Civil Society in Development: How Platform Groups Politicized EPA Negotiation between EU and West Africa

α
David, Ibukun David
David, Ibukun David
σ
David
David
ρ
Ibukun David
Ibukun David
α Obafemi Awolowo University Obafemi Awolowo University

Send Message

To: Author

Civil Society in Development: How Platform Groups Politicized EPA Negotiation between EU and West Africa

Article Fingerprint

ReserarchID

WI7T7

Civil Society in Development: How Platform Groups Politicized EPA Negotiation between EU and West Africa Banner

AI TAKEAWAY

Connecting with the Eternal Ground
  • English
  • Afrikaans
  • Albanian
  • Amharic
  • Arabic
  • Armenian
  • Azerbaijani
  • Basque
  • Belarusian
  • Bengali
  • Bosnian
  • Bulgarian
  • Catalan
  • Cebuano
  • Chichewa
  • Chinese (Simplified)
  • Chinese (Traditional)
  • Corsican
  • Croatian
  • Czech
  • Danish
  • Dutch
  • Esperanto
  • Estonian
  • Filipino
  • Finnish
  • French
  • Frisian
  • Galician
  • Georgian
  • German
  • Greek
  • Gujarati
  • Haitian Creole
  • Hausa
  • Hawaiian
  • Hebrew
  • Hindi
  • Hmong
  • Hungarian
  • Icelandic
  • Igbo
  • Indonesian
  • Irish
  • Italian
  • Japanese
  • Javanese
  • Kannada
  • Kazakh
  • Khmer
  • Korean
  • Kurdish (Kurmanji)
  • Kyrgyz
  • Lao
  • Latin
  • Latvian
  • Lithuanian
  • Luxembourgish
  • Macedonian
  • Malagasy
  • Malay
  • Malayalam
  • Maltese
  • Maori
  • Marathi
  • Mongolian
  • Myanmar (Burmese)
  • Nepali
  • Norwegian
  • Pashto
  • Persian
  • Polish
  • Portuguese
  • Punjabi
  • Romanian
  • Russian
  • Samoan
  • Scots Gaelic
  • Serbian
  • Sesotho
  • Shona
  • Sindhi
  • Sinhala
  • Slovak
  • Slovenian
  • Somali
  • Spanish
  • Sundanese
  • Swahili
  • Swedish
  • Tajik
  • Tamil
  • Telugu
  • Thai
  • Turkish
  • Ukrainian
  • Urdu
  • Uzbek
  • Vietnamese
  • Welsh
  • Xhosa
  • Yiddish
  • Yoruba
  • Zulu

Abstract

The core trajectory of this essay is to explore further the transformative power of civil society as advanced in by neo-Gramscian scholars by looking closely at how platform civil society groups organized in transnational networks politicized the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) negotiation process between the EU and West Africa. The paper argued that platform groups politicized the EPA negotiation process by drawing attention to the potential development implications of concluding EPA with the EU for West Africa in particular and African, Caribbean, and Pacific (ACP) regions in general. Two questions are raised in the paper, the first of which addressed why platform civil society groups in West Africa contested the EPA. The second question engaged with how platform groups organized and mobilized action across national borders and regional divide for this purpose. The paper argued that platform groups in West Africa became resistant to EPA and organized mainly to block its ratification because EPAs are generally perceived to have a neoliberal undertone that potentially challenges African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries’ prospects for socioeconomic development.

References

68 Cites in Article
  1. K Armstrong (2002). Rediscovering civil society: The European Union and the white paper on governance.
  2. Srilatha Batliwala (2002). Grassroots Movements as Transnational Actors: Implications for Global Civil Society.
  3. (2009). Loss of EU Preferences – The Broad Picture for Individual CARIFORUM States.
  4. S Bilal,F Rampa,F Jerosch,D &makhan (2007). Monitoring Economic Partnership Agreements: A methodological overview.
  5. S Bilal (2009). Economic Partnership Agreements: To be or not to be?.
  6. Jean Bossuyt (2006). Mainstreaming Civil Society in ACP-EU Development Cooperation.
  7. (2012). ACP calls for flexibility on trade negotiations with the EU.
  8. Bridges Weekl (2010). Wine classifications by EU country.
  9. J Byron,P Lewis (2007). Formulating sustainable development benchmarks for an EU-CARIFORUM EPA: Caribbean perspectives.
  10. Simone Chambers,Jeffrey Kopstein (2001). Bad Civil Society.
  11. Neera Chandhoke (2007). Civil society.
  12. Emma Humpidge (2003). <i>A moral critique of development: in search of global responsibilities</i> edited by Philip Quarles van Ufford and Ananta Kumar Giri (London: Routledge for EIDOS, 2003, pp. 309). <i>Worlds apart: civil society and the battle for ethical globalization</i> by John Clark (London: Earthscan, 2003, pp. 304). <i>Globalizing civic engagement: civil society and transnational action</i> edited by John Clark (London: Earthscan, 2003, pp. 208).
  13. Andrea Cornwall (2007). Introduction: New Democratic Spaces? The Politics and Dynamics of Institutionalised Participation.
  14. (2000). V.C.12 PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE MEMBERS OF THE AFRICAN, CARIBBEAN AND PACIFIC GROUP OF STATES OF THE ONE PART, AND THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY AND ITS MEMBER STATES, OF THE OTHER PART (23 June 2000).
  15. R Cox (1996). Gramsci, hegemony, and international relations: an essay in method (1983).
  16. Robert Cox,Michael Schechter (2002). The Political Economy of a Plural World.
  17. Gordon Crawford (2006). The European Union and Strengthening Civil Society in Africa.
  18. A Dur,D De Bievre (2007). Inclusion without influence? NGOs in European trade policy.
  19. Richard Ilorah,Collins Ngwakwe (2014). Economic Partnership Agreements between African-Caribbean-Pacific countries and the European Union: revisiting contested issues.
  20. M Edwards,D Hulme (2000). Scaling up NGO impact on development: learning from experience.
  21. Olufemi Babarinde,Gerrit Faber (2005). From Lomé to Cotonou: ACP-EU Partnership in Transition.
  22. (2013). Articles Accessed in March 2007.
  23. (2014). Negotiating an EU–Central Africa EPA: A Brief Overview.
  24. (2016). National Civil Society Sustainability Strategy for Civil Society in Ghana.
  25. Ann Florini,P Simmons (2000). What the World Needs Now?.
  26. Michael Foley,Bob Edwards (1996). The Paradox of Civil Society.
  27. Fontagné Lionel,David Laborde,Cristina Mitaritonna (2008). An impact study of the EU-ACP EPAs in the six ACP regions.
  28. Alan Fowler (2012). Measuring Civil Society: Perspectives on Afro-Centrism.
  29. Francis Fukuyama (2001). Social capital, civil society and development.
  30. C Godfrey (2006). oxfam-briefing-note-after-the-cyclone-lessons-from-a-disaster-15-feb-2008-16-pp.
  31. Stephen Hurt (2006). Civil Society and European Union Development Policy.
  32. Stephen Hurt,Donna Lee,Ulrike Lorenz-Carl (2013). The Argumentative Dimension to the EU-Africa EPAs.
  33. Stephen Hurt (2010). Understanding EU Development Policy: history, global context and self-interest?.
  34. (2016). World Economic Outlook: Subdued Demand: Symptoms and Remedies.
  35. K Karl (2002). ACP-EU Economic Partnership Agreements: Fisheries.
  36. John Keane (2009). Chapter 1 CIVIL SOCIETY IN THE ERA OF MONITORY DEMOCRACY.
  37. M Keck,K Sikkink (1998). Activists beyond borders: Advocacy networks in international politics.
  38. R Keohane,Joseph Nye (1971). Transnational relations and world politics.
  39. Dirk Kohnert (2015). Horse-trading on EU–African Economic Partnership Agreements.
  40. Dirk Kohnert (2014). African Agency and EU–African Economic Partnership Agreements.
  41. R Korzeniewicz,W Smith (2001). TRADE PROTEST NETWORKS.
  42. R Krznaric (1999). Civil and Uncivil Actors in the Guatemalan Peace Process.
  43. L Kuhnhardt (2016). Maturing beyond Cotonou. Reinventing EU relations with the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group of States.
  44. Krishan Kumar (2007). Global Civil Society.
  45. J Mearshiemer (2001). The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. John Mearsheimer. New York: W.W. Norton, 2001. 555 pp. $27.95.
  46. F Miraftab (2004). Invited and invented spaces of participation: neoliberal citizenship and Feminists'expanded notion of politics.
  47. Annita Montoute (2011). Deliberate or Emancipate? Civil Society Participation in Trade Policy: The Case of the CARIFORUM–EU EPA.
  48. Kenneth Newton (2001). Trust, Social Capital, Civil Society, and Democracy.
  49. (2013). The NORAD Agreement.
  50. Alex Nunn,Sophia Price (2004). Managing Development: EU and African Relations through the Evolution of the Lomé and Cotonou Agreements.
  51. F Onah (2010). The Lomé, Cotonou and the African-EU Strategic Partnership Agreements in comparative perspectives.
  52. C Osita (2010). Institutional framework of the African-EU Strategic Partnership Agreement.
  53. R Patman (2006). Globalization and Conflict.
  54. R Putnam (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy.
  55. R Putnam (1995). Bowling alone: America's declining social capital.
  56. J Ravenhill (1985). Collective clientelism: The Lomé Conventions and North-South relations.
  57. Jan Scholte (2002). Civil Society and Democracy in Global Governance.
  58. Jon Shefner (2007). Rethinking Civil Society in the Age of NAFTA: The Case of Mexico.
  59. N Slocum-Bradley,A Bradley (2010). Is the EU's governance 'good'? An assessment of EU governance in its partnership with ACP states.
  60. J Smith,D Wiest (2005). The Uneven Geography of Global Civil Society: National and Global Influences on Transnational Association.
  61. Solignac Lecomte,Henri-Bernard (2001). Effectiveness of developing country participation in ACP-EU Negotiations.
  62. Christopher Stevens (2006). The EU, Africa and Economic Partnership Agreements: unintended consequences of policy leverage.
  63. C Stevens (2009). Economic Partnership Agreements: The Symbol Versus the Reality.
  64. (2006). Overview: European Aid, the European Development Fund and Adjusting to Economic Partnership Agreements.
  65. D Thorburn,J Rapley,D King,C Campbell (2010). The Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA): Towards a new era for caribbean trade.
  66. D Toornstra (2012). Economic Partnership Agreements EU-ACP: Facts and Key Issues, Brussels: European Parliament, Office for Promotion of Parliamentary Democracy (OPPD).
  67. K Waltz (1979). Theory of international politics.
  68. Clara Weinhardt (2015). Relational trust in international cooperation: The case of North–South trade negotiations.

