Pluralism and proportionality in the representation of European international civil society within the UN framework: a sub-regional comparison

References

• Abu-Laban, Y. (2012). “Pluralism as process: The role of liberal democratic institutions.” Global Centre for Pluralism 2008 Expert Roundtable. Retrieved from http://www.pluralism.ca/images/PDF_docs/pluralism_papers/abu_laban_paper_pp6.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, K. (2012). Living with the UN: American responsibilities and international order. Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Barnett, M., & Finnemore, M. (2004). Rules for the world: International organizations in global politics. Ithica, NY: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bloem, R., Attia, I., & Dam, P. (2008). The conference of NGOs (CONGO): The story of strengthening civil society engagement with the United Nations. In J. Walker, & A. Thompson (Eds.), Critical mass: The emergence of global civil society (pp. 43–74). Waterloo, Ontario, CA: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Boli, J., & Thomas, G. (Eds.). (1999). Constructing world culture: International nongovernmental organizations since 1875. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bunea, A., & Thompson, R. (2015). Consultations with interest groups and the empowerment of executives: Evidence from the European Union. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 28(4), 517–531. doi: 10.1111/gove.12119
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carpenter, R. (2010). Governing the global agenda: “Gatekeepers” and ‘issue adoption’ in transnational advocacy networks. In D. Avant, M. Finnemore, & S. Sell (Eds.), Who governs the globe? (pp. 202–237). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, A., Friedman, E., & Hochstetler, K. (1998). The sovereign limits of global civil society: A comparison of NGO participation in UN world conferences on the environment, human rights and women. World Politics, 51(1), 1–35. doi: 10.1017/S0043887100007772
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J., & Arato, A. (1997). Civil society and political theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press (Studies in Contemporary German Social Thought).
   Google Scholar
• Cooley, A. (2010). Outsourcing authority: How project contracts transform global governance networks. In D. Avant, M. Finnemore, & S. Sell (Eds.), Who governs the globe? (pp. 238–265). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dahl, R. (1956). A preface to democratic theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• DeMars, W. (2005). NGOs and transnational networks: Wild cards in world politics. London: Pluto Press.
   Google Scholar
• DeMars, W., & Dijkzuel, D. (2015). Introduction: NGOing. In W. DeMars, & D. Dijkzuel (Eds.), The NGO challenge for international relations theory (pp. 3–38). New York, NY: Routledge. (Global Institutions Series).
   Google Scholar
• Diamond, L. (1994). Toward democratic consolidation. Journal of Democracy, 5(3), 4–17. doi: 10.1353/jod.1994.0041
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, M. (2009). Civil society. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Freedom House 2016 Rankings. Retrieved from https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world-2016/table-scores
   Google Scholar
• Galston, W. (2005). The practice of liberal pluralism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Global Centre for Pluralism. (2012). “Defining pluralism.” Global centre for pluralism: pluralism papers, No. 1. Retrieved from http://www.pluralism.ca/images/PDF_docs/defining_pluralism_EN.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Gotz, N. (2008). Reframing NGOs: The identity of an international relations non-starter. European Journal of International Relations, 14(2), 231–258. doi: 10.1177/1354066108089242
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Guardian. (2012). “Every QUANGO in Britain.” 7 July.
   Google Scholar
• Hemment, J. (2012). Youth voluntarism, and potemkin NGOs: Making sense of civil society in post-soviet russia. Slavic Review, 71(2), 234–260. doi: 10.1017/S0037677900013607
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Himmelfarb, G. (2000). The demoralization of society: What’s wrong with the civil society. In D. Eberly (Ed.), The essential civil society reader (pp. 95–100). New York: Rowman and Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Karppinen, K. (2013). Rethinking media pluralism. New York: Fordham University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Keohane, R. (1998). International institutions: Can interdependence work? Foreign Policy, 110, 82–96. doi: 10.2307/1149278
   Google Scholar
• Knight, B. (2008). Civil society in Western and Southern Europe. In V. F. Heinrich, & L. Fioramonti (Eds.), CIVICUS global survey of the state of civil society: Volume 2 – comparative perspectives (pp. 163–180). Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kotzian, P. (2015). Holding international governance to account: Do civil society organizations have a chance to exert accountability? Journal of International Organizations Studies, 6(2), 5–25.
