The Pyu Ancient Cities World Heritage application: lessons from Myanmar on transnational advocacy networks

References

• Acosta, R. (2012). Advocacy networks through a multidisciplinary lens: Implications for research agendas. Voluntas, 23, 156–181. doi: 10.1007/s11266-011-9187-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck, U., & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2002). Individualization. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Breen, C. (2007). Advocacy, international development, and world heritage sites in Sub-Saharan Africa. World Archaeology, 39(3), 355–370. doi: 10.1080/00438240701464772
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carpenter, R. (2007). Setting the advocacy agenda: Theorizing issue emergence and nonemergence in transnational advocacy networks. International Studies Quarterly, 51, 99–120. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2478.2007.00441.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ciplet, D. (2014). Contesting climate injustice: Transnational advocacy network struggles for rights in UN climate politics. Global Environmental Politics, 14(4), 75–96. doi: 10.1162/GLEP_a_00258
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dale, J. (2008). Burma’s Boomerang: Human rights, social movements and transnational legal mechanisms “from below”. International Journal of Contemporary Sociology, 45(1), 151–184.
   Google Scholar
• Dellacioppa, K. Z. (2011). The bridge called Zapatismo: Transcultural and transnational activist networks in Los Angeles and beyond. Latin American Perspectives, 38(1), 120–137. doi: 10.1177/0094582X10384216
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeMars, W. (2005). NGOs and transnational networks: Wild cards in world politics. London: Pluto Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eghenter, C., & Labo, M. (2003). In search of equitable governance models for indigenous peoples in protected areas—the experience of Kayan Mentarang national park. Policy Matters, 12, 248–253.
   Google Scholar
• European Union. (2012). Burma/Myanmar: EU sanctions suspended. Retrieved from http://eu-un.europa.eu/articles/en/article_12180_en.htm
   Google Scholar
• European Union. (2013). Factsheet: The EU and Myanmar/Burma—a new chapter in bilateral relations. Retrieved from http://eu-un.europa.eu/articles/en/article_14205_en.htm
   Google Scholar
• Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization, 52(4), 887–917. doi: 10.1162/002081898550789
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freeman, L. (2004). The development of social network analysis: A study in the sociology of science. Vancouver: Empirical Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gready, P. (2004). Conceptualising globalisation and human rights: Boomerangs and borders. International Journal of Human Rights, 8(3), 345–354. doi: 10.1080/1364298042000255180
   Google Scholar
• Gurowitz, A. (2006). The diffusion of international norms: Why identity matters. International Politics, 43, 305–341. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.ip.8800145
   Google Scholar
• Hafner-Burton, E., & Montgomery, A. (2008). Power or plenty: How do international trade institutions affect economic sanctions? Journal of Conflict Resolution, 52(2), 213–242. doi: 10.1177/0022002707313689
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henry, L., Mohan, G., & Yanacopulos, H. (2004). Networks as transnational agents of development. Third World Quarterly, 25(5), 839–855. doi: 10.1080/0143659042000231983
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochstetler, K., & Keck, M. (2007). Greening Brazil: Environmental activism in state and society. Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Huelshoff, M., & Kiel, C. (2012). Swan song: Transnational advocacy networks and environmental policy in chile—the case of the Cisnes de Cuello Negro. Interest Groups & Advocacy, 1, 260–278. doi: 10.1057/iga.2012.13
   Google Scholar
• Kahler, M. (Ed.). (2009). Networked politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Keck, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond borders. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Keohane, R., & Nye, J. (1998). Power and interdependence in the information age. Foreign Affairs, 77(5), 81–94. doi: 10.2307/20049052
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keohane, R., & Nye, J. (2001). Power and interdependence. Boston: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Liljeblad, J. (2016). The Pa’oh and Kakku: Implications for heritage conservation from Burma/Myanmar. In B. Verschuuren & N. Furuta (Eds.), Asian sacred natural sites: An ancient Asian philosophy and practice with fundamental significance to protected areas (p. 131). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lixinski, L. (2015). Heritage listing as a tool for advocacy: The possibilities for dissent, contestation, and emancipation in international law through international cultural heritage law. Asian Journal of International Law, 5, 387–409. doi: 10.1017/S2044251314000320
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, P. (2003). Globalization of contentious politics: The Amazonian indigenous rights movement. New York: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• McAteer, E., & Pulver, S. (2009). The corporate boomerang: Shareholder transnational advocacy networks targeting oil companies in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Global Environmental Politics, 9(1), 1–30. doi: 10.1162/glep.2009.9.1.1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McFarlane, C. (2006). Transnational development networks: Bringing development and postcolonial approaches into dialogue. The Geographical Journal, 172(1), 35–49. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-4959.2006.00178.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merry, S. E. (2006). Transnational human rights and local activism: Mapping the middle. American Anthropologist, 108(1), 38–51. doi: 10.1525/aa.2006.108.1.38
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mundy, K., & Murphy, L. (2001). Transnational advocacy, global civil society? Emerging evidence from the field of education. Comparative Education Review, 45(1), 85–126. doi: 10.1086/447646
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ndoro, W., & Wijesuriya, G. (2015). Heritage management and conservation: From colonization to globalization. In L. Meskell (Ed.), Global heritage: A reader (pp. 131–149). New York, NY: Wiley Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, P. (2002). New agendas and new patterns of international NGO political action. Voluntas, 13(4), 377–392. doi: 10.1023/A:1022062010375
   Google Scholar
• New Light of Myanmar. (2013, March 8). Italy agrees lifting of overall EU sanctions against Myanmar. New Light of Myanmar. Retrieved from http://www.burmalibrary.org/docsMA2013/NLM2013-03-08.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Noakes, S. (2012). Transnational advocacy networks and moral commitment: The free Tibet campaign meets the Chinese State. International Journal, 67(2), 507–525. doi: 10.1177/002070201206700218
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nye, J. (2004). Soft power: The means to success in world politics. New York: PublicAffairs.
