Bronwen Alexandra Magrath

Advocacy as Political Strategy: The emergence of an Education for All campaign at ActionAid International and the Asia South Pacific Association for Basic and Adult Education by Bronwen Alexandra Magrath A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Leadership, Higher and Adult Education University of Toronto Copyright by Bronwen Alexandra Magrath 2013

Advocacy as Political Strategy: The Emergence of an Education for All Campaign at ActionAid International and the Asia South Pacific Association for Basic and Adult Education Abstract Bronwen Alexandra Magrath Doctor of Philosophy Department of Leadership, Higher and Adult Education University of Toronto 2013 This dissertation explores why and how political advocacy emerged as a dominant organizational strategy for NGOs in the international development education field. In order to answer this central question, I adopt a comparative case-study approach, examining the evolution of policy advocacy positions at two leading NGOs in the field: ActionAid International and the Asia South Pacific Association for Basic and Adult Education (ASPBAE). Although these organizations differ in significant ways, both place political advocacy at the centre of their mandates, and both have secured prominent positions in global educational governance. Through comparative analysis, I shed light on why these organizations have assumed leadership roles in a global advocacy movement. I focus on how the shift to policy advocacy reflects the internal environment of each organization as well as broader trends in the international development field. Ideas of structure and agency are thus central to my analysis. I test the applicability of two structural theories of social change: world polity theory and political opportunity theory; as well as two constructivist approaches: strategic issue framing and international norm dynamics. I offer some thoughts on establishing a ii

more dynamic relationship between structure and agency, drawing on Fligstein and McAdam s concept of strategic action fields. In order to test the utility of these theoretical frameworks, the study begins with a historical account of how ActionAid and ASPBAE have shifted from service- and practice- oriented organizations into political advocates. These histories are woven into a broader story of normative change in the international development field. I then examine the development of a number of key advocacy strategies at each organization, tracing how decisions are made and implemented as well as how they are influenced by the broader environment. I find that while it is essential to understand how global trends and norms enable and constrain organizational strategy, the internal decision-making processes of each organization largely shape how strategies are crafted and implemented. These findings offer insight into the pursuit of advocacy as a political strategy and the role of NGOs in global social change. iii

Acknowledgments I would like to express my deepest gratitude to all of the people who have helped me through my PhD journey. My supervisor, Dr. Karen Mundy, has offered ideas, information and encouragement over the past four years. This dissertation could not have taken shape without her continued support. Thanks also to my committee members, Dr. Steven Bernstein and Dr. Judith Taylor, and external examiners, Dr. Yusuf Sayed and Dr. Ruth Hayhoe, for their insightful comments and feedback. A special thank you to all the people at ActionAid and ASPBAE who have given me their time and energy, and answered many emails, as I conducted research for this project. I was lucky to have a wonderful network of friends and family in Toronto to support me during this process. Above all, I want to thank my husband Jon for his love and encouragement and for being a fantastic sounding board for ideas, and my daughter Lily May for keeping me grounded and for giving me excuses to go to the park for a swing. This project was made possible through the generous financial support of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) and the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education at the University of Toronto. iv

List of Acronyms ASPBAE CEF CSEF CSO DfID DVV EFA GMR ICAE IET IMF INGO GCE MDG NGO OECD RBA RWS SAF UIL UNESCO USAID Asia South Pacific Association for Basic and Adult Education Commonwealth Education Fund Civil Society Education Fund Civil Society Organization Department for International Development (UK) German Adult Education Organization Education for All Global Monitoring Report International Council of Adult Education International Education Team (ActionAid) International Monetary Fund International Non-Governmental Organisation Global Campaign for Education Millennium Development Goals Non-Governmental Organisation Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Rights-Based Approach Real World Strategies Program Strategic Action Fields Unesco Institute for Lifelong Learning United Nations Education, Social and Cultural Organization US Agency for International Development v

Table of Contents 1 Introduction... 1 1.1 Overview... 1 1.2 Background... 3 1.3 Case study selection and project design... 5 1.4 Organization of the study... 8 2 The Non-Governmental Sector and Global Social Change: a literature review... 9 2.1 Introduction... 9 2.2 Civil society and global governance... 9 2.3 Social change processes: structural or constructed?... 12 2.3.1 World Polity Theory... 12 2.3.2 Political Opportunity Structure... 15 2.3.3 Strategic Issue Framing and International Norm Dynamics... 18 2.3.4 Conclusion: Melding the two approaches?... 24 3 Research Design... 28 3.1 Introduction... 28 3.2 Case study methods and case selection... 28 3.3 Data collection... 30 3.4 Data analysis... 33 3.5 Limitations of the study... 35 3.6 Conclusion... 36 4 A History of ActionAid: from British charity to transnational advocate... 38 4.1 Introduction... 38 4.2 The origins of ActionAid and the post-war development regime... 39 4.3 1980s: the challenge of neoliberalism and ActionAid s community education centres... 44 4.4 1990s: Empowerment, Participation and the emergence of advocacy... 48 4.5 1997-2004: Fighting Poverty Together and the Rights Based Approach to Development... 53 4.6 The rights-based approach as an emerging global norm... 55 4.7 Rights-based advocacy and organizational change at ActionAid... 62 4.8 ActionAid since 2004... 67 4.9 Conclusions... 69 5 A History of ASPBAE: from a network of educators to a transnational advocate... 71 5.1 Introduction... 71 5.2 ASPBAE origins: UNESCO and education for development... 72 5.3 Network growth and the radicalization of adult education discourse... 75 5.4 Organizational Renewal, 1987-1991: Decentralization, Regionalization and Participatory Development... 79 5.5 Structural change... 83 5.6 1990-1999: A gradual shift to advocacy... 88 5.7 2000-2004: Regional to global networking and the advent of an advocacy strategy... 92 5.8 Conclusions... 96 vi

6 Political Opportunity Structures in the Education for All Movement... 99 6.1 Introduction... 99 6.2 NGO advocacy and political opportunities at the UN... 100 6.3 Political Opportunities in Education for All Governance... 103 6.4 Expanding resource opportunities post-dakar... 110 6.5 The Commonwealth Education Fund... 113 6.6 The Civil Society Education Fund... 116 6.7 Conclusions... 117 7 Strategic Frame Alignment: selling global norms in advocacy organizations... 120 7.1 Introduction... 120 7.2 Case Study #1: Framing the Right to Education at ActionAid... 121 7.2.1 Introduction... 121 7.2.2 Global Education Review 2002... 122 7.2.3 The Education Strategic Plan 2005-2010... 128 7.2.4 Education Rights: A Handbook for Practitioners and Activists... 131 7.2.5 Education Review 2005-2009... 134 7.2.6 Conclusions... 139 7.3 Case study 2: ASPBAE s frame extension from adult education to the full EFA agenda... 140 7.3.1 Introduction... 140 7.3.2 Adult Education in the broader EFA movement: some background... 141 7.3.3 ASPBAE Executive Council Strategic Review and Planning 2006... 144 7.3.4 Proposed constitutional amendments 2008... 147 7.3.5 Strategic Directions 2009-2012... 151 7.4 Conclusions... 155 8 Information Politics and the Legitimacy of Advocacy NGOs... 160 8.1 Introduction... 160 8.2 Literature Review: Information Politics and Transnational Advocacy... 161 8.3 Case study 1: ActionAid and the International Benchmarks for Adult Literacy... 164 8.3.1 The Context: The EFA Global Monitoring Report... 166 8.3.2 Project design and implementation... 169 8.3.3 The follow-up process... 173 8.4 Case study 2: ASPBAE and the Asia- South Pacific Education Watch... 176 8.4.1 The Context: Real World Strategies and the Midterm Review of Education for All... 178 8.4.2 Project design and implementation... 179 8.4.3 The follow-up process... 183 8.4.4 Conclusions... 187 9 Conclusions and Findings... 193 9.1 Future Research Directions... 199 10 References... 202 vii

1 Chapter 1 1 Introduction 1.1 Overview This dissertation examines the role of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in the field of international development education. In the last twenty years, many NGOs have shifted away from their historic role as service-providers in international development projects. They have begun to advocate for policy changes in specific issue areas, for example, campaigning for access to safe drinking water or for free, universal primary education. The proliferation of nonstate actors advocating for social change has inspired a considerable amount of literature in a number of academic fields, particularly political science and sociology. Borrowing conceptually from these two disciplines, my dissertation seeks to understand why a global advocacy movement has emerged in the education development field, centred on the Education for All agenda, and why specific organizations have assumed leadership roles in this movement. I adopt a comparative case-study approach in my dissertation, comparing the evolution of policy advocacy positions and the development of advocacy strategies at two organizations: ActionAid, an international anti-poverty agency formed in 1972, and the Asia South Pacific Association for Basic and Adult Education (ASPBAE), a regional network of over 200 member organizations established in 1964. Both organizations have managed to secure large-scale funding for education advocacy work and both have gained access to policy governance bodies, so both can be seen as successful advocacy organizations. This study will explore the emergence of policy advocacy positions within each organization by answering three related questions: Why have NGOs in the education development field pursued networked forms of political advocacy as a preferred organizational strategy?

2 How have such organizations emerged as leaders in the global Education for All Movement and what factors can account for their success? 1 What can the evolution of ActionAid and ASPBAE tell us about the pursuit of advocacy as an organizational strategy and the broader role of NGOs in global social change processes? Most studies of transnational advocacy and global governance see the NGO sector as monolithic, as a political force that exists outside of formal state structures but seeks to influence these structures through various strategies. This study contributes to a more nuanced understanding of the nongovernmental sector through an in-depth examination of how two NGOs have evolved over time, examining shifts in each organization s mandate, discourse and strategic repertoire to see what this can tell us about transnational advocacy and educational governance. The majority of work on contentious politics tends to see external factors as decisive in understanding advocacy strategy: the availability of resources, for example, or the presence of political allies, determines the sort of strategies an advocacy NGO undertakes. In this study, I look in depth at my case study NGOs in order to shed light on the multiplicity of factors that impact the way organizations respond to their environment, and particularly the development of new organizational strategies that put political advocacy at the centre of their enterprise. I focus on how the shift to policy advocacy, and the strategic decision-making that leads to this new organizational strategy, reflects not only the external environment, but also the internal environment of each organization. Ideas of structure and agency are thus central to this study, as will be discussed at length in the following chapter. This study finds that the role of organizational structure is important in understanding advocacy strategy and outcomes. Through careful process-tracing, I found that both case-study organizations have quite centralized decision-making procedures but highly decentralized 1 Defining success in the study of advocacy organizations and movements is somewhat contentious. Here I define ASPBAE and ActionAid as successful because they have existed and grown over the course of many years, are widely recognized for their contribution to the education development field, and because they were able to transition from practice and service-based work to political advocacy without assuming a loss in terms of adherents or funding.

3 implementation procedures. This finding coincides with recent work by Wendy Wong (2012) on the organizational structure of human rights NGOs. An emphasis on organizational structure is not explicit in my research questions, however, as this was a surprise finding that came to light only during the data analysis phase of the research. Thus I do not systematically address theories of organizational structure in this dissertation, but I will make some tentative comments on how the centralized-decentralized dynamic impacted advocacy strategies in my case-study organizations. This will be illustrated in chapters seven and eight and discussed at greater length in the concluding chapter. 1.2 Background This study examines the role of advocacy NGOs within the international development education regime. This regime can be understood as a subset of the broader international development regime, and includes various intergovernmental organizations (IGOs), including the World Bank, the OECD, UNESCO and Unicef; bilateral organizations such as the US Agency for International development (USAID) and UK Department for International Development (DfID); national heads of state and ministers of education; and representatives from non-governmental and civil society organizations who work in education development. The education development regime emerged in the post- World War Two era, part of a wider trend in multilateralism typified by the creation of the United Nations and Bretton Woods systems. Idealism dominated the climate of the young United Nations, and education was given centrality in its mission for global cooperation and development of the formerly-colonized states. Peace and prosperity were firmly believed to be conditions that could be taught or at least encouraged, as reflected in UNESCO s constitution: Since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the defences of peace must be constructed (UNESCO, 1945). The right to education was thus enshrined in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, which urged governments to provide free elementary education directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms (UNESCO, 1948: Article 26). At the same time as education was heralded as a driver of peace and human rights, a new discourse was emerging - human capital theory - that linked education with national economic growth. Championed by the World Bank, the OECD and many western aid organizations, the

4 belief in education as a principle driver of economic growth became widespread, leading to a huge expansion of education systems in both developing and developed countries beginning in the 1960s (Resnik, 2006). Cold war politics served to encourage bilateral rather than multilateral education aid, allowing donor governments to use education to further their geopolitical goals and to promote the neo-liberalising of education in developing countries (Robertson & Dale, 2006; Dale & Robertson, 2002; Dale 2000). No single bilateral donor took the lead in financing or developing education aid programs, not even the United States, and so the regime remained fragmented throughout this era, typified by small to medium-sized, short-term, bilateral transactions, often working at cross-purposes (Mundy, 2006: p. 27). There was no consensus about what worked in development education, leading to an ever-revolving laundry list of solutions for economic development, including adult literacy programs, vocational training, the expansion of higher education, and non-formal, community-based education projects (ibid). During the 1990s, however, a new global consensus on development education began to emerge, beginning with the 1990 World Conference on Education for All. This conference, which was convened jointly by the World Bank and a host of UN agencies, marked the advent of the Education for All movement, where international organizations, donors, national governments, and nongovernmental organizations came together to champion universal basic education as a fundamental human right and as a key part of economic and social development (UNESCO, 1990a). This somewhat surprising consensus within the education development regime was part of a wider trend that saw increasing rapprochement between the neoliberal economic-growth model of development championed by the World Bank and IMF, and the more humanistic, somewhat anti-globalization stance of UN development agencies. Thus the fractured nature of development discourse faded by the end of the twentieth century, replaced by a growing and unprecedented multilateral compromise (Thérien, 2004; Ruggie, 2003). This convergence between the major international organizations was typified by the creation of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which included the achievement of universal primary education. The priority given to education within the MDGs reflects global-level consensus about the role of basic education in development that is unprecedented in terms of scope, density, consistence and persistence (Mundy, 2006: p. 33). In 2000, a second Education

