IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jscscx/v9y2020i8p144-d398884.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Transnational Advocacy Networks of Migrants and Asylum Seekers’ Human Rights: The San Diego—Tijuana Border in the Trump Era

Author

Listed:
  • Philippe Stoesslé

    (Departamento de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de Monterrey, 66238 San Pedro Garza García, Mexico)

  • Valeria Alejandra Patiño Díaz

    (Asylum Access, 03200 Ciudad de México, Mexico)

  • Yetzi Rosales Martínez

    (Departamento de Estudios de Población, CONACYT—El Colegio de la Frontera Norte, 64700 Monterrey, Nuevo Léon, Mexico)

Abstract

How do advocacy organizations from the San Diego—Tijuana area contest and resist Trump’s immigration policies? What resources and tactics do they use to externalize their demands at the local and international levels? Based on semi-structured interviews with eight advocacy organizations—with a local, binational, and international presence—that have mobilized to externalize their demands on different local and international arenas, this research aims to answer these questions by applying the transnational advocacy networks literature to the mentioned case study. Our main findings show that transnational relations between advocacy organizations represent a counterbalance to Trump’s immigration policies. Some organizations have adapted to react to a set of new policies implemented by the administration, and, at the same time, they have diffused information, values, and ideas as part of their resistance tactics. Through transnational advocacy networks, local organizations have accomplished international relevance, turning into key players of advocacy in the region. These networks demonstrate that, despite Trump’s restricting immigration policies, transnational channels between these actors remain open for collective action.

Suggested Citation

  • Philippe Stoesslé & Valeria Alejandra Patiño Díaz & Yetzi Rosales Martínez, 2020. "Transnational Advocacy Networks of Migrants and Asylum Seekers’ Human Rights: The San Diego—Tijuana Border in the Trump Era," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-21, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:9:y:2020:i:8:p:144-:d:398884
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/9/8/144/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/9/8/144/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hendrix, Cullen S. & Wong, Wendy H., 2013. "When Is the Pen Truly Mighty? Regime Type and the Efficacy of Naming and Shaming in Curbing Human Rights Abuses," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(3), pages 651-672, July.
    2. Grant, Ruth W. & Keohane, Robert O., 2005. "Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 99(1), pages 29-43, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jonas Tallberg & Thomas Sommerer & Theresa Squatrito, 2016. "Democratic memberships in international organizations: Sources of institutional design," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 59-87, March.
    2. Sam R. Bell & K. Chad Clay & Amanda Murdie, 2019. "Join the Chorus, Avoid the Spotlight: The Effect of Neighborhood and Social Dynamics on Human Rights Organization Shaming," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 63(1), pages 167-193, January.
    3. Marco Grasso & J. David Tàbara, 2019. "Towards a Moral Compass to Guide Sustainability Transformations in a High-End Climate Change World," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-16, May.
    4. Daniel L. Nielson & Susan D. Hyde & Judith Kelley, 2019. "The elusive sources of legitimacy beliefs: Civil society views of international election observers," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 685-715, December.
    5. Joerges, Christian, 2007. "Integration through de-legislation? An irritated heckler," European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) 3, CONNEX and EUROGOV networks.
    6. Georgios Dimitropoulos, 2022. "The use of blockchain by international organizations: effectiveness and legitimacy [The governance of blockchain dispute resolution]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 41(3), pages 328-342.
    7. Ecker-Ehrhardt, Matthias, 2013. "Why do they want the UN to decide? A two-step model of public support for UN authority," TranState Working Papers 171, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    8. Wilde, Pieter de & Junk, Wiebke Marie & Palmtag, Tabea, 2016. "Accountability and opposition to globalization in international assemblies," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 22(4), pages 823-846.
    9. Christian Joerges; Jurgen Neyer, 2006. "Deliberative Supranationalism Revisited," EUI-LAW Working Papers 20, European University Institute (EUI), Department of Law.
    10. Francesco De Luca & Jenice Prather-Kinsey, 2018. "Legitimacy theory may explain the failure of global adoption of IFRS: the case of Europe and the U.S," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 22(3), pages 501-534, September.
    11. Johannes Urpelainen, 2012. "How Does Democratic Accountability Shape International Cooperation?," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(1), pages 28-55, February.
    12. Axel Dreher & Katharina Michaelowa, 2008. "The political economy of international organizations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 331-334, December.
    13. Terrence L. Chapman, 2007. "International Security Institutions, Domestic Politics, and Institutional Legitimacy," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 51(1), pages 134-166, February.
    14. Michelle Scobie, 2018. "Accountability in climate change governance and Caribbean SIDS," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 769-787, April.
    15. Giuseppe Zaccaria, 2022. "You’re Fired! International Courts, Re‐contracting, and the WTO Appellate Body during the Trump Presidency," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 13(3), pages 322-333, June.
    16. Ecker-Ehrhardt, Matthias, 2010. "Problem perception and public expectations in international institutions: Evidence from a German representative survey," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Global Governance SP IV 2010-302, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    17. Cullen Hendrix & Wendy Wong, 2014. "Knowing your audience: How the structure of international relations and organizational choices affect amnesty international’s advocacy," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 29-58, March.
    18. Lena Partzsch, 2023. "Missing the SDGs: Political accountability for insufficient environmental action," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 14(3), pages 438-450, June.
    19. CDP subgroup on Accountability, 2015. "International Tax Cooperation and Implications of Globalization," CDP Background Papers 025, United Nations, Department of Economics and Social Affairs.
    20. Sherrie Steiner, 2011. "Religious Soft Power as Accountability Mechanism for Power in World Politics," SAGE Open, , vol. 1(3), pages 21582440114, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:9:y:2020:i:8:p:144-:d:398884. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.