   Google Scholar
• Pistolesi, A., Zolese, P., Morello, M., & Romano, M. (2014). Sri Ksetra & modern Pyay. Florence: Padplaces Books.
   Google Scholar
• Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon-Schuster.
   Google Scholar
• Risse, T., Ropp, S., & Sikkink, K. (1999). The power of human rights: International norms and domestic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rodrigues, M. G.M. (2004). Global environmentalism and local politics: Transnational advocacy networks in Brazil, Ecuador, and India. Albany: State University of New York Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, T. (2009). Global cultural governance: Decision-making concerning world heritage between politics and science. Erdkunde, 63(2), 103–121. doi: 10.3112/erdkunde.2009.02.01
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott, J. (2000). Social network analysis: A handbook. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, L. (2004). Archaeological theory and the politics of cultural heritage. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Sperling, V., Ferree, M. M., & Risman, B. (2001). Constructing global feminism: Transnational advocacy networks and Russian women’s activism. Globalization and Gender, 26(4), 1155–1186.
   Google Scholar
• Sunstein, C. (1996). Social norms and social roles. Columbia Law Review, 96(4), 903–968. doi: 10.2307/1123430
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tarrow, S. (2005). The new transnational activism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, A., & Bangarth, S. (2008). Transnational Christian charity: The Canadian council of churches, the world council of churches, and the Hungarian refugee crisis, 1956–1957. The American Review of Canadian Studies, 38(3), 295–316. doi: 10.1080/02722010809481716
   Google Scholar
• Trubek, D., Mosher, J., & Rothstein, J. (2000). Transnationalism in the regulation of labor relations: International regimes and transnational advocacy networks. Law & Social Inquiry, 25(4), 1187–1211. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-4469.2000.tb00320.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (2013a). Capacity building for safeguarding cultural heritage in Myanmar. Retrieved from http://www.unescobkk.org/culture/heritage/wh/ap/myanmar/cultural/
   Google Scholar
• United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (2013b). Pyu Ancient Cities: Halin, Beikthano, Sri Ksetra, volume 1: Nomination dossier. Retrieved from http://whc.unesco.org/uploads/nominations/1444.pdf
   Google Scholar
• United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (2014a). Myanmar’s first site inscribed to World Heritage list. Retrieved from http://whc.unesco.org/en/news/1158/
   Google Scholar
• United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (2014b). Myanmar. Retrieved from http://whc.unesco.org/en/statesparties/mm
   Google Scholar
• United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (2015). Italy’s support strengthens safeguarding of Myanmar heritage. Retrieved from http://fr.unesco.org/node/240019
   Google Scholar
• Van Ham, P. (2010). Social power in international politics. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weerasinghe, J. (2011). Living sacred heritage and “authenticity” in South Asia. In H. Anheier & Y. R. Isar (Eds.), Heritage, memory & identity (pp. 139–147). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• West, P., Igoe, J., & Brockington, D. (2006). Parks and peoples: The social impact of protected areas. Annual Review of Anthropology, 35, 251–277. doi: 10.1146/annurev.anthro.35.081705.123308
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiedener, P. (2009). Global links and environmental flows: Oil disputes in Ecuador. Global Environmental Politics, 9(1), 31–57. doi: 10.1162/glep.2009.9.1.31
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wijesuriya, G. (2007). The restoration of the temple of the tooth relic in Kandy, Sri Lanka: A post-conflict cultural response to loss of identity. In N. Stanley-Price (Ed.), Cultural heritage in postwar recovery (pp. 87–97). Rome: International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, C. (2014). Indigenous mobilisation and the law of consultation in Peru: A boomerang pattern? The International Indigenous Policy Journal, 5(4), 1–16. doi: 10.18584/iipj.2014.5.4.4
   Google Scholar
• Wu, F. (2005). Doctoral dissertation: Double-mobilization: Transnational advocacy networks for china’s environment and public health. University of Maryland. Retrieved from http://drum.lib.umd.edu/handle/1903/2970
   Google Scholar
• Zaharna, R. S., Arsenault, A., & Fisher, A. (2013). Relational, networked, and collaborative approaches to public diplomacy: The connective mindshift. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Zippel, K. (2004). Transnational advocacy networks and policy cycles in the European Union: The case of sexual harassment. Social Politics, 11(1), 57–85. doi: 10.1093/sp/jxh026
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar