1 Raustiala, Kal, ‘States, NGOs, and International Environmental Institutions’, International Studies Quarterly, 41 (1997), pp. 719–740CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Spiro, Peter, ‘New Global Communities: Nongovernmental Organizations in International Decision-making Institutions’, Washington Quarterly, 18 (1995), p. 49CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Princen, and Finger, ‘Introduction’, in Princen, Thomas and Finger, Matthias (eds), Environmental NGOs in World Politics (New York: Routledge, 1994), p. 12CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; and Brown, Janet, Porter, Gareth and Chasek, Pamela S., Global Environmental Politics (New York: Westview Press, 1991), p. 60Google Scholar .

2 Ronit and Schneider called for such an undertaking in their 2000 edited volume, but made little systematic progress towards this goal. See, Private Organizations in Global Politics (New York: Routledge, 2000)Google Scholar .

3 Sell, Susan and Prakash, Aseem, ‘Using Ideas Strategically’, International Studies Quarterly, 48 (2004), pp. 143–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Hertel, Shareen, Unexpected Power: Conflict and Change Among Transnational Activists (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2006)Google Scholar ; Bob, Clifford, Marketing Rebellion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Henderson, Sarah, ‘Selling Civil Society: Western Aid and the Nongovernmental Organization Sector in Russia’, Comparative Policy Studies, 35 (2002), pp. 136–167Google Scholar ; Cooley, Alexander and Ron, James, ‘The NGO Scramble’, International Security, 27 (2002), pp. 5–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; and Burnstein, Paul, ‘Interest Organizations, Information and Policy Innovation’, Sociological Forum, 22 (2007), pp. 174–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

4 Sikkink, Kathryn, ‘Human Rights, Principled Issue-Networks, and Sovereignty in Latin America’, International Organizations, 47 (1993), pp. 411–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Strange, Susan, The Retreat of the State: The Diffusion of Power in the World Economy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Hall, Robert Bruce and Biersteker, Thomas (eds), The Emergence of Private Authority in Global Governance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

5 Mearsheimer, John, ‘False Promises of International Institutions’, International Security, 19 (1994), pp. 5–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

6 Charnovitz, Steve, ‘Nongovernmental Organizations and International Law’, American Journal of International Law, 100:2 (2006), pp. 348–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Raustiala, , ‘States, NGOs’; Michele Betsill and Elisabeth Corell, ‘NGO Influence in International Environmental Negotiations’, Global Environmental Politics, 1:4 (2001), pp. 65–85Google Scholar .

7 In this article I focus on advocacy INGOs defined as formally organised bodies independent of government representation with international aims and projects in, and funding and members from, at least three countries and a permanent headquarters and governing body which have as their explicit goal political change. I focus on advocacy as opposed to national, grassroots, or service-delivery organisations. While select insights from interest group theories may apply to these organisations, that is beyond this scope of this article.

8 Skjelsbaek, Kjell, ‘The Growth of International Non-Governmental Organizations in the Twentieth Century’, International Organizations, 25:3 (1971), pp. 420–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Feld, Werner J., Nongovernmental Forces and World Politics (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1972)Google Scholar ; Keck, Margaret and Sikkink, Kathryn, Activists Beyond Borders (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1998)Google Scholar ; Price, Richard, ‘Transnational Civil Society and Advocacy in World Politics’, World Politics, 55 (2003), pp. 579–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Carpenter, R. Charli, ‘Setting the Advocacy Agenda’, International Studies Quarterly, 51:1 (2007), pp. 99–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Charnovitz, ‘NGOs and International Law’; Josselin, Daphne and Wallace, William (eds), Non-State Actors in World Politics (London: Palgrave, 2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Florini, Ann (ed.), Third Force: The Rise of Transnational Civil Society (Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2000)Google Scholar .

