In Whose Name Are You Speaking? The Marginalization of the Poor in Global Civil Society

Publication date

2021-11

Authors

Senit, Carole-AnneORCID 0000-0003-2723-6091ISNI 0000000419556201
Biermann, FrankORCID 0000-0002-0292-0703ISNI 0000000081139784

Editors

Advisors

Supervisors

Document Type

Article
Open Access logo

License

cc_by_nc

Abstract

Global civil society is often uncritically seen as a democratic force in global governance. Civil society organizations claim to hold states and intergovernmental institutions accountable and channel the voices of the world’s poorest people in policy making. Yet to what extent do they succeed in performing that role? This article assesses the representation of the poor in global civil society, with a focus on the negotiations of the Sustainable Development Goals, a process widely hailed as one of the most democratic ever organized by the United Nations. We first analyse how the poor and their local representatives are procedurally included in global civil society (procedural representation). We then quantitatively assess the actual representation of civil society organizations from the world’s poorest countries in the civil society hearings of the SDG negotiations, where civil society was invited to speak on behalf of their constituencies (geographical representation). Finally, we evaluate the extent to which global civil society representatives who claim to speak on behalf of the poor legitimately represented the interests of these people (discursive representation). We found that global civil society fails to fully represent the poor on procedural, geographical and discursive terms, and eventually perpetuates postcolonial injustices in global sustainability governance.

Keywords

Global and Planetary Change, Economics and Econometrics, Political Science and International Relations, Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law, Law

Citation

Senit, C-A & Biermann, F 2021, 'In Whose Name Are You Speaking? The Marginalization of the Poor in Global Civil Society', Global Policy, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 581-591. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12997