transnational civil society. Sterling, VA: Kumarian Press.Google Scholar
  14. Bull, H. (1977). The anarchical society: A study of order in world politics. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Busby, J. W. (2007). Bono made Jesse Helms Cry: Jubilee 200, debt relief, and moral action in international politics. International Studies Quarterly, 51(2), 247–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Caporaso, J. (1993). International relations theory and multilateralism: The search for foundations. In J. G. Ruggie (Ed.), Multilateralism matters. The theory and Praxis of an institutional form (pp. 51–90). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Cerny, P. G. (2010). Rethinking world politics: A theory of transnational neopluralism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Checkel, J. T. (Ed.). (2013). Transnational dynamics of civil war. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Clarkson, M. B. E. (1994). A risk based model of stakeholder theory. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Second Toronto Conference on Stakeholder Theory, Centre for Corporate Social Performance & Ethics, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
  20. Clinton, H. R. (2010). Leading through civilian power: Redefining American diplomacy and development. Foreign Affairs, 89(6), 13–24.Google Scholar
  21. Collingwood, V., & Logister, L. (2005). State of the art: Addressing the INGO ‘Legitimacy Deficit’. Political Studies Review, 3(2), 175–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Czempiel, E. O., & Rosenau, J. N. (1992). Governance without government: Order and change in world politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. European Commission. (2001). European Governance: A white paper. Brussels: COM (2001) 428 final.Google Scholar
  24. European Commission. (2010). European instrument for democracy and human rights (EIDHR). Strategy Paper 2011–2013. Brussels: C(2010) 2432, 21 April.Google Scholar
  25. Evans, P. (2000). Fighting marginalisation with transnational networks: Counter-hegemonic globalisation. Contemporary Sociology, 29, 230–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ferguson, Y. H., & Mansbach, R. W. (2004). Remapping global politics. History’s revenge and future shock. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fisher, F. (1990). Technocracy and the politics of expertise. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  28. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.Google Scholar
  29. Gary, I. (1996). Confrontation, cooperation or cooptation: NGOs and the Ghanaian State during structural adjustment. Review of African Political Economy, 23(68), 149–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hale, T., & Held, D. (Eds.). (2011). Handbook of transnational governance. New institutions and innovations. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  31. Hall, R. B., & Biersteker, T. J. (Eds.). (2002). The emergence of private authority in global governance. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Heap, S. (1998). NGOs and the private sector: Potential for partnerships? Oxford: INTRAC.Google Scholar
  33. Heine, J., & Thakur, R. (Eds.). (2011). The dark side of globalization. Tokyo: United Nations University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Held, D., & McGrew, A. (Eds.). (2002). Governing globalization: Power, authority and global governance. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  35. Hemmati, M. (Ed.). (2002). Multi-Stakeholder processes for governance and sustainability: Beyond deadlock and conflict. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  36. Henderson, S. L. (2002). Selling civil society: Western aid and the nongovernmental organization sector in Russia. Comparative Political Studies, 35, 139–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Higgott, R. A., Underhill, G. R. D., & Bieler, A. (Eds.). (2000). Non-State actors and authority in the global system. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  38. Hill, K. A., & Hughes, J. E. (1998). Cyberpolitics: Citizen activism in the age of the internet. Lanham, MD: Rowan and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  39. Hulme, D., & Edwards, M. (Eds.). (1997). NGOs, states and donors: Too close for comfort? London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  40. Imig, D. R., & Tarrow, S. (Eds.). (2001). Contentious Europeans: Protest and politics in an emerging polity. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  41. Joachim, J., & Locher, B. (Eds.). (2009). Transnational activism in the UN and the EU. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  42. Kaiser, K. (1971). Transnational relations as a threat to the democratic process. International Organization, 25(3), 706–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kaldor, M., & Muro-Ruiz, D. (2003). Religious and nationalist militant groups. In M. Kaldor, H. K. Anheier, & M. Glausius (Eds.), Global civil society (pp. 151–184). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Kapoor, I. (2012). Celebrity humanitarianism: The ideology of global charity. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  45. Keck, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond borders: Advocacy networks in international politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Keohane, R. (1984). After hegemony: Cooperation and discord in the world political economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Keohane, R. (1986). Reciprocity in international relations. International Organization, 40(1), 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Keohane, R., & Nye, J. (Eds.). (1971). Transnational relations and world politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Keohane, R., & Nye, J. (1977). Power and interdependence. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  50. Koenig-Archibugi, M., & Zürn, M. (Eds.). (2006). New modes of governance in the global system: Exploring publicness, delegation and inclusiveness. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  51. Krasner, S. D. (1982). Structural changes and regime consequences: Regimes as intervening variables. International Organization, 36(2), 185–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Liese, A., & Beisheim, M. (2011). Transnational public–private partnerships and the provision of collective goods in developing countries. In T. Risse (Ed.), Governance without a state: Policies and politics in areas of limited statehood (pp. 115–143). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Macdonald, T. (2008). Global stakeholder democracy: Power and representation beyond liberal states. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Mansbach, R. W., & Rafferty, K. L. (2008). Introduction to global politics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  55. Marchetti, R. (2008). Global democracy: For and against. Ethical theory, institutional design, and social struggles. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  56. Marchetti, R. (2015). The conditions for civil society participation in international decision making. In D. Della Porta & M. Diani (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of social movements (pp. 753–766). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Marchetti, R. (2016a). Global Strategic Engagement. The New Rules for Global Governance. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  58. Marchetti, R. (Ed.). (2016b). Cooperation and competition between governments and NGOs: Perspectives from Africa, Asia, Europe, and Middle East. New Delhi: Routledge.Google Scholar