9 With the notable exception of Johnson, Erica and Prakash, Aseem, ‘NGO Research Program: A Collective Action Perspective’, Policy Sciences, 40 (2007), pp. 221–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

10 Mahoney, Christine and Baumgartner, Frank, ‘Converging Perspectives on Interest Group Research in Europe and America’, West European Politics, 31:6 (2008), pp. 1251–1271CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Jordan, Grant, Halpin, D., and Maloney, W., ‘Defining Interests: Disambiguation and the Need for New Distinctions’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 6 (2004), pp. 195–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

11 Greenwood, Justin and Aspinwall, Marc (eds), Collective Action in the EU: Interests and the New Politics of Associability (London: Routledge, 1998)Google Scholar ; Beyers, Jan et al. (eds), Interest Group Politics in Europe: Lessons from EU Studies and Comparative Politics (London: Routledge, 2009)Google Scholar .

12 While this article does not go very far towards answering this question, I put forth several future directions for research. I thank an anonymous reviewer for this suggestion.

13 Mahoney, Christine, Brussels Versus the Beltway (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2008)Google Scholar .

14 In their review of the study of interest groups in American politics, Frank Baumgartner and Beth Leech note ‘When we refer to “interest groups” we mean not only membership organizations but also advocacy organizations that do not accept members, businesses, and any other organization or institution that makes policy-related appeals to the government.’ (1998, p. xxii). Interest groups are also referred to as ‘pressure groups’ or ‘organized interests’ in the literature. I treat the two as the same and use the term interest groups for consistency.

15 Hayes, Michael T., Lobbyists and Legislators: Theory of Political Markets (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1981), p. 71Google Scholar .

16 Knoke, David, ‘Associations and Interest Groups’, Annual Review of Sociology, 12 (1986), p. 2CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Baumgartner, Frank and Leech, Beth, Basic Interests: The Importance of Groups in Politics and in Political Science (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988), p. 25Google Scholar ; Berry, Jeffrey, Lobbying for the People (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977)Google Scholar ; Truman, David, The Governmental Process: Political Interests and Public Opinion (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1951)Google Scholar .

17 Berry, , Lobbying for the People, pp. 10–11Google Scholar .

18 The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (amended in 1974) imposes stringent requirements on PACs, including disclosure of their activities to the Federal Election Commission. For more see the Federal Election Commission website, {www.fec.gov/pages/fecfeca.html}. According to the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995, lobbyists must file semi-annual reports with the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House identifying their clients and the amount of income they receive. Companies also have to report their overall lobbying expenditure. For more information, see: {www.opensecrets.org/pubs/lobby00/rules.asp}.

19 Potters, Jan and Van Winden, Frans, ‘Lobbying and Asymmetric Information’, Public Choice, 74:3 (1992), p. 270CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

20 Truman, The Governmental Process, chap. 3; Berry, , Lobbying for the People, p. 11Google Scholar ; Hayes, Lobbyists and Legislators, chap. 4.

21 Baumgartner and Leech, Basic Interests; Berry, Lobbying for the People; Ornstein, Norman J. and Elder, Shirley, Interest Groups, Lobbying and Policymaking (Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press, 1978)Google Scholar ; Schlozman, Kay L. and Tierney, John, ‘More of the Same: Washington Pressure Group Activity in a Decade of Change’, Journal of Politics, 45:2 (1983), pp. 351–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Fowler, Linda and Shaiko, Ronald, ‘The Grass Roots Connection: Environmental Activists and Roll Calls’, American Journal of Political Science, 31:3 (1987), pp. 484–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Wright, John, ‘PAC Contributions, Lobbying and Representation’, Journal of Politics, 51:3 (1989), pp. 713–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Langbein, Laura and Lotwis, Mark, ‘The Political Efficacy of Lobbying and Money; Gun Control in the US House, 1986’, Legislative Studies Quarterly, 15:3 (1990), pp. 413–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Humphries, Craig, ‘Corporations, PACs, and the Strategic Link Between Contributions and Lobbying Activities’, Western Political Quarterly, 44:2 (1991), pp. 353–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Grier, Kevin B., Munger, Michael, and Roberts, Brian, ‘The Determinants of Industry Political Activity, 1978–1986’, American Political Science Review, 88:4 (1994), pp. 911–926CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Leyden, Kevin M., ‘Interest Group Resources and Testimony at Congressional Hearings’, Legislative Studies Quarterly, 20:3 (1995), pp. 431–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Wright, John, Interest Groups and Congress: Lobbying, Contributions and Influence (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1996)Google Scholar ; Hojnacki, Marie and Kimball, David C., ‘The Who and How of Organizations’ Lobbying Strategies in Committee’, Journal of Politics, 61:4 (1999), pp. 999–1024CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

