Abstract
AbstractDrawing on the literature on framing, we explore the emotional framing differences in radical and reformative NGOs over time. We analyse the sentiment of a sample of 5880 press releases issued by five NGOs positioned differently on the reformative‐radical spectrum and examine how they address large companies. Our findings reveal an increasing polarisation of sentiment in these NGOs' framing, with individual NGOs gravitating towards ideal‐type radical or reformative positions, respectively. In alignment with the differences in their framing, we observe differences in their approaches to cross‐sector partnerships. Policymakers need to note the implications of the observed polarisation for the effectiveness and credibility of cross‐sector partnerships and multi‐stakeholder initiatives more generally, given the risk of co‐optation (for reformative NGOs) as well as the risk of foregoing significant funding and governance opportunities (for radical NGOs).
Highlights
Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) have emerged as relevant policy actors at various levels due to their role in motivating corporate action on various environmental and social issues (Yaziji & Doh, 2009)
Our longitudinal perspective allows us to identify trajectories in the development of framing at reformative and radical environmental NGOs over time, whereas the extant literature has been dominated by conceptual work and casebased inquiries
As a methodological contribution, we demonstrate how sentiment analysis tools can be usefully applied to the analysis of NGO-business relationships and to NGO campaigning in the context of multinational companies (MNCs)
Summary
Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) have emerged as relevant policy actors at various levels due to their role in motivating corporate action on various environmental and social issues (Yaziji & Doh, 2009) How they motivate corporate action ranges from smear campaigns that use an adversarial language and antagonistic strategies to more constructive cross-sector partnerships where NGOs use a friendly language and act as external consultants or change agents (Burchell & Cook, 2013a). These differences in NGO-business relationships reflect the reformative-radical spectrum that helps us categorise NGOs. Reformative (or insider) NGOs try to improve and reinforce existing institutional structures, whereas radical (or outsider) NGOs explicitly try to change or undermine existing institutional structures (den Hond & de Bakker, 2007; Yaziji & Doh, 2009; Young, 1999). While a recent study demonstrates shifts in framing in a single longitudinal case (Luxon, 2019), radical and reformative NGOs' framing would differ significantly and be likely to show different evolutionary patterns
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