5 for All conference, the World Education Forum, further solidified the consensus on education development. This conference established a set of six Education for All goals, covering the full gamut of educational issues including early childhood education, universal primary education, adult literacy and gender equity. These goals are measurable and time-bound, requiring coordination between international organizations, national governments and civil society networks. The new coordinated multilateralism placed significant importance on the role of non-state actors as partners in poverty reduction (Mundy, 2006; Ruggie, 2003). Civil society organizations were generally seen by governments and international organizations as crucial for delivering the social services stipulated in the MDGs, and inviting civil society representatives into policy discussions was also seen as an important legitimizing factor in global governance (Murphy, 2005). But the rapidly-increasing number of advocacy networks did not see themselves as secondary actors, responding to the political principles emanating from global conferences - they were increasingly trying to shape these principles, making the demands for human rights more salient and more influential as their numbers increased (Thomas & Boli, 1999; Keck & Sikkink, 1998). In the field of development education, local and national civil society organizations emerged as crucial monitors of progress on the six EFA goals, spreading vital information and research through their global networks, and using this information to lobby states and international organizations operating at the global level. By the late 1990s, a number of prominent nongovernmental organizations had assumed a leadership position in placing Education for All goals on the global agenda. That a global consensus on the role of education in development could emerge, and that non-state actors could play a key role in this emergence, seems surprising given the history of the international development regime. This study examines this important shift in global educational governance, asking why the nongovernmental sector began to define its work in terms of political advocacy rather than service delivery. What factors - both internal to the organizations and in the broader environment can account for this change? 1.3 Case study selection and project design

6 In order to answer the above question, I chose to focus my research on two case studies of prominent advocacy NGOs in the development education field. The first of these is ActionAid International (generally referred to simply as ActionAid), a large international development NGO with a broad mandate to alleviate poverty. ActionAid was founded in 1972 as a British charity predominantly focussed on child sponsorship, but has since evolved into an advocate for the political rights of marginalized populations in developing countries. An important part of its image as a pro-poor organization came in 2004, when it moved its headquarters from London to Johannesburg, and in so doing became the first development INGO to be based in the global south. ActionAid campaigns for more equitable economic and development policies in a wide range of issue-areas, including access to food, women s rights, democratic governance, and education. My research focuses on this last theme, education, which is coordinated by the International Education Team based in London, UK. Education has been a major focus for the organization since its inception, and is often regarded as ActionAid s most prominent area of work (Sayed & Newman, 2009). The second case-study organization is the Asia South Pacific Association for Basic and Adult Education (ASPBAE). ASPBAE was founded in 1964 after a UNESCO adult education conference called for the establishment of more southern-based regional networks of adult educators. In its early years, ASPBAE s membership was practitioner-based, drawn predominantly from universities in the Asia-Pacific region. Its mandate was to improve adult education practice in order to combat poverty and exclusion across the region, and its activities focussed on information dissemination and participation in UNESCO-led events. It has since evolved to become a regional advocacy network campaigning for education as a political and social right, and for the reforming of education development policies at national and global levels. ASPBAE s network now includes over 200 NGOs and social movement organizations operating across the region. I selected these two organizations as most different case studies. These organizations differ significantly in terms of their size, geographical location, historical origins and levels of funding. Yet they share a broadly similar education mandate: both campaign for education as a fundamental human right, a duty for governments to provide and for international donors to fund; and both have as a central goal increasing the access of civil society organizations into

7 national and international policy-making in order to democratize global education governance. Both organizations have emerged as leaders within the Education for All advocacy movement, as both have obtained significant funding for their advocacy work and have gained access to global governance decision-making bodies. Comparing two different organizations with these key similarities allows me to examine how and why political advocacy emerged as a key strategy among seemingly different types of NGO, and to account for differences in how each organization crafts their advocacy strategies. There is, however, a limitation to choosing case studies based on the dependent variable. In this case, both ASPBAE and ActionAid have managed to successfully transition from practice- and service- oriented organizations into prominent political advocates for Education for All. It is hard to make generalizable statements about this process in the absence of an unsuccessful case an organization that tried and failed to make a similar transition. This is a common methodological problem in the study of NGOs and social movements, as unsuccessful organizations and campaigns are more difficult to track and study (Wong, 2012; Risse, 2002). I will discuss this methodological limitation at greater length in chapter three. Despite this caveat, the present study uncovers important points of comparison and contrast between the two cases, and accounts for the emergence of political advocacy positions at each by tracing shifts in strategy over time. In order to do so, I examine the evolution and key advocacy strategies of each NGO through an analysis of documents and through personal interviews with individuals inside and outside each organization. The narrative I am able to construct through this source material is woven into a wider story of change in the international development regime. This allows me to assess the extent to which my case study NGOs are influenced by global norms and trends, and the extent to which they diffuse and shape these norms through their own advocacy and practice. To understand these processes, I draw on a number of theoretical frameworks that deal with the role of non-state actors in social change. These include structuralist theories, such as sociological institutionalism and political opportunity theory; as well as constructivist approaches, including work on international norm dynamics and strategic issue framing. A full discussion of both my research design and conceptual framework follows in chapters two and three.