22 Baumgartner, and Leech, , Basic Interests, p. 29Google Scholar .

23 Ornstein and Elder, Interest Groups, Lobbying, and Policymaking, chap. 2; Baumgartner and Leech, Basic Interests.

24 Milbrath, Lester, ‘Lobbying as a Communications Process’, Public Opinion Quarterly, 24:1 (1960), pp. 32–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

25 Austen-Smith, David, ‘Information and Influence: Lobbying for Agendas and Votes’, American Journal of Political Science, 37: 3 (1993), p. 799CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Bennedsen, Morten and Feldmann, Sven E., ‘Informational Lobbying and Political Contributions’, Journal of Public Economics, 90 (2006), pp. 631–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

26 Olson, Mancur, The Logic of Collective Action, revised edition (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1971)Google Scholar ; Schattschneider, E. E., The Semi-Sovereign People (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1960)Google Scholar ; Schlozman and Tierney, Organized Interests; Walker, Jack L., Mobilizing Interest Groups in America (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Gray, Virginia and Lowery, David, The Population Ecology of Interest Representation (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Baumgartner and Leech, Basic Interests, chap. 5.

27 Crawford, Vincent P. and Sobel, Joel. ‘Strategic Information Transmission’, Econometrica, 50: 6 (1982), pp. 1431–1451CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Milgrom, Paul and Roberts, John, ‘Relying on the Information of Interested Parties’, RAND Journal of Economics, 17: 1 (1986), pp. 18–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Austen-Smith, ‘Information and Influence’; Lohmann, Susanne, ‘A Signaling Model of Informative and Manipulative Political Action’, American Political Science Review, 87:2 (1993), pp. 319–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Rasmusen, Eric, ‘Lobbying When the Decision-Maker can Acquire Independent Information’, Public Choice, 77 (1993), pp. 899–913CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Potters, and Van Winden, , ‘Asymmetric Information’; David Austen-Smith and John Wright, ‘Counteractive Lobbying’, American Journal of Political Science, 38 (1994), pp. 25–44Google Scholar ; Kollman, Ken, ‘Inviting Friends to Lobby’, American Journal of Political Science, 41: 2 (1997), pp. 519–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Krishna, Vijay and Morgan, John, ‘A Model of Expertise’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116 (2001), pp. 747–775CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Esterling, Kevin, The Political Economy of Expertise (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2005)Google Scholar .

28 Potters and Van Winden, ‘Asymmetric Information’, p. 270; Ainsworth, Scott, ‘Regulating Lobbyists and Interest Group Influence’, Journal of Politics, 55:1 (1993), p. 52CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Lupia, Arthur and McCubbins, Matthew, ‘Who Controls? Information and the Structure of Legislative Decision-making’, Legislative Studies Quarterly, 19:3 (1994), p. 364CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

29 Lohmann, ‘Signalling Model’, pp. 320–1; Milgrom and Roberts, ‘Interested Parties’, p. 19; Potters and Van Winden, ‘Asymmetric Information’, p. 275; Crawford and Sobel, ‘Strategic Information’, pp. 1432, 1441–2.

30 Potters and Van Winden, ‘Asymmetric Information’, p. 238.

31 Austen-Smith, ‘Information and Influence’; Krishna and Morgan, ‘Expertise’.

32 Bauer, , Dexter, and Pool, , American Business and Public Policy: The Politics of Foreign Trade, second edition (Chicago: Aldine-Atherton, 1972)Google Scholar ; Gilligan, Thomas and Krehbiel, Keith, ‘Organization of Informative Committees by a Rational Legislature’, American Journal of Political Science, 34 (1989), pp. 531–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Berry, Lobbying for the People; Potters and Van Winden, ‘Asymmetric Information’, pp. 278–9; Eric Rasmusen, ‘Lobbying’.

33 Austen-Smith and Wright, ‘Counteractive’, p. 28; Potters and Van Winden, ‘Asymmetric Information’, p. 278; Salisbury, Robert, Heinz, John, Laumann, Edward, and Nelson, Robert, ‘Who Works With Whom? Interest Group Alliances and Opposition’, American Political Science Review, 81:4 (1987), pp. 1217–1234CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

34 Kollman, ‘Inviting’, pp. 520–1.

35 Berry, Lobbying for the People, chap. 10.

36 Baumgartner and Leech, Basic Interests, chap. 9; Esterling, Political Economy of Expertise; Wright, Interest Groups and Congress, chap. 1.

37 Anheier, Helmut, Glasius, Marlies, and Kaldor, Mary (eds), Global Civil Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), p. 4Google Scholar .

38 Union of International Associations, Yearbook of International Organizations 1997/98, vol. 1 (Munchen: K.G. Saur, 1998)Google Scholar ; Thomas, John Boli and George (eds), Constructing World Culture: International Non-Governmental Organizations Since 1875 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1999)Google Scholar ; Skjelsbaek, ‘Growth’; and Anheier et al., Global Civil Society all use UIA data in their studies of INGOs.

39 ECOSOC Resolution 1296 (XLIV).

40 Dalton, Russell, The Green Rainbow (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998), p. 178Google Scholar ; Willetts, Peter, Pressure Groups in the Global System: The Transnational Relations of Issue-Orientated Non-Government Organizations (London: Frances Pinter, 1982), p. 191Google Scholar .

41 Ron, James, Ramos, Howard, and Rodgers, Kathleen, ‘Transnational Information Politics: NGO Human Rights Reporting, 1986–2000’, International Studies Quarterly, 49 (2005), p. 558CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

42 Raustiala, ‘States, NGOs’, p. 728.

43 Spiro, ‘New Global’, pp. 49–50.

44 Willets, Pressure Groups in the Global System; Risse-Kappen, Thomas, (ed.), Bringing Transnational Relations Back In: Non-State Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996)Google Scholar ; Busby, Joshua, ‘Bono Made Jesse Helms Cry: Jubilee 2000, Debt Relief, and Moral Action in International Politics’, International Studies Quarterly, 51 (2007), pp. 247–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Hertel, Unexpected Power; Burstein, Paul and Linton, April, ‘The Impact of Political Parties, Interest Groups, and Social Movement Organizations on Public Policy’, Social Forces, 81 (2002), pp. 380–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Bob, Marketing Rebellion.

45 Keck, and Sikkink, , Activists Beyond Borders, p. 18Google Scholar ; Stone, Diane, ‘Think Tanks and Informal Diplomacy’, in Higgott, Richard A., Underhill, Geoffrey R. D. and Bieler, Andreas (eds), Actors and Authority in the Global System (London: Routledge, 2000), p. 217Google Scholar ; Princen, and Finger, (eds), Environmental NGOs in World Politics, p. 12Google Scholar .

46 This conclusion is based on the comparison of Dalton, Green Rainbow, Table 8.1, p. 182 and Baumgartner, and Leech, , Basic Interests, Table 8.1, p. 152Google Scholar , which are startlingly similar, given their different areas of study.