  59. Martens, J. (2007). Multistaholder partnerships. Future models of multilateralism? Berlin: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. Dialogue on Globalization n. 29.Google Scholar
  60. McKeon, N. (2009). The United Nations and civil society: Legitimating global governance—Whose voice? London: Zed.Google Scholar
  61. Naìm, M. (2007). What is a GONGO? How government-sponsored groups masquerade as civil society. Foreign Policy, 170(18), 96–98.Google Scholar
  62. Naìm, M. (2013). The end of power. From boardrooms to battlefields and churches to states, Why being in charge isn’t what it used to be. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  63. Nelson, J. (2002). Building partnership. Cooperation between the United Nations and the private sector. New York: United National Department of Public Information.Google Scholar
  64. Nye, J., & Keohane, R. O. (1971). Transnational relations and world politics. International Organization, XXV(3), 329–349.Google Scholar
  65. Ohmae, K. (1999). The borderless world: Power and strategy in the interlinked economy. New York: HarperBusiness.Google Scholar
  66. Pattberg, P. (2005). The institutionalization of private governance: How business and nonprofit organizations agree on transnational rules. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 18(4), 589–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Pishchikova, K. (2014). Multi-stakeholder partnership nella ricostruzione post-conflitto: Un bilancio della letteratura e della prassi attuale. In R. Belloni, M. Cereghini, & F. Strazzari (Eds.), Costruire la pace tra Stato e territorio: I dilemmi del peacebuilding (pp. 165–180). Trento: Erickson.Google Scholar
  68. Putnam, R. D. (1988). Diplomacy and domestic politics: The logic of two-level games. International Organization, 42, 427–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Reiman, K. D. (2006). A view from the top: International politics, norms, and the worldwide growth of NGOs. International Studies Quarterly, 50, 45–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Risse-Kappen, T. (Ed.). (1995). Bringing transnational relations back in: Non-State actors, domestic structure and international institutions. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Risse, T. (2011). Governance without a state? Policies and politics in areas of limited statehood. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  72. Rosenau, J. N. (1992). Citizenship in a changing global order. In J. N. Rosenau & E. O. Czempiel (Eds.), Governance without government: Order and change in world politics (pp. 272–294). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Rosenau, J. N. (1997). Along the domestic-foreign frontier: Exploring governance in a turbulent world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Ruggie, J. G. (1982). International regimes, transactions, and change: Embedded liberalism in the postwar economic order. International Organization, 36(2), 379–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Ruggie, J. G. (1993). Multilateralism: The anatomy of an institution. In J. G. Ruggie (Ed.), Multilateralism matters. The theory and Praxis of an institutional form (pp. 3–47). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  76. Salamon, L. M. (1994). The rise of the nonprofit sector. Foreign Affairs, 73(4), 109–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Sardamov, I. (2005). Civil society’ and the limits of democratic assistance. Government and Opposition, 40(3), 379–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Schaferhoff, M., Campe, S., & Kaan, C. (2009). Transnational public–private partnerships in international relations: Making sense of concepts, research frameworks, and results. International Studies Review, 11(2), 451–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Scholte, J. A. (2000). Globalization: A critical introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  80. Slaughter, A.-M. (2004). A new world order. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  81. Smith, J., & Wiest, D. (2012). Social movements in the world-system: The politics of crisis and transformation. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  82. Sommerer, T., & Tallberg, J. (2016). Transnational access to international organizations 1950–2010: A new data set. International Studies Perspectives, (0), 1–20. doi: 10.1093/isp/ekv022.
  83. Steger, M. B. (2003). Globalization. A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  84. Tarrow, S. (1994). Power in movement. Social movements and contentious politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  85. Tarrow, S. (2005). The new transnational activism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Uhlin, A., & Kalm, S. (2015). Civil society and the governance of development: Opposing global institutions. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  87. United Nations. (2004). We the peoples: Civil society, the United Nations and global governance (A/58/817/2004). New York: Report of the Panel of Eminent Persons on United Nations-Civil Society Relations. Commission Cardoso (UN A/58/817).Google Scholar
  88. Vaillancourt Rosenau, P. (Ed.). (2000). Public-private policy partnerships. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  89. Van Rooy, A. (2004). The global legitimacy game: Civil society, globalization, and protest. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Wapner, P. (2002). Introductory essay: Paradise lost? NGOs and global accountability. Chicago Journal of International Law, 3(1), 155–160.Google Scholar
  91. Warner, M., & Sullivan, R. (Eds.). (2004). Putting partnerships to work. Strategic alliances for development between government, the private sector and civil society. Sheffield: Greenleaf.Google Scholar
  92. Willets, P. (2000). From ‘Consultative Arrangements’ to ‘Partnership’: The changing status of NGOs in diplomacy at the UN. Global Governance, 6, 191–212.Google Scholar
  93. Witte, J. M., Reinicke, W., & Benner, T. (2000). Beyond Multilateralism: Global Public Policy Networks. Internationale Politik und Gesellschaft, 2, 176–188.Google Scholar
  94. Woods, N. (2000). Globalization and international institutions. In N. Woods (Ed.), The political economy of globalization (pp. 202–223). New York: St. Martin’s Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Wu, F. (2003). Environmental GONGO autonomy: Unintended consequences of state strategies in China. The Good Society, 12(1), 35–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Zürn, M. (1999). The state in the post-national constellation—Societal denationalization and multi-level governance: Arena Working Papers WP 99/35.Google Scholar
  97. Zürn, M. (2004). Global governance and legitimacy problems. Government and Opposition, 39(2), 260–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LUISSRomaItaly

Personalised recommendations