8 1.4 Organization of the study This dissertation is organized into nine chapters, including this introduction. Chapter two and three are short chapters that provide background to the rest of the dissertation. Chapter two discusses key literature and theory on the role of NGOs as social change agents, from which I derive my conceptual framework. Chapter three discusses my research design and methods. Chapter four traces the history of ActionAid from its origin as a child-sponsorship charity to its current role as an advocacy NGO. Chapter five does the same for ASPBAE, providing a historical account of how this organization evolved from being a small network of adult education practitioners to a policy advocate. In both these chapters, the history of each organization is woven into a broader narrative of change in the global international development regime. Chapter six provides a more in-depth analysis of the emergence of the Education for All movement, and the role NGOs particularly ActionAid and ASPBAE - played in this emergence. In these chapters, I will draw particularly on structuralist theories to test their applicability to my specific cases. I will then switch focus to the organizational level, and examine the construction of advocacy strategies at ActionAid and ASPBAE. In chapter seven, I will look at how ActionAid and ASPBAE constructed strategic issue frames. In chapter eight, I will look at the way each organization has carried out advocacy research as part of their strategic repertoire. In both chapters, my focus will be on the decision-making process, as I try to assess the applicability of constructivist theories to each case of strategic decision-making. I will also seek to explain how these strategies were crafted to respond to the broader political environment, and particularly how they were designed to establish ASPBAE and ActionAid as legitimate and authoritative policy advocates. In the final chapter, I will offer some conclusions about the role of advocacy NGOs in the global Education for All movement, and some broader thoughts on the dynamic relationship between structure and agency in social change processes.

9 Chapter 2 2 The non-governmental sector and global social change: a literature review 2.1 Introduction This chapter provides an overview of literature on the role of NGOs in global social change. Drawing on a number of fields of study, I pull out important theoretical threads from which I derive a conceptual framework to guide my study. I begin with a brief overview of work on the role of civil society organizations in global governance, looking particularly at whether or not non-state actors can make global decision-making more democratic. This body of literature is further analysed in chapters six to eight, in which I examine the specific advocacy efforts of my case-study organizations. The bulk of this chapter is taken up with a discussion of theoretical work pertaining to the role of both actor agency and external environment in social change processes. I begin by looking at two structural accounts of social change: world polity theory, based on sociological intuitionalism, and political opportunity theory, a dominant perspective in the wider theoretical field of social movement theory. I then move on to examine constructivist theories, which place greater importance on individual actors as the agents of social change. Here I will be specifically looking at social movement theory on strategic issue framing, and the related theory of international norm dynamics, which comes out of the field of international relations. I will conclude with some thoughts on establishing a more dynamic relationship between structure and agency, drawing on Fligstein and McAdam s concept of strategic action fields. 2.2 Civil society and global governance By focussing on how advocacy NGOs shape the development education regime, this study is part of a much wider academic interest in the role of non-state actors in global governance. Recognizing that an increasing array of decisions are made at the global level, a number of

10 scholars have pointed to the inclusion of civil society in international policy-making as a way to democratize global governance (Bexell, Tallberg and Uhlin, 2010; Glasius, 2008; Scholte, 2007; Held & Koenig-Archibugi, 2005.) This perspective rests on the idea that NGOs and other civil society organizations could serve to reinvigorate international political and economic structures by holding state and non-state actors to account, by bringing the voices of the citizenry into the international policy process, and by placing social and moral issues on the international agenda (Collingwood & Logister, 2005) a process that has been described as globalization from below (Appadurai, 2000). Among the leading advocates of this process is Held (1995, 2004), who has suggested a reforming of the United Nations system to incorporate new actors, including INGOs, whose links to local and grassroots governance would help create a global cosmopolitan democracy. Indeed, United Nations agencies have become increasingly open to NGO influence since the 1990s. A large body of academic work examines the expanding opportunities for civil society organizations seeking access to UN decision-making fora. Some agencies are particularly open in this regard, for example UNESCO and the UN Economic and Social Council, while others remain virtually closed to NGO participation, for example the Security Council and WTO (Sikkink, 2005). The former organizations tend to seek out partnerships with appropriate NGOs because their broad mandates - to resolve conflict, promote peace and security and foster international cooperation - are greatly facilitated by having a large cadre of non-state actors to serve the global constituency by implementing and monitoring policies and programs (Smith, Pagnucco & Chatfield, 1997: p 69). For NGOs, achieving UN accreditation and being invited participants at UN conferences present valuable political opportunities. In chapter six, I examine how ASPBAE and ActionAid have sought to influence EFA policy by taking advantage of political opportunities at various UN fora. This chapter begins with a more in-depth review of literature on the role of the nongovernmental sector in the UN system. In particular, I focus on how this role has changed in the past decades as NGOs have moved from a focus on service delivery to political advocacy. This literature provides a base for the empirical work of the chapter, which examines how NGOs, and especially ASPBAE and ActionAid, have redefined their role as actors within the UN system.