47 Raustiala, ‘NGOs, States’, p. 727.

48 Price, ‘Transnational Civil Society’, p. 589; Ron, Ramos, and Rodgers, ‘Transnational Information’, p. 557; Keck, and Sikkink, , Activists Beyond Borders, pp. 18–21Google Scholar .

49 Keck and Sikkink, Activists Beyond Borders; Risse-Kappen (ed.), Bringing Transnational Relations Back In; Price, ‘Transnational Civil Society’.

50 Princen, and Finger, (eds), Environmental NGOs in World Politics, p. 36Google Scholar ; Brysk, Allison, ‘From Above and Below: Social Movements, the International System, and Human Rights in Argentina’, Comparative Political Studies, 26:3 (1993), pp. 259–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Clark, Ann Marie, ‘Non-Governmental Organizations and the Influence of Civil Society’, Journal of International Affairs, 48:2 (1995), pp. 507–525Google Scholar ; Risse, Thomas, Ropp, Stephen, and Sikkink, Kathryn (eds), The Power of Human Rights: International Norms and Domestic Change (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

51 Keck, and Sikkink, , Activists Beyond Borders, pp. 12–13Google Scholar ; Risse, , Ropp, and Sikkink, (eds), Power of Human Rights, pp. 18–21Google Scholar ; Clark, ‘NGOs’, pp. 507–25; Brysk, ‘Above and Below’, pp. 259–85; Willets, , Pressure Groups in the Global System, p. 194Google Scholar .

52 Princen, and Finger, , Environmental NGOs in World Politics, p. 5Google Scholar ; Keck, and Sikkink, , Activists Beyond Borders, p. 127Google Scholar ; Josselyn, and Wallace, , Non-State Actors in World Politics, pp. 10–13Google Scholar ; Anheier, et al., Global Civil Society, chap. 1; Risse-Kappen (ed.), Bringing Transnational Relations Back In, chap. 1.

53 Brown, , et al. , Global Environmental Politics, pp. 17–19Google Scholar .

54 Hertel, Unexpected Power; Carpenter, ‘Advocacy Agenda’; Bob, Marketing of Rebellion; Jordan, Lisa and Van Tuijl, Peter, ‘Political Responsibility in Transnational NGO Advocacy’, World Development, 28:12 (2000), pp. 2051–2065CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

55 While this dataset includes a range of non-profit organisations, including professional associations, sports organisations, and social groups, I have selected issue areas in which groups have political goals in order to focus on interest groups.

56 Knoke, David, Organizing for Collective Action (Hawthore: Aldine de Gruyter, 1990)Google Scholar ; Leyden, ‘Interest Group Resources’, pp. 431–39.

57 The search of Associations Unlimited produced 270 organisations under the category of the Environment, 183 organisations in Disarmament and Peace, 207 organisations concerned with Social Welfare, and 108 organisations interested in Human Rights. A similar search of the UN data did not give total tallies for each category; however the final data set results in roughly the same numbers of domestic interest groups and INGOs.

58 Data is available from author by email request.

59 This data source has also been used by Skjelsbaek, ‘Growth’; Boli and Thomas (eds), Constructing World Culture; and Anheier, , et al. (2000), Global Civil SocietyGoogle Scholar . Organizations must have membership and resources from three countries as well as established leadership procedures to appear in this source. While there do not tend to be regional biases in the Yearbook, the UIA depends upon self-reporting as well as reporting by other organisations and so there may be organisations that self-select not to appear in the Yearbook.

60 These data sources are commonly used in American politics research on interest groups, for a survey of data sources, see Baumgartner and Leech, Basic Interests, chap. 8.

