Abstract

The 2009 UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen was marked by an unprecedented level of contentious action by civil society activists. Conference organizers consequently increased restrictions on all civil society participation. This frustrated activists who favored working within the UN process to influence global climate policy. Jennifer Hadden’s Networks in Contention examines the internal politics of the transnational climate change network, both before and during the Copenhagen conference, to understand why Copenhagen was so contentious, why some organizations adopted contention and others did not, and how changes in the network and members’ tactics influenced climate politics. The book contributes to the ample literature on transnational activist networks by opening the proverbial “black box” of the transnational climate change network and revealing its internal struggles, divisions, and decisionmaking processes. Hadden’s central argument is that the structure of transnational networks (i.e., the relations among network members) influences the way the networks perform, and therefore their ability to influence policy. When it comes to explaining organizational decisions, she argues that “network ties can be more important than [organizational] attributes” (p. 87). Such ties can even mediate the incentives produced by political opportunity structures. This observation does not mean that political opportunity structures and organizational attributes are irrelevant. Hadden credits changing political opportunities with the dramatic increase in the number and diversity of civil society groups working on climate change at the 2009 Copenhagen conference. Particularly important was the addition of organizations from the global justice movement, which had a long history with contentious action. Hadden’s main focus, however, is on how these changes affected the structure of the transnational climate change network and the implications for civil society organizations’ ability to influence global climate policy. One might expect the additional resources and expertise brought by new civil society participants to translate into increased influence. Hadden skillfully uses social network analysis to explain why the increase in network size nevertheless decreased the climate change network’s overall connectivity, and thus members’ ability to impact climate change policy. The cliques that formed rarely

Full Text
Published version (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