11 Of course, the entry of NGOs into global decision-making processes does not automatically mean that global governance will become fairer or more just. Many scholars have warned against the perspective that NGOs are doing good by virtue of their non-profit, non-state status (Anderson, 2011; Martens, 2008; Lipshutz, 2008). These organizations have no direct legal ties to the citizenry on whose behalf they claim to speak (Gordenker and Weiss, 1995), and those that are able to have their voices heard in global policy fora are often northern-based, well-funded NGOs with direct ties to international organizations, leaving smaller civil society groups underrepresented (Bexell, Tallberg and Uhlin, 2010). Furthermore, many scholars have warned that upward accountability to donors often takes precedence over downward accountability to the populations on whose behalf an NGO works. In chapter eight, I examine this issue more closely through a review of literature on information politics and the nongovernmental sector. This review highlights that the information gathered by NGOs often reflects the priorities of donors and the international community at the expense of the grassroots communities from which evidence is drawn (Bob, 2010; Ron, Ramos and Rodgers, 2005). In this view, advocacy research is a product that is sold to donors and policy makers in exchange for funds and prestige - a perspective that calls into question the democratizing potential of NGO advocacy. Despite these caveats about the role of advocacy NGOs, both ActionAid and ASPBAE have as a central goal the democratization of educational governance. Both organizations devote a large proportion of their time and resources to strengthening national education campaigns and both relay information from these national campaigns into global fora in order to make education policy more responsive to the needs of the global citizenry. Although this dissertation does not explicitly examine whether NGOs are a force for democratizing global politics, it does offer a contribution to this field by shedding light on why advocacy NGOs emerged when they did, and how these actors are reshaping the terrain of international development education. It is thus concerned with global-level change and the role of both actor agency and institutional environment in creating social change. The main conceptual frameworks used in this study speak to the agent-structure dynamic. I draw on various theories to determine the extent to which the emergence of a particular kind of political advocate-ngo is the result of strategic efforts by specific non-state actors, or the result of broader trends and global norms. The remainder of this chapter will focus on these structuralist and constructivist theories of global -level social change.

12 2.3 Social change processes: structural or constructed? This study seeks to understand why a global advocacy movement has emerged, centered on the Education for All agenda, and why specific organizations have assumed leadership roles in this movement. I attempt to account for the role of both structure and agency in the emergence of the EFA movement. There are a number of theoretical fields that deal with global level social change, each of which places emphasis on either the role of external structure or the role of actor agency in change processes. This section will offer a brief discussion of the theoretical frameworks that I draw on as I try to make sense of the emergence of the education advocacy NGO. 2.3.1 World Polity Theory The world polity perspective first developed among sociologists at Stanford in the late 1970s and 1980s, and is particularly associated with the work of John Meyer and colleagues. Based in sociological institutionalism, these scholars have sought to explain global change, particularly the spread of Western institutions and bureaucratic forms, as a consequence of the development of a pervading world culture. They argue that this culture shapes social actors - states, intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations, corporations and individuals defining identities, goals and behaviour in terms of what is socially appropriate in a given context (Meyer & Rowan, 1977; DiMaggio & Powell, 1983). World polity theory can be understood as a theory of modernity, as scholars of this tradition have sought to unpack the institutionalized culture of modern society, and to characterize social actors as products of that culture (Schofer et al, 2012: p. 3). World polity theory developed as a reaction against more established approaches to global change analysis that view worldwide systems as constituted by actors who create these systems to serve their own interests. This actor-centrism is common to a variety of approaches, referred to collectively by Boli and Thomas (1999) and Schofer et al (2012) as global neorealist perspectives, which have in common an emphasis on states as the primary actors in global politics. In these models, the relation of actor and action is causal, with society and its structure

13 as a product, whereas world polity theory argues that the the actor on the social stage is a scripted identity and enacts scripted action (Meyer, 2010: p. 4). Here individuals do not act so much as they enact (Jepperson, 1991), and in so doing elaborate transform and modify the cultural framework as well (Boli & Thomas, 1999: p. 18). Interestingly, world polity theorists trace the very idea of the rational agentic actor as a prime example of a world cultural norm, actorhood as the culturally-preferred and demanded identity (Meyer, 2010: p 12). One of the first empirical contributions of world polity theory was examining and explaining the spread of western bureaucratic institutions worldwide, particularly post-1945. Traditional Weberian analysis, as well as realist and neoliberal models, saw this expansion as a rational response on the part of states to cope with expanding markets and technological change (Finnemore, 1996). The problem with this perspective, as pointed out by world polity scholars, was that bureaucratic forms often diffused before the economic and technological changes that supposedly created the need for them. In fact, much of the developing world was adopting western institutions government ministries, legal systems, social policies - in the absence of economic or technological development (Meyer and Hannan, 1979). This led to the conclusion that western institutions spread, not because they are efficient or effective, but because they are supported and legitimized by the wider global environment (Meyer & Rowan, 1977). Global culture is understood as having arisen out of western Christianity, crystallized in the late nineteenth century through the expansion of capitalist imperialism, and achieved full force in the post World War Two era. World polity scholars highlight a number of key aspects of this global culture, with ideas of progress and social justice taking centre-stage (Boli & Thomas, 1999; Meyer et al, 1997). Progress is understood as the expansion of material wealth, measured by GDP is national contexts. Justice is defined in terms of the (equal) rights of the self-determined individual. Markets and bureaucracies are the main vehicles diffusing these cultural norms. To focus on how this culture diffused globally is to denaturalize features of social life that appear natural and inevitable (Finnemore, 1996), to reveal that what we assume is rational or natural - the proliferation of national public education systems, for example - is actually a cultural value. World polity theory can go a long way in explaining why the Education for All movement emerged in the 1990s and why a particular type of advocacy NGO has gained prominence and legitimacy within this movement. World polity scholars have devoted considerable attention to

14 the diffusion of western education systems and education norms around the globe (Meyer & Ramirez, 2009; 2000; Ramirez, Suarez & Meyer, 2006). Post 1945, educational expansion was closely linked with economic development and thus promoted by the new intergovernmental organizations, particularly UNESCO, OECD and the World Bank, who facilitated the development of national education systems modelled on western public schools. The 1980s saw the emergence of a new global norm in development education, based on the neoliberal belief that states were inefficient deliverers of public goods, and that non-governmental organizations could provide education (and other social services) more effectively and cheaply. At this point development NGOs began to play a more important role in diffusing western education globally. Again, world polity theory offers a useful lens to understand the role of NGOs in diffusing and propagating world culture. Theorists argue that world culture is a stateless force, exogenous to state actors who enact world cultural scripts. It is global organizations namely IGOs, NGOs, epistemic communities and social movements who are largely responsible for diffusing norms (Meyer et al, 1997). This has been best developed by Thomas and Boli (1999), whose seminal work on the role of INGOs in promoting world cultural principles has shown how these organizations have shaped global norms in a wide array of fields, including development education (Chabbott, 1999). Subsequent studies have confirmed the important role of NGOs as the organizational dimensions of world society, conveying global models to domestic receptor sites (Schofer et al, 2012). But world polity theorists are careful not to overstate the role of NGOs in cultural diffusion or to treat these organizations as causal agents. Although key enactors of global norms, NGOs are acting within the global culture they diffuse, and thus diffusion happens along specific lines and promotes specific norms (ibid). In chapters four and five, I will explore in more detail the evolving role of NGOs in the development education regime, arguing that these actors do indeed spread norms on education and development, but do so in ways that reflect the broader environment in which they are embedded. Chapters four and five will also discuss the extent to which world polity theory can explain the emergence of the advocacy NGO as a key player in global politics. This theory does help to explain how the idea of advocacy emerged and diffused among NGOs and social movement organizations in a wide range of fields, including development education. I will argue that, beginning in the 1990s, NGOs began to be legitimated as political players, due to a host of environmental factors emerging after the cold war, including the ascendancy of universal rights

15 discourse, the proliferation of global conferences and agreements on wide ranging social issues, and the growth of network forms of organization. World polity theory is particularly useful for its ability to explain why loose coupling the gap between endorsed world cultural principles and actual policy - exists (Meyer, 2010). In chapter six, I will argue that loose coupling between EFA commitments and education policies opened up a vital space for NGO advocacy and activism (Bromley & Powell, 2012). However, I argue that world polity theory does not go far enough in explaining the emergence of the advocacy NGO in the development education regime, and in particular cannot explain why certain organizations emerged as leaders within the EFA movement. This is because world polity theory does not address the mechanisms of social change; it is essentially a theory of how conformity occurs in already existing fields. It lacks an underlying theory of how fields emerge or are transformed (Fligstein & McAdam, 2011: p. 40). The crux of the issue is that world polity theory ignores any concept of agency, and therefore ignores the fact that new ideas come from individuals, they do not magically emerge in an already constituted global culture. This removal of active agency has prompted considerable criticism of world polity theory (Carney et al, 2012; Fligstein & McAdam, 2011; Towns, 2004), which, as these scholars point out, ignores issues of conflict that arise when new ideas emerge and take hold. Who has the power to propose new ideas in an organization? Who has the power to enforce or resist these new ideas? As Ramirez (2003) explains: World culture theory focuses not on the power of actors but on the power of the culture itself and thus underemphasizes both coercion and imitation in favor of enactment (251). As my own research indicates, the emergence of new ideas and new political actors is a highly contentious process, and world polity theory s usefulness is called in to question when we attempt to make sense of this process. To understand how the Education for All movement emerged and took shape, and how specific contextual factors impacted this shape, I turn the political opportunity approach developed by social movement scholars. 2.3.2 Political Opportunity Structure