61 The only statistically significant differences concern lobbying budget and testimony. See note 62 for details.

62 This result is somewhat dependent on how overlapping organisations are categorised. In the analysis here, any group which is both a national interest group and an INGO is treated as an INGO. If the alternative coding is used, the results change slightly – the difference of means and variances of lobbying budget and legislative testimony become significant, both at the .01 level, but affiliation becomes insignificant. This likely implies that there are a range of different characteristics and behaviours within both categories, but some organisations are more likely to take on these characteristics and behaviours. Namely larger INGOs are more likely to use money for influence and have the reputations and expertise to testify before Congress than smaller INGOs. Interest groups which are also INGOs are more likely to build networks and have affiliates than traditional domestic interest groups, as was hypothesised earlier. When overlapping organisations are removed from the dataset, such that only ‘pure’ INGOs and interest groups are compared, only affiliations and PAC are statistically significantly different across the two groups, as the analogy leads us to expect (only US organisations can form PACs).

63 Table 2 like Table 1 reports the results when INGOs which are also interest groups are categorised as INGOs. When these overlapping organisations are treated as interest groups the results change somewhat. Contributions by organisation and testimony before Congress become significant (at the .01 level), having a D.C. office remains significant, and number of affiliates becomes insignificant.

64 This argument can be connected to the larger domestic analogy debate in International Relations. For examples, see, Bull, Hedley, ‘Society and Anarchy in International Relations’, in Butterfield, Herbert and Wright, Martin (eds), Diplomatic Investigations (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1968)Google Scholar ; Waltz, Kenneth, Man, The State, and War (New York: Columbia University Press, 1954)Google Scholar ; and Reitan, Ruth, ‘A Global Civil Society in a World Polity, or Angels and Nomads Against Empire?’, Global Governance, 13 (2007), pp. 445–460Google Scholar .

65 Keck and Sikkink, Activists Beyond Borders; Risse-Kappen (ed.), Bringing Transnational Relations Back In; Anheier et al., Global Civil Society; Hall and Biersteker, The Emergence of Private Authority.

66 Cohen, Samy, The Resilience of the State. trans. Derrick, Jonathan (Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2006)Google Scholar ; Wapner, Paul, ‘The State or Else! Statism's Resilience in NGO Studies’, International Studies Review, 9 (2007), pp. 85–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

67 Cooley and Ron, ‘NGO Scramble’; Mallaby, Sebastian, ‘NGOs: Fighting Poverty, Hurting the Poor’, Foreign Policy (2004), pp. 50–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Bob, Marketing Rebellion; Stoddard, Abby, Humanitarian Alert: NGO Information and Its Impact on US Foreign Policy (Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press, 2006)Google Scholar .

68 Edwards, Michael and Hulme, David (eds), Beyond the Magic Bullet: NGO Performance and Accountability in the Post-Cold War World (Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press, 1996)Google Scholar ; Tvedt, Terje, Angels of Mercy or Development Diplomats? NGOs and Foreign Aid (Trenton: Africa World Press, 1998)Google Scholar .

69 Bob, Marking Rebellion; Stoddard, Humanitarian Alert; Heins, Volker, Nongovernmental Organizations in International Relations (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008)Google Scholar .

70 DeMars, William, NGOs and Transnational Networks (New York: Pluto Press, 2005), p. 4Google Scholar .

71 Price, ‘Transnational Civil Society’, p. 601.

72 Ibid.

73 Crawford and Sobel, ‘Strategic Information’; Milgrom and Roberts, ‘Interested Parties’.

74 Wapner, Paul, Environmental Activism and World Civic Politics (Albany: SUNY Press, 1996)Google Scholar ; Clark, Anne Marie, Diplomacy of Conscience (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001)Google Scholar ; Power, Jonathan, Like Water on Stone: The Story of Amnesty International (Boston: Northeastern, 2001)Google Scholar ; Forsythe, David, The Humanitarians: The International Committee of the Red Cross (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Busby, ‘Bono’; Matthew, Richard, MacDonald, Bryan, and Rutherford, Kenneth (eds), Landmines and Human Security (Albany: SUNY Press, 2004)Google Scholar ; Meyer, David, A Winter of Discontent (New York: Praeger, 1990)Google Scholar ; Keck and Sikkink, Activists Across Borders; Evangelista, Matthew, Unarmed Forces: The Transnational Movement to End the Cold War (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1999)Google Scholar ; Risse-Kappen (ed.), Bringing Transnational Relations Back In; Princen and Finger, Environmental NGOs in World Politics; Dalton, Green Rainbow; Risse, Ropp, and Sikkink (eds), Power of Human Rights; Florini (ed.), Third Force; Josselin and Wallace, Non-State Actors in World Politics.

