Cupać, Jelena; Heiden eich, Tobias
A icle — Published Ve sion
A house di ided: Feminis and conse a i e NGOs’
legi imacy belie s abou he Uni ed Na ions
Re iew o In e na ional S udies
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Cupać, Jelena; Heiden eich, Tobias (2025) : A house di ided: Feminis and
conse a i e NGOs’ legi imacy belie s abou he Uni ed Na ions, Re iew o In e na ional S udies,
ISSN 1469-9044, Camb idge Uni e si y P ess, Camb idge, Iss. Fi s View, pp. 1-25,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S026021052510137X
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/330709
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0
Re iew o In e na ional S udies (2025), page 1 o 25
doi:10.1017/S026021052510137X
RESEARCH ARTICLE
A house di ided: Feminis and conse a i e NGOs’
legi imacy belie s abou he Uni ed Na ions
Jelena Cupać and Tobias Heiden eich
WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e , Global Go e nance, Be lin, Ge many
Co esponding au ho : Jelena Cupać; Email: [email protected]
(Recei ed 24 June 2024; e ised 10 July 2025; accep ed 11 Augus 2025)
Abs ac
Wi hin he UN, he e is a di ide be ween NGO ne wo ks wi h di e ing s ances on gende equali y and
women’s igh s. Feminis and eminis -in o med NGOs push o ex ensi e women’s igh s, including ep o-
duc i e igh s and p o ec ion agains disc imina ion. In con as , conse a i e NGOs uphold adi ional
gende oles and amily s uc u es, s ongly opposing ep oduc i e igh s like abo ion. S udies ha e exam-
ined hese NGOs’ s ances and ad ocacy ac ics, bu a de ailed compa a i e analysis o hei iews o he UN
– hei key ba leg ound – is missing. The pape add esses his gap by assessing how each g oup e alua es
he UN’s legi imacy and iden i ying he unde lying sou ces o legi imacy belie s. By combining compu-
a ional and quali a i e ex analysis, i e eals se e al ends: he UN is cen al in he discou se o bo h
g oups o NGOs, al hough i appea s mo e in eminis NGOs’ communica ions, and eminis g oups gen-
e ally e alua e he UN’s legi imacy mo e posi i ely. This posi i i y peaks when he UN ac i ely suppo s
eminis objec i es and collabo a es wi h hese NGOs. Conse a i e NGOs, on he o he hand, posi i ely
e alua e he UN when hey can align he UN’s ounda ional ex s wi h hei iews and when hey ga ne
suppo om conse a i e s a es. Thei mos nega i e e alua ions occu when hey belie e he UN uses
decep ion o p omo e p og essi e policies.
Keywo ds: backlash; conse a i e; eminis ; legi imacy; NGO; UN
In oduc ion
The s a o Donald T ump’s second e m as US p esiden signalled a new and mo e dange ous
phase o global democ a ic decline and he un a elling o he libe al in e na ional o de . I con in-
ues an en enched pa e n whe e au ho i a ian, populis , and conse a i e eligious ac o s moun a
backlash agains wha hey see as he eli is and in usi e co e o he global libe al agenda.1Gende
equali y and women’s igh s ha e been key a ge s o his backlash. The a acks ha e occu ed no
only a egional and na ional le els, as seen in he EU and he Uni ed S a es, bu also inc easingly on
1Ka en J. Al e and Michael Zü n, ‘Concep ualising backlash poli ics: In oduc ion o a special issue on backlash poli ics
in compa ison’, The B i ish Jou nal o Poli ics and In e na ional Rela ions, 22:4 (2020), pp. 563–84; Ka en J. Al e and Michael
Zü n, ‘Theo ising backlash poli ics: Conclusion o a special issue on backlash poli ics in compa ison’, The B i ish Jou nal o
Poli ics and In e na ional Rela ions, 22:4 (2020), pp. 739–52; Wayne Sandhol z, Yuxin Bei, and Kayla Caldwell, ‘Backlash and
in e na ional human igh s cou s: C isis, accoun abili y, and oppo uni y’, in Lau ence R. Hel e (ed.), Con ac ing Human
Righ s (Edwa d Elga Publishing, 2018), pp. 159–78; Mikael Rask Madsen, Pio Cebulak, and Micha Wiebusch, ‘Backlash
agains in e na ional cou s: Explaining he o ms and pa e ns o esis ance o in e na ional cou s’, In e na ional Jou nal o
Law in Con ex , 14:2 (2018), pp. 197–220.
© The Au ho (s), 2025. Published by Camb idge Uni e si y P ess on behal o The B i ish In e na ional S udies Associa ion. This is an Open
Access a icle, dis ibu ed unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion licence (h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0), which
pe mi s un es ic ed e-use, dis ibu ion and ep oduc ion, p o ided he o iginal a icle is p ope ly ci ed.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S026021052510137X Published online by Camb idge Uni e si y P ess
2 Jelena Cupać and Tobias Heiden eich
he global s age, wi hin he Uni ed Na ions.2Leading his e o a e conse a i e eligious NGOs,
p ima ily om he Uni ed S a es and Wes e n Eu ope – no ably he He i age Founda ion, whose
P ojec 2025 is widely seen as he bluep in o T ump’s second adminis a ion. Alongside alliances
wi h ce ain pos -So ie , Islamic, and pos colonial s a es – as well as he Uni ed S a es unde T ump
– hese o ganisa ions ha e in es ed subs an ial esou ces in o eshaping he UN’s no ma i e ame-
wo k.3Despi e di e ences, hey a e uni ed in esis ing ‘gende ideology’ and p omo ing adi ional
alues, pa icula ly he no ion o ‘ he na u al amily’.4Thei e o s ha e yielded esul s, such as
in oducing ‘ amily igh s’ language in o se e al Human Righ s Council esolu ions and emo ing
e e ences o sexual and ep oduc i e heal h om Secu i y Council Resolu ion 2467 on women,
peace, and secu i y in 2019.5
The ise o he conse a i e eligious bloc wi hin he UN has signi ican ly challenged eminis
and eminis -in o med NGOs. While eminism a he UN has always been di e se and in e nally
con es ed, ideological di e ences ha e no p e en ed eminis s om seizing oppo uni ies and
shaping he UN’s agenda. Since i s ea ly days, eminis s ha e in luenced key UN ins i u ions and
policies, om es ablishing he Commission on he S a us o Women o ad ancing he e m ‘gende ’
a he 1995 Beijing Con e ence and d a ing Resolu ion 1325 on women in con lic . These e o s
ha e os e ed a sense o eminis owne ship o e he UN and, al hough much emains o be done,
ha e helped es ablish i as a cen al pla o m o ad ancing gende equali y and women’s igh s
globally. Any ollback would h ea en hese achie emen s and unde mine decades o ad ocacy.
While eminis and eminis -in o med NGOs wi hin he UN do no ye cons i u e a uni ied emi-
nis on , hey a e pa o a b oade esis ance ne wo k agains he g owing in luence o an i-gende
o ces.6
As a esul , he UN has become a ba leg ound o wo opposing NGO ne wo ks wi h adically
di e en iews on gende equali y and women’s igh s: eminis and eminis -in o med NGOs, who
ad oca e o comp ehensi e gende equali y – including ep oduc i e au onomy and p o ec ion
om disc imina ion and iolence – and conse a i e NGOs, who p omo e adi ional gende oles
and s ongly oppose ep oduc i e igh s, pa icula ly abo ion.
Mul iple s udies ha e al eady documen ed his new no ma i e and ad ocacy dynamic. They
also d aw on mul iple s ands o li e a u e, anging om no ms and in e na ional o ganisa ions
(IO) poli icisa ion esea ch in In e na ional Rela ions (IR) o social mo emen s udies in poli i-
cal science and sociology. Ea lie s udies ha e been mos ly empi ical, iden i ying key conse a i e
ac o s and mapping hei o ganisa ional s a egies, coo dina ion e o s, and he spaces whe e hey
mobilised.7Mo e ecen schola ship has placed g ea e emphasis on concep ualisa ion. Sande s
in oduces he concep o no m spoiling, desc ibing how conse a i e ac o s ac i ely wo k o
2Jelena Cupać and I em Ebe ü k, ‘The pe sonal is global poli ical: The an i eminis backlash in he Uni ed Na ions’, The
B i ish Jou nal o Poli ics and In e na ional Rela ions, 22:4 (2020), pp. 702–14; Jelena Cupać and I em Ebe ü k, ‘Backlash
ad ocacy and NGO pola iza ion o e women’s igh s in he Uni ed Na ions’, In e na ional A ai s, 97:4 (2021), pp. 1183–201;
Agnieszka G a and Elżbie a Ko olczuk, An i-Gende Poli ics in he Populis Momen (Rou ledge, 2022); Roman Kuha and
Da id Pa e no e (eds), An i-Gende Campaigns in Eu ope: Mobilizing Agains Equali y (Rowman & Li le ield, 2017); Esz e
Ko á s, ‘The eme gence o powe ul an i-gende mo emen s in Eu ope and he c isis o libe al democ acy’, in Michaela Kö ig,
Rena e Bi zan, and And ea Pe ö (eds), Gende and Fa -Righ Poli ics in Eu ope (Palg a e Macmillan, 2017), pp. 175–89.
3Rebecca Sande s, ‘No m spoiling: Unde mining he in e na ional women’s igh s agenda’, In e na ional A ai s, 94:2
(2018), pp. 271–91; Jelena Cupać and I em Ebe ü k, ‘Compe i i e mimic y: The socializa ion o an i eminis NGOs in o he
Uni ed Na ions’, Global Cons i u ionalism, 11:3 (2022), pp. 379–400.
4Do is Buss and Didi He man, Globalizing Family Values: The Ch is ian Righ in In e na ional Poli ics (Uni e si y o
Minneso a P ess, 2003).
5Jessica Sapiano and Nupu S. Raghu anshi, ‘Making o “s ange bed ellows”: he Women, Peace and Secu i y agenda a e
UNSCRs 2467 and 2493’, In e na ional Feminis Jou nal o Poli ics, 26:3 (2024), pp. 680–703.
6Rebecca Holmes, Feminis Responses o ‘No m-Spoiling’ a he Uni ed Na ions (O e seas De elopmen Ins i u e, 2024);
Rebecca Holmes, Feminis Responses o he G owing An i-Righ s Mo emen a he UN (The Global Obse a o y, 2024).
7Cli o d Bob, The Global Righ Wing and he Clash o Wo ld Poli ics (Camb idge Uni e si y P ess, 2012); Louise Chappell,
‘Con es ing women’s igh s: Cha ing he eme gence o a ansna ional conse a i e coun e -ne wo k’, Global Socie y, 20:4
(2006), pp. 491–520; Buss and He man, Globalizing Family Values.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S026021052510137X Published online by Camb idge Uni e si y P ess
Re iew o In e na ional S udies 3
delegi imise es ablished in e na ional no ms on women’s igh s by po aying hem as ideologi-
cal imposi ions o h ea s o na ional so e eign y.8Coun e -no ming, as de eloped by Roggeband,
explains how hese ac o s do no me ely oppose exis ing no ms bu ac i ely cons uc and p omo e
al e na i e amewo ks oo ed in adi ional, na ionalis , o eligious alues.9Voss concep ualises
no m con es a ion as he p ocess h ough which conse a i e NGOs engage in s uggles o e he
in e p e a ion and applica ion o gende no ms.10 Finally, backlash ad ocacy, as explo ed by Cupać
and Ebe ü k, cap u es he b oade mobilisa ion e o s o conse a i e NGOs o oll back eminis
gains, while employing legal, poli ical, and ins i u ional s a egies o en ench conse a i e agendas
a he UN.11
Howe e , wi h ew excep ions, exis ing esea ch has de o ed li le a en ion o compa ing em-
inis and eminis -in o med NGOs wi h conse a i e NGOs.12 Beyond compa ing aspec s such as
hei ne wo ks and modes o ins i u ional engagemen , one impo an dimension – examined in
his pape – is how hese NGOs pe cei e he UN, a key a ena o hei no ma i e con lic s. This
compa a i e angle ollows om IR li e a u e on he legi imacy and au ho i y o IOs. Legi imacy
pe cep ions shape how ac o s engage wi h IOs, in luencing whe he hey suppo , con es , o dis-
engage om hem. I , o example, eminis NGOs iew he UN as a p og essi e ac o , hey may
seek deepe coope a ion, whe eas i hey see i as un esponsi e o co-op ed by conse a i e o ces,
hey migh seek al e na i e enues o ac ion. A he same ime, legi imacy pe cep ions in luence
he UN’s e ec i eness in a gi en issue a ea by de ining he condi ions o i s abili y o es ablish
no ms and en o ce compliance. This is e iden , o example, in he case o eminis ac o s wi hin
he UN no da ing o o ganise he Fi h Wo ld Con e ence on Women, o en a ibu ed o ea s
ha ideological pola isa ion would cause se backs a he han p og ess in women’s igh s.
Howe e , beyond analysing he implica ions o eminis , eminis -in o med, and conse a i e
NGOs’ legi imacy pe cep ions and assessmen s o he UN, i is equally impo an o examine
he unde lying belie s ha shape hese pe cep ions. Unde s anding hese belie s no only cla i ies
whe he hese NGOs iew he UN as mo e o less legi ima e bu also e eals he easons behind
hei pe spec i es. This app oach enables a deepe analysis o he poli ical, ins i u ional, and no -
ma i e dynamics in luencing NGO–UN ela ions – wi hou he immedia e p essu e o es ablishing
causal links be ween pe cep ion and ac ion. None heless, u u e esea ch can build on his oun-
da ion o explo e how legi imacy pe cep ions shape NGO s a egies and he UN’s esponses amid
ideological pola isa ion. Agains his backg ound, his pape asks: Unde wha ci cums ances, and
based on which legi imacy belie s, a e eminis , eminis -in o med, and conse a i e NGOs inclined
o e alua e he UN along a spec um om mo e posi i e o mo e nega i e?
To answe his ques ion, we p oceed in i e s eps. Fi s , we del e in o he heo y o IO legi imacy,
pa icula ly i s in e play wi h (1) IO au ho i y, (2) he audience’s legi imacy e alua ions, and (3) he
belie s shaping hem. We a gue ha legi imacy e alua ions consis o an audience’s assessmen s –
anging on a con inuum om mo e posi i e o mo e nega i e – o whe he an IO exe cises i s
au ho i y wi hin a gi en domain app op ia ely. These e alua ions, we posi , s em om p io ideas,
no ms, and alues – wha we e m sou ces o legi imacy belie s. We hen apply hese heo e ical
p oposi ions o analyse how eminis , eminis -in o med NGOs, and conse a i e NGOs pe cei e
he UN. We i s show ha bo h g oups ecognise he UN’s au ho i y. Then, using au oma ed ex
analysis – seman ic ole labelling and sen imen analysis on 23,747 NGO documen s – we examine
hei legi imacy e alua ions o he UN o e ime. Plo ing hese e eals when he NGOs iewed he
UN mos posi i ely and mos nega i ely. Finally, we quali a i ely analyse six y sampled documen s
om hese in lec ion poin s o in e he sou ces o legi imacy belie s shaping hei e alua ions.
8Sande s, ‘No m spoiling’.
9Conny Roggeband, In e na ional Women’s Righ s: P og ess Unde A ack?, Wo king Pape Se ies No. 26 (Be lin Po sdam
Resea ch G oup ‘The In e na ional Rule o Law – Rise o Decline?’, 2019).
10M. J. Voss, ‘Con es ing “ amily” a he Uni ed Na ions Human Righ s Council’, Religion & Human Righ s, 14:2
(2019), pp. 95–133.
11Cupać and Ebe ü k, ‘An i eminis backlash in he UN’; Cupać and Ebe ü k, ‘Backlash ad ocacy and NGO pola iza ion’.
12Cupać and Ebe ü k, ‘Backlash ad ocacy and NGO pola iza ion’; Cupać and Ebe ü k, ‘Compe i i e mimic y’.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S026021052510137X Published online by Camb idge Uni e si y P ess
4 Jelena Cupać and Tobias Heiden eich
Ou indings show ha while he UN is cen al o eminis , eminis -in o med, and conse a i e
NGOs, i ea u es mo e p ominen ly in eminis communica ion. These NGOs consis en ly iew
he UN mo e posi i ely, pa icula ly when i champions eminis causes (IO pe o mance and ide-
ology as a sou ce o legi imacy belie s) and os e s ins i u ional access (IO p ocedu e as a sou ce
o legi imacy belie s). Conse a i e NGOs e alua e he UN mos posi i ely when p omo ing an
‘o iginalis ’ in e p e a ion o i s ounding documen s – an o e looked legi imacy sou ce ied o
owne ship o e an IO’s no ma i e ou pu s. This inding is pa icula ly s iking, as i di e ges om
es ablished sou ces o legi imacy belie s in he li e a u e. Ins ead, i sugges s an o e looked dimen-
sion: legi imacy pe cep ions oo ed in a sense o owne ship o e an IO’s no ma i e ou pu s. This
insigh opens a p omising a enue o u he esea ch, including compa isons wi h eminis claims
o owne ship o e he UN. Conse a i e NGOs also a e he UN highly when allied wi h conse -
a i e s a es (IO p ocedu e as a sou ce o legi imacy belie s) bu mos nega i ely when pe cei ing
UN agencies as ad ancing a p og essi e agenda h ough misleading me hods (IO p ocedu e as a
sou ce o legi imacy belie s).