Funding

No external funding was declared for this work.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

No ethics committee approval was required for this article type.

Data Availability

Not applicable for this article.

How to Cite This Article

David, Ibukun David. 2019. \u201cCivil Society in Development: How Platform Groups Politicized EPA Negotiation between EU and West Africa\u201d. Global Journal of Human-Social Science - F: Political Science GJHSS-F Volume 19 (GJHSS Volume 19 Issue F2): .

Download Citation

Issue Cover
GJHSS Volume 19 Issue F2
Pg. 25- 35
Journal Specifications

Crossref Journal DOI 10.17406/GJHSS

Print ISSN 0975-587X

e-ISSN 2249-460X

Keywords
Classification
GJHSS-F Classification: FOR Code: 160699
Version of record

v1.2

Issue date

June 6, 2019

Language
en
Experiance in AR

Explore published articles in an immersive Augmented Reality environment. Our platform converts research papers into interactive 3D books, allowing readers to view and interact with content using AR and VR compatible devices.

Read in 3D

Your published article is automatically converted into a realistic 3D book. Flip through pages and read research papers in a more engaging and interactive format.

Article Matrices
Total Views: 2742
Total Downloads: 1320
2026 Trends
Related Research

Published Article

The core trajectory of this essay is to explore further the transformative power of civil society as advanced in by neo-Gramscian scholars by looking closely at how platform civil society groups organized in transnational networks politicized the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) negotiation process between the EU and West Africa. The paper argued that platform groups politicized the EPA negotiation process by drawing attention to the potential development implications of concluding EPA with the EU for West Africa in particular and African, Caribbean, and Pacific (ACP) regions in general. Two questions are raised in the paper, the first of which addressed why platform civil society groups in West Africa contested the EPA. The second question engaged with how platform groups organized and mobilized action across national borders and regional divide for this purpose. The paper argued that platform groups in West Africa became resistant to EPA and organized mainly to block its ratification because EPAs are generally perceived to have a neoliberal undertone that potentially challenges African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries’ prospects for socioeconomic development.

Our website is actively being updated, and changes may occur frequently. Please clear your browser cache if needed. For feedback or error reporting, please email [email protected]

Request Access

Please fill out the form below to request access to this research paper. Your request will be reviewed by the editorial or author team.
X

Quote and Order Details

Contact Person

Invoice Address

Notes or Comments

This is the heading

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

High-quality academic research articles on global topics and journals.

Civil Society in Development: How Platform Groups Politicized EPA Negotiation between EU and West Africa

David
David
Ibukun David
Ibukun David

Research Journals