16 Social movement theory offers important insights into the role of agency in social change, concerned as the field is with how relatively powerless and under-resourced actors engage in collective action. Among the most dominant perspectives in social movement theory is the political opportunity approach, or political process approach, which recognizes that the ability of activists to effect social change is highly context-dependent. The political environment in which advocacy NGOs operate place various opportunities and constraints on their social change efforts; thus political opportunity theory argues that the success of a movement is largely determined by structures within a given political system. Although there is no single definition of political opportunity structures, that provided by Tarrow has gained widespread acceptance: consistent but not necessarily formal or permanent dimensions of the political struggle that encourage people to engage in contentious politics" (1994: p. 85). Like world polity theory, this perspective can be understood as broadly structural, as it sees the external environment as the main factor in shaping social action. However, the political opportunity approach is not as sweeping in scope, focusing on specific political contexts rather than universal scripts, and therefore does not try to account for isomorphism among social actors. Instead, it focuses on contestation between power-holders and challengers, and is therefore useful when trying to understand how actors craft their strategies in response to a given political environment. The political opportunity approach was first used by Eisinger (1973) to account for the presence or absence of race riots in American cities in the late 1960s. Focusing on the degree of to which municipal governments were open to citizen participation, Eisinger found that cities with a combination of open and closed structures were most likely to experience riots. Following on this, Tilly (1978) sought to build a more comprehensive theory of political opportunity structures through national and historical comparison. This allowed him to construct an argument about when and where movements emerge, and how political opportunities determine which strategies movements utilize within their wider repertoire of contention. He found, for example, that the strategy of political protest has a curvilinear relationship to state openness: protest was unlikely in both very open or very repressive political systems, and was most likely in situations where challengers are neither so privileged that they do not feel a need to protest, nor so repressed that they are unable to engage in collective action.

17 A large amount of scholarship has followed up on this early work, focussing on specific structural factors within political systems that encourage or constrain non-state actors engaging in collective action (McCarthy, 1997; Smith, Pagnucco & Chatfield, 1997; McAdam, McCarthy & Zald, 1996; Risse-Kappen, 1995; Tarrow, 1994; McAdam, 1982). These include formal and informal mechanisms for accessing policy-making fora, the presence or absence of elite allies within these fora, the stability of the political system, and splits within the governing body. The great contribution of this perspective is that it can explain why movements emerge or increase their activity at certain times and in certain places, as it is extremely difficult for a movement to succeed in the absence of any political opportunity structure. At the same time, many scholars using this approach avoid attempting to test political opportunity theories against other frameworks, and thus are not interested in constructing a grand conceptual statement about political opportunity. Rather, this work is generally focussed on explaining specific case studies (Meyer, 2004). It is in this spirit that the present study uses political opportunity theory: to identify and examine some of the contextual factors that shaped the emergence of the Education for All movement, and to help explain the influence and strategies of leading INGOs within this movement. Social movement scholars have focussed primarily on political opportunities at the national level, owing to the fact that national governments are the traditional source of public policies and most social movements - even transnational ones therefore focus their efforts at the domestic level. However, as more and more decisions impacting national policy are made at the global level, increasing attention has been paid to multilayered opportunity structures (Della Porta & Tarrow, 2005; Smith & Wiest, 2005; Khagram, Riker & Sikkink, 2002; Smith, Pagnucco & Chatfield, 1997; Risse-Kappen, 1995). Intergovernmental arenas have their own political opportunity structures that enable or constrain transnational activism, but they also impact domestic opportunity structures through multinational agreements and the cultivation of international norms (Smith, Pagnucco & Chatfield, 1997: p 67). Sikkink (2005) has argued that transnational advocacy organizations develop their strategies based on both domestic and international opportunity structures. For example, activists may take their claims to the international level if domestic governments are unresponsive (the boomerang model); activists who enjoy relatively open access to both domestic and global policy-making will most likely form insider-outsider coalitions to operate at multiple governance levels.