   Google Scholar
• Kymlicka, W. (2007). Multicultural odysseys: Navigating the New international politics of diversity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 3–25.
   Google Scholar
• Lane, D. (2010). Civil society in the old and new member states. European Societies, 12(3), 293–315. doi: 10.1080/14616696.2010.483008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linz, J., & Stepan, A. (1996). Problems of democratic transition and consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and post-communist Europe. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• McKeon, N. (2009). The United Nations and civil society: Legitimizing global governance – who’s voice? New York: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Mingst, K., & Muldoon, J. (2015). Global governance and NGOs: Reconceptualizing international relations for the 21st century. In W. DeMars, & D. Dijkzuel (Eds.), The NGO challenge for international relations theory (pp. 65–81). New York, NY: Routledge. (Global Institutions Series).
   Google Scholar
• National Center for Charitable Statistics. (2007). The nonprofit sector in brief: Facts and figures from the nonprofit almanac 2007. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.
   Google Scholar
• NGO.IN. (2016). “NGO.” Retreived from http://www.ngo.in/
   Google Scholar
• Omelicheva, M. (2009). Global civil society and democratization of world politics: A bona fide relationship or illusory liason? International Studies Review, 11(2), 109–132. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2486.2008.01827.x
   Google Scholar
• Putnam, R. (2001). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. London: Simon and Schuster.
   Google Scholar
• Riddell-Dixon, E. (2008). Facilitating NGO participation: An assessment of Canadian government-sponsored mechanisms for the Copenhagen summit for social development and the Beijing conference on women. In J. Walker, & A. Thompson (Eds.), Critical mass: The emergence of global civil society (pp. 89–110). Waterloo, ON: The Centre for International Governance Innovation and Wilfrid Laurier University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Risse-Kappen, T. (Ed.). (1995). Bringing transnational relations back In: Non-state actors, domestic structures and international institutions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, M. (2006). Plurality. In C. Hay, M. Lister, & D. Marsh (Eds.), The state: Theories and issues (pp. 21–38). New York: Palgrave McMillan.
   Google Scholar
• Tallberg, J. (2012). Civil society and global democracy: An assessment. In C. Archibugi, M. Koenig-Archibugi, & R. Marchetti (Eds.), Global democracy: Normative and empirical perspectives (pp. 210–232). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thiel, M. (2017). European civil society and human rights advocacy. University Park, PA: Penn State University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Uhlin, A. (2009). Which characteristics of civil society organizations support what aspects of democracy? Evidence from post-communist Latvia. International Political Science Review, 30(3), 271–295. doi: 10.1177/0192512109105639
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verweij, M. (2011). Clumsy solutions for a wicked world: How to improve global governance. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Waisman, C. (2006). Autonomy, self-regulation, and democracy: Tocquevillean-Gellnerian perspectives on civil society and the Bifurcated State in Latin America. In R. Feinberg, C. Waisman, & L. Zamosc (Eds.), Civil society and democracy in Latin America (pp. 17–34). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Whaites, A. (1996). Let’s get civil society straight: NGOs and political theory. Development in Practice, 6(3), 240–249. doi: 10.1080/0961452961000157824
   Google Scholar
• Willetts, P. (Ed.). (1996). The conscience of the world: The influence of Non-governmental organizations in the UN system. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Willetts, P. (2000). From ‘consultative arrangements’ to ‘partnership’: The changing status of NGOs in diplomacy at the UN. Global Governance, 6(2), 191–212.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willetts, P. (2006). The cardoso report on the UN and civil society: Functionalism, global corporatism, or global democracy? Global Governance, 12(3), 305–324.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willetts, P. (2011). Non-Governmental organizations in world politics: The construction of global governance. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Willetts, P. (2012). “What is a non-governmental organization?” UNESCO Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems. Retrieved from http://www.eolss.net/
   Google Scholar
• World Bank. (2002). “Non-governmental organizations and civil society engagement in World Bank supported projects: Lessons from OED Evaluations.” Retrieved from http://lnweb90.worldbank.org/oed/oeddoclib.nsf/DocUNIDViewForJavaSearch/851D373F39609C0B85256C230057A3E3/$file/LP18.pdf.
   Google Scholar