The pape con ibu es o wo s ands o li e a u e – IO legi imacy and he global an i- eminis
backlash – which in e sec as backlash s udies d aw om mul iple schola ly adi ions. I makes
h ee key con ibu ions. Fi s , i shows ha in pola ised se ings, legi imacy pe cep ions a e also
shaped by opposi ional dynamics. Conse a i e NGO in luence leads eminis s o iew he UN
less posi i ely, making i ulne able o con es a ion om bo h libe al and illibe al o ces, hus
complica ing simple dis inc ions be ween suppo e s and challenge s o he ene s o he lib-
e al in e na ional o de . Second, i in oduces no ma i e owne ship as a po en ial new sou ce o
legi imacy, showing ha conse a i es, while ejec ing he UN’s libe al amewo k, seek o claim
ideological and his o ical s akes in he ins i u ion a he han abandon i . Thi d, i challenges
he iew o illibe al backlash as pu ely eac iona y by highligh ing conse a i e no m-building.
Fu he esea ch should explo e hese a eas and he link be ween legi imacy, NGO ac ions, and
UN esponses.
Legi imacy as a lens o analysing pe cep ions o in e na ional o ganisa ions
IO au ho i y and legi imacy e alua ions
IO legi imacy has long been a heme in IR, bu i has only ecen ly ga ne ed mo e ocused a en ion
om schola s in he ield.13 The end has also been accompanied by a mo e ex ensi e empi ical
analysis o he phenomenon.14 Following he sociological de ini ion o IO legi imacy p oposed by
Jonas Tallbe g and Michael Zü n, a de ini ion ha has ecen ly come in o he spo ligh and been
13S e en Be ns ein, ‘Legi imacy in in e go e nmen al and non-s a e global go e nance’, Re iew o In e na ional Poli ical
Economy, 18:1 (2011), pp. 17–51; James B asse and Eleni Tsingou, ‘The poli ics o legi ima e global go e nance’, Re iew
o In e na ional Poli ical Economy, 18:1 (2011), pp. 1–16; Lisa Ma ia Dellmu h and Jonas Tallbe g, ‘The social legi imacy o
in e na ional o ganiza ions: In e es ep esen a ion, ins i u ional pe o mance, and con idence ex apola ion in he Uni ed
Na ions’, Re iew o In e na ional S udies, 41:3 (2015), pp. 451–75; Ma hias Ecke -Eh ha d , ‘Cosmopoli an poli iciza ion: How
pe cep ions o in e dependence os e ci izens’ expec a ions in in e na ional ins i u ions’, Eu opean Jou nal o In e na ional
Rela ions, 18:3 (2012), pp. 481–508; Ian Hu d, ‘Legi imacy and au ho i y in in e na ional poli ics’, In e na ional O ganiza ion,
53:2 (1999), pp. 379–408; Ian Hu d, A e Ana chy: Legi imacy and Powe in he Uni ed Na ions Secu i y Council (P ince on
Uni e si y P ess, 2007); Jonas Tallbe g and Michael Zü n, ‘The legi imacy and legi ima ion o in e na ional o ganiza ions:
In oduc ion and amewo k’, The Re iew o In e na ional O ganiza ions, 14 (2019), pp. 581–606; E ik Voe en, ‘Public opinion
and he legi imacy o in e na ional cou s’, Theo e ical Inqui ies in Law, 14:2 (2013), pp. 411–36; Dominik Zaum, Legi ima ing
In e na ional O ganiza ions (Ox o d Uni e si y P ess, 2013).
14B igi e Ande son, Thomas Be naue , and Alexande Kachi, ‘Does in e na ional pooling o au ho i y a ec he pe -
cei ed legi imacy o global go e nance?’, The Re iew o In e na ional O ganiza ions, 14 (2019), pp. 661–83; Ma in Binde and
Monika Heupel, ‘The legi imacy o he UN Secu i y Council: E idence om ecen Gene al Assembly deba es’, In e na ional
S udies Qua e ly, 59:2 (2015), pp. 238–50; Tana Johnson, ‘Guil by associa ion: The link be ween s a es’ in luence and he
legi imacy o in e go e nmen al o ganiza ions’, Re iew o In e na ional O ganiza ions, 6:1 (2011), pp. 57–84; Pippa No is,
‘Con idence in he Uni ed Na ions: Cosmopoli an and na ionalis ic a i udes’, in Yilmaz Esme and Tho lei Pe e sson
(eds), The In e na ional Sys em, Democ acy, and Values (Uppsala Uni e si y P ess, 2009), pp. 17–48; Ch is oph Rauh and
Michael Zü n, ‘Au ho i y, poli iciza ion, and al e na i e jus i ica ions: Endogenous legi ima ion dynamics in global economic
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S026021052510137X Published online by Camb idge Uni e si y P ess
Re iew o In e na ional S udies 5
widely adop ed, we cha ac e ise legi imacy as ‘belie s wi hin a gi en cons i uency o o he ele an
audience ha a poli ical ins i u ion’s exe cise o au ho i y is app op ia e’.15
This de ini ion s ands ou o no only making IO legi imacy dependen on o ganisa ional
au ho i y bu also he unique way in which i es ablishes his link: Au ho i y is unde s ood as he
ecogni ion o an o ganisa ion’s igh o make no ms, decisions, and in e p e a ions wi hin a pa ic-
ula social domain o issue a ea, while legi imacy conce ns he audience’s e alua ion o whe he his
igh is exe cised app op ia ely.16 To illus a e, conside he Wo ld Heal h O ganiza ion (WHO)
du ing he COVID-19 pandemic. The audience migh ecognise he WHO as he leading au ho i y
on global public heal h. Ye , while some migh suppo he WHO’s decisions, o he s could ques-
ion hei ai ness, impa iali y, o impac . Pu di e en ly, he WHO’s exe cise o au ho i y could
be iewed posi i ely by some and nega i ely by o he s. We e e o hese assessmen s as legi imacy
e alua ions. Collec i ely, hey con ibu e o an IO’s legi imacy, a phenomenon ha is, he e o e,
bes unde s ood in ela ional e ms a he han as an inhe en IO cha ac e is ic.
Legi imacy e alua ions o an IO do no ma e ialise in isola ion; ins ead, hey a e oo ed in dis-
inc legi imacy belie s o igina ing om he socially cons uc ed amewo k o ideas, no ms, and
alues emb aced by a speci ic audience, e e ed o as sou ces o legi imacy belie s.17 When e alua -
ing an IO, some may, he e o e, p io i ise democ a ic p inciples like openness, anspa ency, and
accoun abili y, while o he s may choose a neolibe al app oach ha a ou s e iciency and p oblem-
sol ing.18 The sou ces o legi imacy belie s a speci ic audience elies on when e alua ing an IO a e
no ixed bu a y o e ime and ac oss con ex s. They cons i u e an in eg al pa o he dynamic
poli ics o legi ima ion ha su ounds IOs. In his con ex , IOs endea ou o secu e app o al
om hei audience by c a ing legi imisa ion na a i es ha alida e hei au ho i y, ac ions, and
decisions. Simul aneously, he audience obse es hese ac ions and jus i ica ions, e alua ing hem
agains hei own se o alues, no ms, ideas, and objec i es.19
The sou ces o legi imacy belie s a e, he e o e, a subjec o empi ical inqui y. They can be
accessed by examining an audience’s legi imacy e alua ions, communica ed in w i en, spoken, o
enac ed o ms (see Figu e 1). In w i en and spoken o m, hese e alua ions appea in an audience’s
public s a emen s ac oss adi ional and digi al media, as well as on hei websi es. In an enac ed
o m, an audience may exp ess suppo o disapp o al o IOs h ough ac ions such as collabo a -
ing wi h hem as expe s, pa icipa ing in p o es s, o signing pe i ions. In his pape , we ocus
on eminis and conse a i e w i en communica ion. While his app oach may sac i ice comp e-
hensi eness, i is impo an o no e ha w i en communica ion s ill encodes spoken and enac ed
communica ion, such as when i e e s o a pa icula speech, p o es , o pa icipa ion in IO spaces.
The e o e, he s udy o w i en communica ion should enable us o gain a ela i ely obus unde -
s anding o he eminis , eminis -in o med, and conse a i e NGOs’ e alua ions o he UN and
he legi imacy belie s hey a e based on.
Be o e discussing sou ces o legi imacy belie s, a ca ea is needed. Following Tallbe g and Zü n,
we classi y eminis , eminis -in o med, and conse a i e NGOs as pa o he UN’s cons i uen
audience – an audience ha acknowledges i s au ho i y while also seeking o in luence i .20
Howe e , while hei engagemen and e alua ions ma e o he UN’s legi imacy, hey a e no he
go e nance’, Re iew o In e na ional Poli ical Economy, 27:3 (2020), pp. 583–611; Henning Schmid ke, ‘Eli e legi ima ion
and delegi ima ion o in e na ional o ganiza ions in he media: Pa e ns and explana ions’, The Re iew o In e na ional
O ganiza ions, 14:4 (2019), pp. 633–59; Be nd Schlipphak, ‘Measu ing a i udes owa d egional o ganiza ions ou side Eu ope’,
Re iew o In e na ional O ganiza ions, 10:3 (2015), pp. 351–75.
15Tallbe g and Zü n, ‘Legi imacy and legi ima ion’, p. 585.
16Michael Zü n, Ma in Binde , and Ma hias Ecke -Eh ha d , ‘In e na ional au ho i y and i s poli iciza ion’, In e na ional
Theo y, 4:1 (2012), pp. 69–106 (pp. 82–8).
17Binde and Heupel, ‘Legi imacy o he UN Secu i y Council’, p. 547; Hu d, ‘Legi imacy and au ho i y’, p. 381.
18An hony McG ew and Da id Held, Go e ning Globaliza ion: Powe , Au ho i y and Global Go e nance (Poli y P ess, 2002).
19Tallbe g and Zü n, ‘Legi imacy and legi ima ion’, pp. 588–9.
20Tallbe g and Zü n, ‘Legi imacy and legi ima ion’, p. 586.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S026021052510137X Published online by Camb idge Uni e si y P ess
6 Jelena Cupać and Tobias Heiden eich
Figu e 1. The ela ionship be ween legi imacy communica ion, legi imacy e alua ions, and he sou ces o legi imacy
belie s.
sole measu e o i . IO legi imacy is a complex agg ega e o mul iple audiences and he IO’s own legi -
imisa ion e o s. Ne e heless, examining hese NGOs’ legi imacy belie s can o e insigh in o he
bounda ies wi hin which he UN is expec ed o se gende equali y no ms and ensu e adhe ence.
Sou ces o legi imacy belie s
As p e iously no ed, he belie s shaping legi imacy e alua ions o IOs can o igina e om di e se
sou ces. Wi hin his sec ion, we del e in o hose mos equen ly e e enced wi hin he IO legi -
imacy, social mo emen s, and in e na ional NGO li e a u e: IO p ocedu e, IO pe o mance, he
audience’s ideology, access o esou ces, and he boome ang e ec .21 The li e a u e gene ally ea s
hese sou ces as dis inc analy ical ca ego ies. In eali y, hey o en o e lap. Fo ins ance, disen-
angling he ideologies o eminis and conse a i e NGOs om hei assessmen s o he UN’s
pe o mance is no always a s aigh o wa d ask, gi en ha hei ideologies ypically in o m hese
assessmen s. This in e sec ion will be appa en in ou empi ical analysis. In his sec ion, howe e ,
we add ess he sou ces o legi imacy belie s as hey a e commonly desc ibed in he li e a u e.
P ocedu e as a sou ce o IO legi imacy belie s
Max Webe was one o he i s o highligh he impo ance o p ocedu e in legi imacy, emphasis-
ing he p ope adminis a ion o ules by au ho i a i e igu es h ough his concep o a ional-legal
au ho i y.22 Nowadays, he concep is gi en enewed impo ance h ough an emphasis on demo-
c a ic p ocedu al s anda ds such as access, ep esen a ion, pa icipa ion, anspa ency, legali y, and
impa iali y. Agains he backg ound o hei ising au ho i y, IOs a e inc easingly expec ed o
uphold hese s anda ds.23 Failing o do so opens he doo o c i ics o ques ion he alidi y o
hei ac ions and decisions, leading o nega i e e alua ions o hei legi imacy. Social mo emen s
c i icising la ge economic IOs o being closed, opaque, and undemoc a ic a e a case in poin .24
The same applies o s a e and non-s a e c i ics who ha e highligh ed he EU’s democ acy de ici o
he UN’s inabili y o accu a ely ep esen global powe dis ibu ion.
21Ma ga e E. Keck and Ka h yn Sikkink, Ac i is s Beyond Bo de s: Ad ocacy Ne wo ks in In e na ional Poli ics (Co nell
Uni e si y P ess, 1998).
22Max Webe , Economy and Socie y (Uni e si y o Cali o nia P ess, 1978 [1922]).
23Ma hew Pa e son, ‘Legi ima ion and accumula ion in clima e change go e nance’, New Poli ical Economy, 15:3
(2010), pp. 345–68; Binde and Heupel, ‘Legi imacy o he UN Secu i y Council’.
24Gab ielle Ma ceau and Ma y Hu ley, ‘T anspa ency and public pa icipa ion in he WTO: A epo ca d on WTO
anspa ency mechanisms’, T ade, Law & De elopmen , 4 (2012), pp. 19–50.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S026021052510137X Published online by Camb idge Uni e si y P ess
Re iew o In e na ional S udies 7
Pe o mance as a sou ce o IO legi imacy belie s
The link be ween pe o mance and legi imacy is a widely ecognised opic in he s udy o domes-
ic poli ical ins i u ions. The p emise is simple: i a go e nmen pe o ms well, i will likely ea n
he us and suppo o i s ci izens, bu i i pe o ms poo ly, i will likely p o oke dis us and
c i icism. Simila ly, i is now widely ecognised ha IOs acqui e a po ion o hei legi imacy by
deli e ing collec i e bene i s o s a es and socie ies. Resea ch on IOs such as he UN, WTO, IMF,
and EU shows ha an IO’s pe cei ed abili y o add ess issues is key o shaping posi i e legi imacy
e alua ions ac oss di e en audiences.25 Social mo emen s p o es ing he mixed esul s o IMF
adjus men p og ammes, and A ican go e nmen s opposing he In e na ional C iminal Cou o
i s high p osecu ion a e o A icans, exempli y he nega i e ela ionship be ween o ganisa ional
pe o mance and legi imacy e alua ions.26
Ideology as a sou ce o IO legi imacy belie s
Liesbe Hooghe and colleagues highligh ha legi imacy belie s can also eme ge om domes ic
con es a ion o IOs, d i en by le is and igh -wing na ionalis ideologies.27 Le is iews a y
depending on he speci ic o ganisa ion and i s policies. Some le is g oups oppose IOs hey
pe cei e as p omo ing capi alis economic policies, such as aus e i y measu es and ee ade ag ee-
men s, which hey a gue ha m wo ke s and he poo . They may also c i icise IOs hey see as se ing
he in e es s o powe ul coun ies and co po a ions. Howe e , some le is g oups suppo IOs ha
p omo e social jus ice, human igh s, and en i onmen al p o ec ion, iewing hem as ins umen s
o ad ancing p og essi e goals and holding powe ul ac o s accoun able.
As o igh -wing and na ionalis g oups, hey ypically challenge IOs because hey belie e in
p omo ing and p o ec ing he in e es s, so e eign y, and independence o hei na ion abo e all
else. They iew IOs as h ea s o he au onomy o hei na ion and as o ces ha limi hei abili y
o decide independen ly on issues such as immig a ion, ade, and secu i y. They ea ha IOs can
dilu e he powe and in luence o indi idual na ions by pooling esou ces and decision-making
au ho i y. In hei iew, he impo an consequence o all hese p ocesses is he e osion o na ional
iden i y and cul u al he i age. Na ionalis s hus equen ly poin o he EU and he UN as IOs
ha in e e e in domes ic ma e s and e ode so e eign y. Many also see NATO as an alliance ha
p essu es na ions in o con lic s ha do no se e hei na ional in e es s.
Sou ces o legi imacy belie s speci ic o NGO pa icipa ion in IOs: Access o esou ces and he
boome ang e ec
Access o IOs alone can se e as a sou ce o IO legi imacy belie s among NGOs. Howe e , he
link be ween access and legi imacy becomes clea e when examining wo key pe spec i es on
NGO–IO ela ionships: he esou ce-based app oach and he boome ang e ec .28 The esou ce-based
app oach o IO–NGO ela ions holds ha NGOs en e IOs o ensu e hei own su i al. By engag-
ing wi h non-s a e ac o s, IOs bene i om NGOs’ policy expe ise, agenda-se ing capabili ies,
policy implemen a ion suppo , and ole in moni o ing ule compliance.29 Fo many NGOs, his
25Klaus A mingeon and Besi Ceka, ‘The loss o us in he Eu opean Union du ing he G ea Recession since 2007:
The ole o heu is ics om he na ional poli ical sys em’, Eu opean Union Poli ics, 15:1 (2014), pp. 82–107; Ecke -Eh ha d ,
‘Cosmopoli an poli iciza ion’; Dellmu h and Tallbe g, ‘Social legi imacy o in e na ional o ganiza ions’.