75 Tvedt, Angels of Mercy; Cooley and Ron, ‘NGO Scramble’; Ron et al., ‘Transnational Information’.

76 Baumgartner, and Leech, , Basic Interests, p. 9Google Scholar .

77 Olson, Collective Action.

78 Baumgartner, and Leech, , Basic Interests, pp. 67–77Google Scholar ; Staggenborg, Susanne, Social Movements (Toronto: Oxford University Press, 2008)Google Scholar .

79 Hayes, Lobbyists and Legislators; Knoke, Organizing for Collective Action; Humphries, ‘Corporations’; Walker, Mobilizing Interest Groups in America.

80 Shabecoff, Philip, A Fierce Green Fire: The American Environmental Movement, revised edition (Washington, DC: Island Press, 2003)Google Scholar .

81 Risse-Kappen (ed.), Bringing Transnational Relations Back In; Busby ‘Bono’.

82 Feld, , Nongovernmental Forces, p. 186Google Scholar ; Skjelsbaek, ‘Growth’, p. 432.

83 Gray and Lowery, Population Ecology of Interest Representation; Hannan, Michael and Freeman, John, Organizational Ecology (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1989)Google Scholar .

84 Shanks, Cheryl, Jacobsen, Harold, and Kaplan, Jeffrey, ‘Inertia and Change in the Constellation of Intergovernmental Organizations, 1891–1992’, International Organization, 50:4 (1996), pp. 593–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

85 Boli, and Thomas, (eds), Transforming World Culture, pp. 32–34, 41–43Google Scholar ; Skjelsbaek, ‘Growth’; Feld, Nongovernmental Forces.

86 Boli, and Thomas, (eds), Transforming World Culture, p. 34Google Scholar .

87 Skjelsbaek, ‘Growth’, p. 429.

88 Carpenter, ‘Advocacy Agenda’, p. 103; Bob, Marketing Rebellion; Prakash, Aseem and Gugerty, Mary Kay (eds), Revisiting Advocacy Organizations: A Collective Action Perspective (Cambridge University Press, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

89 Wapner, Environmental Activism; Matthew et al., Landmines and Human Security.

90 Shabecoff, Fierce Green Fire.

91 Crawford and Sobel, ‘Strategic Information’; Milgrom and Roberts, ‘Interested Parties’; Austen-Smith, ‘Information and Influence’; Rasmusen, ‘Lobbying’.

92 Ainsworth, ‘Regulating Lobbyists’.

93 Princen and Finger (eds), Environmental NGOs; Wapner, Environmental Activism; Risse-Kappen (ed.), Bringing Transnational Relations Back In; Keck and Sikkink, Activists Across Borders; Price, ‘Transnational Civil Society’; Risse, Ropp, and Sikkink (eds), Power of Human Rights; Florini (ed.), Third Force; Arts, Bas, Noortmann, Math and Reinalda, Bob (eds), Non-State Actors in International Relations (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2001)Google Scholar ; Betsill and Correll, ‘NGO Influence’; Josselin and Wallace (eds), Non-State Actors in World Politics; Stoddard, Humanitarian Alert; Busby, ‘Bono’.

94 Price, ‘Transnational Civil Society’, p. 605.

95 Stoddard, Humanitarian Alert.

96 Risse-Kappen (ed.), Bringing Transnational Relations Back In; Carpenter, ‘Advocacy Agenda’; Mahoney, Brussels Versus the Beltway.

97 Bob, Marketing Rebellion; Carpenter, ‘Advocacy Agenda’.

98 Matthew, et al., Landmines and Human Security; Keck and Sikkink, Activists Across Borders; Busby, ‘Bono’.

99 Finnemore, Martha and Sikkink, Kathryn, ‘International Norm Dynamics and Political Change’, International Organization, 52 (1998), pp. 887–917CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Risse, Ropp, and Sikkink (eds), Power of Human Rights; Florini (ed.), Third Force.

100 Princen and Finger (eds), Environmental NGOs; Raustiala, ‘States, NGOs’; Charnovitz, ‘NGOs and International Law’.

101 Cameron, David et al. , To Walk Without Fear (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998)Google Scholar ; Clark, Diplomacy of Conscience; Bloodgood, Elizabeth, ‘Influential Information: Non-Governmental Organizations’ Roles in International Regime Formation’, Ph.D. dissertation, Princeton University (2002)Google Scholar ; Matthew, et al., Landmines and Human Security; Busby, ‘Bono’.

102 Baumgartner, and Leech, , Basic Interests, p. 134Google Scholar .

103 Keck and Sikkink, Activists Across Borders; Risse, Ropp, and Sikkink (eds), Power of Human Rights; Sell and Prakash, ‘Using Ideas’; Carpenter, ‘Advocacy Agendas’; Hertel, Unexpected Power; and Bob, Marketing Rebellion are notable exceptions.

104 Risse-Kappen (ed.), Bringing Transnational Relations Back In; Wapner, Environmental Activism.

105 Keck, and Sikkink, , Activists Beyond Borders, p. 2Google Scholar .

106 Feld, , Nongovernmental Forces, p. 201Google Scholar .

107 Cooley and Ron, ‘NGO Scramble’; Mallaby, ‘NGOs’; Bob, Marketing Rebellion.

108 Ibid., p. 6.

109 Milgrom and Roberts, ‘Interested Parties’, pp. 21–5; Lupia and McCubbins, ‘Who Controls’, p. 365; Krishna and Morgan, ‘Expertise’, p. 200.

110 Esterling, Political Economy of Expertise, p. x.

111 Milgrom and Roberts, ‘Interested Parties’, pp. 21–15; Lupia and McCubbins, ‘Who Controls’, pp. 364–6.

112 Ainsworth, ‘Regulating Lobbyists’, p. 44.

113 Crawford and Sobel, ‘Strategic Information’; Sobel, Joel, ‘A Theory of Credibility’, Review of Economic Studies, 52:4 (1985), pp. 557–573CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Austen-Smith, ‘Information and Influence’; Ainsworth, ‘Regulating Lobbyists’.

114 Keck and Sikkink, Activists Across Borders; Brysk, ‘Above and Below’; Bob, Marketing Rebellion; Busby, ‘Bono’.

115 Bauer, Dexter, and Pool, American Business and Public Policy; Gilligan and Krehbiel, ‘Organization of Informative Committees’; Berry, Lobbying for the People.

116 Austen-Smith and Wright, ‘Counteractive’; Salisbury et al., ‘Who Works’; Potters and Van Winden, ‘Asymmetric Information’, p. 278.

117 Kollman, ‘Inviting Friends’; Esterling, Political Economy of Expertise.

118 Edwards and Hulme (eds), Beyond the Magic Bullet; Tvedt, Angels of Mercy; Bob, Marketing Rebellion; Mallaby, ‘NGOs’; DeMars, Transnational Networks.

119 Keck and Sikkink, Activists Across Borders; Risse, Ropp, and Sikkink (eds), Power of Human Rights; Clark, ‘Non-Governmental Organizations’; Brysk, ‘Above and Below’.

120 Stoddard, Humanitarian Alert.

121 Ainsworth, ‘Regulating Lobbyists’, pp. 49–51.

122 Jordan, Lisa and Van Tuijl, Peter (eds), NGO Accountability: Politics, Principles, and Innovations (London: Earthscan, 2006)Google Scholar is a step in this direction.