Abstract
The article contributes to our understanding of how trade is politicized and how civil society activists manage the tensions between multiple collective action frames in a complex political context. When viewed alongside the Brexit referendum and Trump’s US Presidency, it is easy to see the 2013–2016 campaign against a European Union–US Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership as a further example of an apparently growing populist ‘nationalism.’ Yet, in the European context—where campaigning was most visible—there was in fact extensive reliance on, and re-iteration of, a transnational ‘European’ frame, with antecedents in the 1999–2006 campaign against General Agreement on Trade in Services negotiations. As the article argues, transnational campaigning operates within a nexus of multiple, and sometimes conflicting, geographic frames. In both campaigns discussed here, activists typically engaged with the wider public via the national context and, sometimes, with allusions to ‘national autonomy.’ However, their activism was dependent upon a frame espousing ‘transnational solidarity.’ Developed over time, this structured their transnational relations with other groups and more full-time activists.
Highlights
Geography is at the centre of trade policy
The collective action frames that civil society actors rely on to politicize trade negotiations often emphasize multiple geographies as a means of targeting different authoritative actors, as well as communicating to various supportive audiences
In both the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) cases, the wider public was commonly addressed via national campaigns, with trade negotiations often framed as a threat to ‘government autonomy’ as a means of drawing out the salience of the issue
Summary
Geography is at the centre of trade policy. It defines trade flows. To read politicization around TTIP only in reference to these groups and arguments misses the more variegated cleavages underpinning the politicization of trade policymaking During both the earlier GATS talks and those focused on TTIP, NGOs, which played a central role in politicizing the respective negotiations, utilized a variety of geographic frames that drew on notions of both ‘national autonomy’ and ‘transnational solidarity.’. As we discuss, studying how campaigners utilize a mix of geographic frames has important implications They are not merely descriptive of the activities and demands of civil society groups or mutually exclusive. They reflect a desire to engage with the public in a national context while constructing a transnational network of activists This leads us to rethink the politicization of trade policy, and how to interpret the political conditions that constrain or favour trade negotiations, going beyond a simple picture of nationalism versus globalism
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