26Jan Aa Schol e, ‘A mo e inclusi e global go e nance? The IMF and ci il socie y in A ica’, Global Go e nance, 18:2
(2012), pp. 185–206; Kamal M. Cla ke, Abel S. Kno ne us, and Ee je De Volde (eds), A ica and he ICC: Pe cep ions o
Jus ice (Camb idge Uni e si y P ess, 2016).
27Liesbe Hooghe, Tobias Lenz, and Ga y Ma ks, ‘Con es ed wo ld o de : The delegi ima ion o in e na ional go e nance’,
The Re iew o In e na ional O ganiza ions, 14 (2019), pp. 731–43.
28Keck and Sikkink, Ac i is s Beyond Bo de s.
29Jonas Tallbe g, ‘T ansna ional access o in e na ional ins i u ions: Th ee app oaches’, in Ch is e Jönsson and Jonas
Tallbe g (eds), T ansna ional Ac o s in Global Go e nance: Pa e ns, Explana ions and Implica ions (Sp inge , 2010), pp. 45–66;
Jonas Tallbe g, The esa Somme e , Thomas Squa i o, and Ch is e Jönsson, ‘Explaining he ansna ional design o in e na-
ional o ganiza ions’, In e na ional O ganiza ion, 68:4 (2014), pp. 741–74; Jens S e ek, ‘Explaining coope a ion be ween IGOs
and NGOs – push ac o s, pull ac o s, and he policy cycle’, Re iew o In e na ional S udies, 39:4 (2013), pp. 993–1013.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S026021052510137X Published online by Camb idge Uni e si y P ess
8 Jelena Cupać and Tobias Heiden eich
c ea es an oppo uni y o exchange policy expe ise o esou ces ha many need o con inue unc-
ioning. The mo e such esou ces a e a ailable, he mo e posi i ely ce ain NGOs end o e alua e
an IO.
De eloped by Ma ga e Keck and Ka he yn Sikkink, he boome ang e ec s ands as one o he
mos in luen ial app oaches in he s udy o he IO–NGO ela ionship.30 Sociologically a he han
ins umen ally inclined, he logic o he boome ang e ec es s on he speci ic con igu a ion o
domes ic and in e na ional oppo uni y s uc u es. Simply pu , i e e s o a si ua ion in which
an NGO coming om a closed and po en ially ep essi e domes ic a ena mus seek allies a he
in e na ional le el i i wishes o achie e i s aims. This s a egy’s ul ima e goal is o p oduce ex e nal
p essu e on he domes ic a ena, hence he use o he e m boome ang. Fo ce ain NGOs, he
exis ence o his oppo uni y s uc u e will lead o a posi i e e alua ion o an IO.
Based on hese heo e ical p oposi ions, we p oceed o ou empi ical analysis. Fi s , we exam-
ine how eminis , eminis -in o med, and conse a i e NGOs iew he UN’s au ho i y on women’s
igh s and gende equali y. Consis en wi h ou de ini ion o IO legi imacy, we posi ha ecognis-
ing his au ho i y is a i s s ep in shaping hei legi imacy pe cep ions o he UN. In his sec ion,
we mos ly ely on seconda y li e a u e. To explo e unde wha ci cums ances and based on which
legi imacy belie s hese NGOs e alua e he UN mo e posi i ely o mo e nega i ely, we ake wo
addi ional empi ical s eps: one based on au oma ed ex analysis and he o he on quali a i e
examina ion o selec ed ex s.
Feminis and conse a i e NGOs’ pe cep ion o he UN’s au ho i y
Feminis NGOs and he UN’s au ho i y
Feminis s ha e ne e ep esen ed a uni ied ideological bloc a he UN. Acco ding o A a , hey can
be his o ically ca ego ised in o oughly se en b oad g oups.31 Du ing he ea ly Cold Wa , libe al
eminis s p io i ised indi idual igh s and sough gende equali y h ough legal and ins i u ional
e o ms, while Ma xis eminis s opposed his app oach, a guing ha capi alism was he oo o
women’s opp ession. In he 1970s, adical eminis s ca ed ou space o a gue ha pa ia chy was
he p ima y sys em o opp ession, whe eas socialis eminis s linked gende inequali y p ima ily
o class exploi a ion. In he 1980s and 1990s, women o colou and pos colonial eminis s u he
challenged neolibe al policies by connec ing hem o global s uc u es o powe and p i ilege. They
also c i icised mains eam libe al eminism o i s cul u al impe ialism and i s endency o o e look
cul u al di e ences and local con ex s.32 These ideological deba es ul ima ely pa ed he way o
in e sec ional eminism in he 2000s, which analyses opp ession h ough in e connec ed sys ems
o ace, class, gende , and o he social hie a chies.
O e he yea s, each o hese eminis ac o s has le i s ma k on he UN’s gende equal-
i y and women’s igh s no ms and policies. Ye , hei o e a ching amewo k emains la gely
g ounded in libe al eminism – a ecu ing poin o con en ion and c i ique wi hin eminis
ci cles.33 Ne e heless, he his o y o eminism a he UN is one o sus ained engagemen and
meaning ul in luence. Following Wo ld Wa II, eminis s p essu ed s a e delega ions a he UN
o secu e ecogni ion o ‘ he equal igh s o men and women’ in he UN Cha e .34 Fu he mo e, in
1946, hey helped es ablish he Commission on he S a us o Women (CSW), he p ima y UN body
p omo ing gende equali y and women’s empowe men . Du ing he Cold Wa ’s ideological di ide,
30Keck and Sikkink, Ac i is s Beyond Bo de s.
31Zeh an F. K. A a , ‘Feminisms, women’s igh s, and he UN: Would achie ing gende equali y empowe women?’, Ame ican
Poli ical Science Re iew, 109:4 (2015), pp. 674–89 (pp. 676–80).
32Engle, Ka en and Nesiah, Vasuki, and O o, Dianne L., ‘Feminis app oaches o in e na ional law’, U o Texas Law, Public
Law Resea ch Pape , 716 (2021), A ailable a SSRN: h ps://ss n.com/abs ac =3820771 o h p://dx.doi.o g/10.2139/ss n.
3820771.
33A a , ‘Feminisms, women’s igh s, and he UN’.
34Radhika Adami and Dan Plesch, Women and he UN: A New His o y o Women’s In e na ional Human Righ s (Taylo &
F ancis, 2022).
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S026021052510137X Published online by Camb idge Uni e si y P ess
Re iew o In e na ional S udies 15
wo ds om Table 2, we ind sa is ac o y le els o co ela ion on an agg ega ed le el ( =0.77 o
conse a i e NGOs and =0.81 o eminis and eminis -in o med NGOs), ollowing he ali-
da ion p ocedu es implemen ed by ea lie s udies using LSS.51 In he esul s, highe sco es signi y
g ea e posi i e sen imen owa d he UN, while lowe sco es indica e a mo e nega i e pe spec i e.
Example sen ences o each g oup o NGOs a e lis ed in he lowe pa o Table 2.
Analysis. In he ollowing sec ion, we p esen ou analysis in h ee s eps. Fi s , we examine
he UN’s isibili y in he communica ion o eminis , eminis -in o med, and conse a i e NGOs
o e ime. Second, we p esen he sen imen exp essed by hese NGOs owa ds he UN o e ime,
ea ing i as a p oxy o hei legi imacy e alua ions. Thi d, we in e he p ima y sou ces o legi i-
macy belie s unde pinning hese e alua ions. To do so, we iden i y poin s in ime depic ing ce ain
dynamics such as peaks, dips, o speci ic longe -las ing ends, and selec exempla y documen s o
quali a i e inspec ion. In o al, a se o six y documen s was d awn based on he pa icula ime-
ame ( o an o e iew, see Appendix) and dis inc sen imen sco es o single sen ences wi hin he
documen s. Howe e , as many documen s con ain sen ences wi h simila sen imen sco es, ou
selec ion p ocess was u he in luenced by he agg ega ed sen imen sco e a he documen le el.
Addi ionally, we made su e o include documen s c a ed by a ious NGOs o ensu e a ia ion
o sou ces, p e en ing his analy ical s ep om being d i en by a single NGO in ou selec ion.
The e o e, he esul ing collec ion o documen s showcases posi i e and nega i e communica ion
o a di e se se o NGOs owa ds he UN du ing dis inc ime pe iods, communica ion ha is
ins umen al in d i ing he dynamics obse ed in p eceding s eps. The analysis o he selec ed six y
documen s e en ually in ol ed a ho ough eading o each o es ablish wo key aspec s: i s ly, he
cen al subjec o subjec s o each documen , such as he Millennium De elopmen Goals, abo -
ion, o a CSW mee ing; and secondly, which legi imacy belie s in o med he documen ’s posi i e
o nega i e e alua ion o he opic and he UN, whe he i was issues conce ning pe o mance,
p ocedu e, ideology, esou ces, o he boome ang e ec .
