The Quandary of the Second-Best
The Quandary of the Second-Best
How should INGOs’ advocacy campaigns be conceptualized and normatively evaluated? Chapter 5 argues that two common answers to this question—that INGOs should be good non-elected representatives and good partners—are both inadequate. The reason is that both overlook the “quandary of the second-best.” In light of this quandary, this chapter argues, INGO advocacy should be conceptualized not as representation or partnership, but rather as the use of power. Correspondingly, INGO advocates should be evaluated based on how well they avoid misusing their power. Drawing on the example of ENOUGH and Global Witness’s advocacy on Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank bill (involving mining in the Democratic Republic of Congo) and Oxfam’s advocacy on health care in Ghana, this chapter argues that INGO advocates regularly misuse their power in four ways and specifies four principles—involving basic interests, displacement, arbitrary power, and “low-balling”—for minimizing these misuses.
Keywords: Democratic Republic of Congo, representation, partnership, power, second-best actor, advocacy, displacement, low-balling, Dodd-Frank, Ghana
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .
