Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Session Type
Browse By Topic
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Deadlines
Policies
Updating Your Submission
Requesting AV
Presentation Tips
Request a Visa Letter
FAQs
X (Twitter)
Search Tips
Annual Meeting App
About Annual Meeting
Transnational advocacy networks are increasingly impactful players in global politics. But such influence presents a puzzle. Social movement scholars underscore the significant role that organizations play in social movement functioning. Organizational resources and organizational efficiency often condition a movement’s ability to mobilize financial and human resources. Organizational structures also provide for movement continuity during periods of abeyance. Brulle (1996) has gone so far as to argue that the modern environmental movement in the United States is “synonymous” with major environmental organizations. In contrast, TANs function without a central organizational base. This facilitates transnational activism, but at the same time can act as handicap. Borrowing insights from the study of social movements, organizational theory, and science and technology studies, this paper argues that TANs insource organization by rooting claims in a specific arena, such as a regional human rights body, and coopting that area’s “communication infrastructure”. To demonstrate such insourcing at work, I detail efforts to advance a human rights approach to climate change at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the United Nations Human Rights Council. This analysis contributes to our understanding of how TANs operate in the global arena, drawing particular attention to the benefits of arena-based activism and its issuant risks. This investigation also supplements our knowledge of how the human rights frame functions as master frame, suggesting that it serves as much as a socio-organizational resource as it does moral resource.