Resul s
Visibili y o he UN in eminis , eminis -in o med, and conse a i e NGOs’ communica ion
Examining he mon hly communica ion o eminis , eminis -in o med, and conse a i e NGOs
e eals ha he UN holds no only heo e ical signi icance o hem bu also plays a i al ole in
hei in e ac ions wi h he public. Figu e 2 shows ha o eminis and eminis -in o med NGOs
(dashed line), du ing ce ain mon hs, mo e han hal o he documen s published on hei websi es
ela e o he UN, men ioning i a leas once. Impo an ly, he impo ance g ows ac oss he en i e
ime ame wi h a less s eep inc ease ollowing 2016 and a pla eau-like pa e n ollowing 2020.
In con as , conse a i e NGOs (solid line) a e less conce ned wi h he UN; isibili y emains,
o mos o he ime, a a ound 20 pe cen . A close look e eals ha hey a e o en imes mo e
conce ned wi h na ional issues. Al hough he e is a no iceable spike in a en ion owa d he UN in
2016, possibly in luenced by Donald T ump’s ise o powe , he e is a gene al, g adual decline in
isibili y o e ime. Howe e , conside ing he di e se ange o ac o s and issues in ol ed, he UN
emains a c ucial componen o conse a i e NGOs’ communica ion.
Feminis , eminis -in o med, and conse a i e NGOs’ legi imacy e alua ions o he UN (sen imen
analysis)
The wo g aphs p esen ed in Figu e 3 e eal a clea and compelling end: eminis and eminis -
in o med NGOs, o e he pe iod spanning om 2012 o 2021, on a e age and a e e y poin
in ime, a e mo e posi i e when add essing he UN as compa ed o hei conse a i e coun e -
pa s. We in e p e his o indica e a p e ailing endency among eminis s o ega d he UN as
51Tobias Heiden eich, Oli e Eisele, Kohei Wa anabe, and Hajo G. Boomgaa den, ‘Explo ing engagemen wi h EU news on
Facebook: The in luence o con en cha ac e is ics’, Poli ics and Go e nance, 10:1 (2022), pp. 121–32; Pe e T ubowi z and Kohei
Wa anabe, ‘The geopoli ical h ea index: A ex -based compu a ional app oach o iden i ying o eign h ea s’, In e na ional
S udies Qua e ly, 65:3 (2021), pp. 852–65.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S026021052510137X Published online by Camb idge Uni e si y P ess
16 Jelena Cupać and Tobias Heiden eich
Figu e 2. Visibili y o he UN wi hin eminis and eminis -in o med and conse a i e NGOs’ communica ion o e ime.
No es: Smoo hed ime ends wi h 95 pe cen con idence in e als o he isibili y pe mon h (mean) a e shown. N=120.
Figu e 3. Sen imen exp essed owa ds he UN by eminis , eminis -in o med, and conse a i e NGOs o e ime. No es.
Smoo hed ime ends wi h 95 pe cen con idence in e als o scaled sen ences, whe e he UN is iden i ied as he ‘agen ’
o ‘pa ien ’ wi hin a sen ence, a e shown. Ho izon al lines depic mean sen imen exp essed by he espec i e g oup in hei
o e all communica ion. N=9.754 o conse a i e NGOs, N=13.820 o eminis NGOs.
a mo e legi ima e o ganisa ion han conse a i es do. Howe e , o bo h camps, he sen imen
exp essed owa ds he UN emains below he le el o he mean sen imen hey exp ess in hei
o e all communica ion, as deno ed by he ho izon al lines in bo h g aphs in Figu e 3.
Feminis NGOs, as shown in he le g aph in Figu e 3, a e g adually seeing he UN mo e neg-
a i ely. Exhibi ing a sligh dip in 2015 and a mild peak be ween 2017 and 2018, we obse e a
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S026021052510137X Published online by Camb idge Uni e si y P ess
Re iew o In e na ional S udies 17
somewha s eepe decline in sen imen ollowing 2019. All o hese dynamics desc ibe he pa -
e ns obse ed o hese NGOs as a whole, as we canno see any single NGO d i ing pa icula
dips o peaks (see Figu e A1 in he Appendix).52 Fo conse a i e NGOs, on he o he hand, we
see dis inc ly mo e luc ua ion. While mo e o less s eady un il 2015, he sen imen owa ds he
UN ge s signi ican ly mo e nega i e wi h a clea dip in 2017. As he igh g aph in Figu e 3 shows,
ex s ouching upon UN ma e s ge mo e posi i e a e wa ds wi h a dis inc peak mid-2018, ol-
lowed by a s eep nega i e d i un il he end o he in es iga ed ime pe iod. Fo his g oup o
NGOs, we simila ly looked a he disagg ega ed sco es (see Figu e A2 in he Appendix),53 indica -
ing ha , while o e all dynamics desc ibe pa e ns o mos indi idual NGOs well, he peak in 2017
is pa icula ly d i en by he He i age Founda ion. The ends in he displayed sen imen sco es
aise ques ions abou he sou ces o legi imacy belie s d i ing hese e alua ion pa e ns. In o de
o del e mo e deeply in o his issue, we ocused on he dis inc pe iods men ioned he e. The esul s
o his quali a i e analysis a e epo ed in he ollowing sec ion.
Feminis , eminis -in o med, and conse a i e NGOs’ sou ces o legi imacy belie s
abou he UN
Feminis and eminis -in o med NGOs. In 2015, eminis and eminis -in o med NGOs exhib-
i ed a mino nega i e shi in hei e alua ion o he UN. An examina ion o he documen s hey
eleased du ing ha ime e eals ha his change was p incipally d i en by hei discon en wi h
he UN’s pe o mance, in e p e ed h ough he lens o hei ideology, and p oblems ela ed o he
UN’s p ocedu es, pa icula ly being denied access o signi ican UN o ums.
The dissa is ac ion o hese NGOs wi h he UN’s pe o mance was mainly ocused on he
Millennium De elopmen Goals (MDGs). As he implemen a ion o hese goals was coming o
a close and p epa a ions we e unde way o he Sus ainable De elopmen Goals (SDGs), emi-
nis s’ discon en cen ed on he nume ous unme a ge s. Essen ially, hey we e mo e conce ned
wi h he UN’s inac ion han i s ac ions, wi h some e en labelling he MDGs as a global ailu e ha
led o se en was ed yea s (ID: 5910).54 They pe cei ed he p og ess as sluggish and inconsis en
ac oss a ious coun ies and egions, wi h ma e nal and child mo ali y no ably expe iencing he
leas imp o emen (ID: 851). Consequen ly, hey u ged ha he upcoming SDGs s eng hen he
connec ion be ween de elopmen and human igh s, pa icula ly women’s igh s and sexual and
ep oduc i e heal h and igh s (ID: 333, 5866).
A p ocedu al eason o he nega i e e alua ion o he UN by eminis and eminis -in o med
NGOs in 2015 was hei exclusion om he CSW nego ia ions commemo a ing he wen ie h
anni e sa y o he Beijing Decla a ion (ID: 814, 823, 3576). S a es decided o d a a poli ical dec-
la a ion be o e ci il socie y could con ene in New Yo k (ID: 823). Feminis s ound his exclusion
deeply oubling, gi en hei long his o y wi h he CSW and he ac ha he Beijing Decla a ion,
hei b ainchild and a majo UN success, was a s ake. Thei conce ns we e u he exace ba ed
by he con en o he poli ical decla a ion, which hey saw as weak and ahis o ical (ID: 823). The
decla a ion no only ailed o ecognise he eminis con ibu ion o he Beijing Decla a ion bu
also o e looked essen ial issues such as gende -based iolence, an inclusi e de ini ion o women
and gi ls, and sexual and ep oduc i e heal h and igh s (ID: 823). Feminis s also no ed ha his
de elopmen signi ican ly empowe ed hei opponen s, conse a i e an i- igh s g oups (ID: 823).
In 2017, he e was a sligh imp o emen in he eminis pe cep ion o he UN compa ed o he
p e ious pe iod. This shi was also d i en by hei posi i e e alua ion o he UN’s pe o mance
and p ocedu es, pa icula ly ega ding i s agencies and special ep esen a i es. Acco dingly, he
eminis and eminis -in o med NGOs exp essed app o al o a ious ac ions wi hin he UN, such
52The Appendix is a ailable online.
53The Appendix is a ailable online.
54Examined documen s a e lis ed in he Appendix.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S026021052510137X Published online by Camb idge Uni e si y P ess
18 Jelena Cupać and Tobias Heiden eich
as he Human Righ s Council’s (HRC) decision o ex end he manda e o he Special Rappo eu on
human igh s de ende s (ID: 5060, 5020, 5093), he appoin men o he UN’s i s expe on sexual
o ien a ion and gende iden i y (SOGI) (ID: 5029), he s eng hening o he UN’s ea y bodies,
pa icula ly he one on CEDAW (ID: 4986), UNESCO’s ini ia i es in he ealm o women and
gi l empowe men (ID: 9217), and he second High-Le el Poli ical Fo um (HLPF) holding sexual
and ep oduc i e heal h and igh s in high ega d (ID: 183). Impo an ly, in all hese ins ances,
hese NGOs posi i ely assessed he willingness o he UN’s bu eauc acy and special ep esen a i es
o g an hem access and os e collabo a ion. This, as we will show below, was a sou ce o g ea
i i a ion o conse a i e NGOs.
F om 2020 o 2022, we obse e a s eady down end in he eminis e alua ion o he UN.
Unde s anding his decline equi es no ing he con ex o hose yea s: he COVID pandemic,
wo sening clima e change, and a wo ldwide s eng hening o conse a i e and a - igh g oups.
As be o e, he eminis c i iques o he UN cen ed p ima ily on he o ganisa ion’s p ocedu es and
pe o mance.
Rega ding p ocedu es, he COVID pandemic hinde ed he in-pe son a endance o eminis
and eminis -in o med NGOs a many c ucial UN mee ings. In hei wo ds, hey we e ‘locked ou
du ing lockdown’ (ID: 6283). They obse ed ha , pa icula ly in mee ings ela ed o human igh s,
disa mamen , and peace and secu i y, issues such as a el es ic ions, he global sou h’s uns able
in e ne access, ime zone challenges, and o he simila p oblems all impeded he meaning ul pa -
icipa ion o NGOs in UN p ocesses (ID: 6283, 459). Adding o hei us a ion was he pe cei ed
hypoc isy, whe eby, o example, in 2021, access o he Thi d Commi ee o he Gene al Assembly
was g an ed o membe s a es, UN s a , and esiden jou nalis s bu no o hem (ID: 4190).
Besides ea ing ha he COVID pandemic was being le e aged as a p e ex o ma ginalise ci il
socie y wi hin he UN, eminis s aised conce ns abou how his exclusion e lec ed in he UN’s
pe o mance. The ou come documen s om nume ous mee ings and UN ac ions seemed o pe -
sis en ly o e look o ad ance a weake unde s anding o gende equali y and women’s igh s. A
he same ime, conce ns g ew ha an i- igh s conse a i es we e gaining g ound (ID: 1139), wi h
unding being an impo an a ea o conce n. They obse ed ha , amid he COVID-induced se -
backs in gende equali y and women’s igh s, ‘ eminis unding pales in compa ison o an i- eminis
and an i-LGBT unding’ (ID: 451).
Conse a i e NGOs. In 2017, he conse a i e NGOs’ e alua ion o he UN declined sha ply,
eaching i s lowes poin since 2012. This nega i e e alua ion was based on he UN’s pe o mance,
in e p e ed h ough he lens o hei ideology, as well as p ocedu al ma e s ha unde sco ed
his pe o mance. Rega ding he UN’s pe o mance, conse a i es’ main c i icisms we e aimed
a a ious UN agencies, including he WHO, UNFPA, CCPR, and di e en UN-specialised ep e-
sen a i es. They accused he WHO o p omo ing he use o con acep i es in sub-Saha an A ica
ha inc eased women’s isk o HIV and c i icised UNFPA o suppo ing s e ilisa ion and coe ci e
abo ion, especially in connec ion wi h China’s one-child policy (ID: 15658, 20040). They asse ed
ha UNFPA claims o be a g ea champion o di e si y, bu i is he ‘g ea es des oye o cul-
u es, cus oms, and ai h o de eloping na ions in exis ence oday’ (ID: 29761). Fu he mo e, hey
blamed he WHO o a emp ing o es ablish a cus oma y in e na ional igh o abo ion by pub-
lishing in e ac i e da abases on global laws and policies, a mo e hey saw as an e o o p essu e
s a es o con o m o he ecommenda ions o UN agencies and bu eauc acy (ID: 16009). Rega ding
he CCPR, hey condemned i o p essu ing I eland, wi hou legal g ounds o a clea manda e, o
legalise abo ion (ID: 30798).
He ein also lies hei p ocedu e-based c i ique o he UN agencies. They asse ha hese agen-
cies ac wi hou legal basis conce ning abo ion and ela ed p ac ices. No UN documen , hey
main ain, es ablishes he igh o abo ion, and al hough ph ases such as ‘sexual and ep oduc-
i e heal h and igh s’ a e men ioned in se e al landma k documen s, hey a gue ha hese canno
be used as a su oga e o his igh . To hem, hese ac ions ep esen no me ely an o e each bu
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S026021052510137X Published online by Camb idge Uni e si y P ess
Re iew o In e na ional S udies 19
a malicious and biased expansion o he agencies’ manda es, cons i u ing a clea de ia ion om
wha hey belie e should be he UN’s co e p inciples and esponsibili ies.
In mid-2018, he public communica ion o conse a i e NGOs ega ding he UN became signi -
ican ly mo e posi i e, wi h wo easons s anding ou . The i s is hei a emp o claim ‘owne ship’
o e he Uni e sal Decla a ion o Human Righ s (UDHR) on i s se en ie h anni e sa y (ID: 10158,
11961, 10126). Ins ead o ejec ing he UDHR as a p og essi e and libe al human igh s ins u-
men , conse a i es ha e emb aced i , ye hey sough o ad ance an o iginalis in e p e a ion o
his documen (akin o hei app oach o he US Cons i u ion). Consequen ly, hey u ge he UN
o in e p e he UDHR’s p o isions – such as he igh o li e, he unde s anding o he amily, and
eligious eedoms – in line wi h he conse a i e pe spec i e.
The second eason o he mo e posi i e e alua ion o he UN du ing his pe iod s ems om
he inc easingly ui ul collabo a ion be ween conse a i e NGOs and sympa he ic UN mem-
be s a es, such as he Holy See and s a es belonging o he G oup o F iends o he Family.
Coun e balancing hei con lic s wi h UN agencies and bu eauc acy, conse a i e NGOs a ge ed
hei ad ocacy owa ds UN s a e ac o s. This s a egic ealignmen p o ed success ul in 2018, lead-
ing o s ong opposi ion agains eminis agendas in se e al UN o a (ID: 30209, 31595, 15958,
15961).
Simila o eminis NGOs, he pe iod be ween 2020 and 2022 saw a s eady downwa d end
in conse a i e e alua ions o he UN. Howe e , his decline was much s eepe o conse a i es.
While he COVID-19 pandemic was also a ocal poin o hem, he conce ns o conse a i e NGOs
we e less abou es ic ed access o ci il socie y and mo e abou he UN agencies’ pe o mance
du ing his ime. P ocedu al issues we e s ill pe inen bu closely in e wo en wi h pe o mance-
ela ed c i iques.
The cen al conce n o conse a i e NGOs du ing his pe iod was he way he UN and i s
agencies we e ca ego ising abo ion and sexual and ep oduc i e heal h and igh s as essen ial
heal hca e issues, including hem as pa o hei pandemic- ela ed humani a ian assis ance (ID:
28861, 15832, 19405). They s aunchly a gue ha abo ionis no he same as ood o shel e , wi h one
o ganisa ion asse ing ha he WHO, which should, by i ue o i s name, be p omo ing heal h, has
ins ead become one o he leading o ganisa ions p omo ing ‘ he supp ession o li e’ a he han an
‘openness o li e’ (ID: 28861). The WHO also aced accusa ions o collusion wi h China ega ding
an alleged co e -up o ea ly pandemic wa nings (ID: 26600).
Rega ding p ocedu al c i ique, much like in p e ious pe iods, conse a i es accused UN
agencies o decep i e ac ics. They cha ged hem wi h employing a ‘s acking’ s a egy in hei
humani a ian assis ance packages. Speci ically, hey claimed ha humani a ian aid was made
con ingen on he a ge coun ies’ accep ance o sexual and ep oduc i e heal h and igh s p o i-
sions (ID: 19405). This was seen as a manipula i e app oach, le e aging essen ial aid o p omo e
pa icula alues o policies ha we e no uni e sally accep ed.
Discussion
Besides showing ha eminis and eminis -in o med NGOs on a e age iew he UN mo e posi-
i ely han conse a i e NGOs, ou analysis e ealed ha , o e he pas decade, hese NGOs ha e
e alua ed he UN mos posi i ely when i s pe o mance and p ocedu es esona ed wi h eminis
ideological o ien a ion. In e ms o pe o mance, his mainly ela es o hei app ecia ion o he
UN’s bu eauc acy, agencies, specialised bodies, and special ep esen a i es when p omo ing gen-
de equali y and women’s igh s. On he p ocedu al on , hey unde sco e hese ac o s’ eadiness
o engage in close collabo a ion wi h eminis and eminis -in o med NGOs. Pe o mance and
p ocedu e as sou ces o legi imacy belie ha e also been cen al o hese NGOs’ mos p onounced
nega i e e alua ion o he UN. Pe o mance-wise, hey aul he UN o no adequa ely implemen -
ing gende equali y and women’s igh s commi men s and o en o e looking hese conce ns in i s
c i ical human igh s and de elopmen al policies. In he las decade, his c i icism has been espe-
cially p onounced in ela ion o he UN’s app oach o MDGs and i s COVID esponses. On he
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S026021052510137X Published online by Camb idge Uni e si y P ess
20 Jelena Cupać and Tobias Heiden eich
p ocedu al on , hei p ima y g ie ance is hei exclusion om key UN o a, which, hey a gue,
does no jus cu ail hei ad ocacy e o s bu also weakens he UN’s anspa ency and accoun abil-
i y. They no e ha his sidelining has coincided wi h a ise in conse a i e oices. While eminis
and eminis -in o med NGOs, in p inciple, suppo di e se ci il sec o ep esen a ion in he UN,
hey iew he g owing in luence o conse a i e NGOs as a ba ie o hei goals, leading o a
mo e nega i e e alua ion o he UN. Ins umen al conce ns abou esou ce a ailabili y ha e also
in luenced hei c i icism du ing he s udied pe iod. This c i icism oo is linked o he ise o con-
se a i e NGOs, pe cei ed o ha e signi ican ly g ea e access o unding. We ound no e idence
o he boome ang e ec – an ins ance whe e engagemen wi h he UN is explici ly connec ed o
speci ic ep essi e con ex s a ec ing local eminis ac i is s – playing a ole in eminis s’ posi i e
o nega i e e alua ion o he UN.
Conse a i e NGOs e alua ed he UN mos posi i ely when ad ancing he ‘o iginalis ’ in e -
p e a ion o i s ounda ional ex s, mos p ominen ly he UDHR. This canno s ic ly be ela ed o
any o he sou ces o legi imacy belie s we lis ed, poin ing o a possible sou ce o legi imacy belie s
ha IO li e a u e o e looks: one gained h ough asse ing owne ship o e an IO’s no ma i e ou -
pu s. While eminis s can claim such owne ship due o hei pi o al ole in shaping he UN’s key
documen s and eel snubbed when his con ibu ion is igno ed, conse a i es lack such a his o i-
cal claim. Ins ead, hey posi ion hemsel es as gua dians o he o iginal in e p e a ions o he UN’s
landma k human igh s documen s. The conse a i e NGOs’ mo e posi i e e alua ion o he UN is
u he linked o p ocedu al elemen s, such as hei alliance wi h conse a i e s a es, which g an s
hem access o and in luence o e UN decisions and pe o mance. P ocedu al and pe o ma i e
issues, oo ed in igid ideological s andpoin s, eme ge as he main d i e s behind conse a i e
NGOs’ mos poin ed c i iques o he UN. Con a y o eminis and eminis -in o med NGOs, con-
se a i e NGOs iew he UN wi h pa icula disdain when i s bu eauc acy, agencies, and special
ep esen a i es champion p og essi e iews, no ably on issues like abo ion, sexual o ien a ion and
gende iden i y, and sexual and ep oduc i e heal h and igh s. While hei c i icisms a e based on
pe o mance, hey also ca y signi ican p ocedu al ese a ions. Ye , unlike eminis s, hei p oce-
du al conce ns a e no p edominan ly abou pa icipa ion, anspa ency, o accoun abili y, hough
hese ma e s a e no i ial o hem. Ins ead, hey p ima ily c i icise UN ac o s o maliciously and
decep i ely o e s epping hei manda es and de ia ing om he UN’s ounda ional p inciples. A
pa icula ly salien c i icism accuses hese ac o s o coe cing de eloping na ions in o emb acing
p og essi e objec i es.
Conclusion
Employing a mixed-me hod app oach and making a concep ual dis inc ion be ween sou ces o
legi imacy belie s and legi imacy e alua ions, he pape has explo ed unde wha ci cums ances
and holding which legi imacy belie s eminis and eminis -in o med NGOs, and conse a i e
NGOs, a e mos inclined o e alua e he UN posi i ely o nega i ely. The s udy was compa a i e in
na u e: i aimed o examine how eminis and conse a i e NGOs pe cei e and engage wi h he UN
while con on ing each o he . As such, we aimed o p o ide a possible no el app oach o s udying
IO legi imacy in he con ex o he ongoing illibe al backlash. Cu en li e a u e o en cas s illibe al
ac ions as he main challenge s o he libe al in e na ional o de . Howe e , ou indings indica e
ha while eminis s gene ally iew he UN mo e posi i ely han conse a i es, he p esence and
in luence o conse a i e NGOs p omp hem o also gi e a less posi i e e alua ion, hough no ye
amoun ing o ou igh con es a ion. Con e sely, conse a i e NGOs a e no me ely con es ing he
UN bu also s i ing o claim owne ship o e i and i s no ma i e amewo k. While hey ejec
he libe al no ma i e amewo k, hey none heless main ain a commi men o he UN i sel . We
belie e his compa a i e and ela ional insigh , which challenges black and whi e po ayals o lib-
e al and illibe al ac ions, could se e as a ounda ion o u he esea ch in o illibe al challenges
o he libe al in e na ional o de .
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S026021052510137X Published online by Camb idge Uni e si y P ess
Re iew o In e na ional S udies 21
An impo an ques ion o bo h u u e esea ch and p ac ice is: Wha does his mean o he
UN and i s abili y o exe cise au ho i y on gende equali y and women’s igh s? The UN has o ind
a way o dealing wi h an ideological spli ha is becoming inc easingly clea e . Feminis NGOs a e
becoming mo e ocal in hei calls o he UN o ake conc e e ac ions ha would suppo and
encou age eminis engagemen . They also ad oca e o he UN o ac i ely comba conse a i e
a acks a he han allowing hem o go unchallenged o ecognised as legi ima e ci il socie y pa -
icipan s. The p ima y a ge s o hese calls a e he UN bu eauc acy, a ious UN manda e holde s,
and he s a es known o hei p og essi e ou look – he e y agen s conse a i e NGOs associa e
wi h hei nega i e e alua ion o he UN. The consequence o his spli is g owing dis us in he
UN on bo h he eminis and conse a i e sides and a diminishing o e all legi imacy o he o gani-
sa ion, which hampe s i s capaci y o es ablish new ules and no ms ega ding gende equali y and
women’s igh s and o en o ce hose p e iously adop ed. I emains o be seen and subjec o u -
he esea ch wha measu es, i any, he UN can unde ake o bols e i s legi imacy in his domain
while a oiding being accused o silencing he di e si y o oices ha i o icially suppo s.
Appendix
Dic iona y UN ac o s55
uni ed na ion, un, unhq, secu i y council, unsc, sc, p5, gene al assembly, unga, ga, i s commi ee, second commi ee, hi d
commi ee, human igh s commi ee, ou h commi ee, i h commi ee, six h commi ee, 1s commi ee, 2nd commi ee, 3 d
commi ee, 4 h commi ee, 5 h commi ee, 6 h commi ee, depa men o economic and social a ai s, desa, sec e a y gene al,
sec gen, unsg, sg, usg, special en oy, sesg, economic and social council, ecosoc, commission on he s a us o women, csw, ou h
wo ld con e ence on women, beijing con e ence, beijing decla a ion, pla o m o ac ion, beijing p a, p a?, beijing commi ee,
beijing20, beijing +20, bejing25, beijing +25, beijing +25, you h o um, commi ee on he elimina ion o disc imina ion
agains women, cedaw, en i y o gende equali y and he empowe men o women, uni em, ci il socie y ad iso y, csag, us
und, us und o end iolence agains women, women asia and he paci ic, women o ice, in e na ional esea ch and ain-
ing ins i u e o he ad ancemen o women, in e na ional esea ch and aining ins i u e, ins aw, lgb qi +co e, commission
o social de elopmen , csocd, commission on social de elopmen , economic and social commission, escap, economic com-
mission, ece, unece, non-go e nmen al liaison se ice, ngls, commi ee on non-go e nmen al o ganiza ions, commi ee on
ngo, ngo commi ee, human igh s council, human igh council, council o human igh s, unh c, h c, human igh s mech-
anisms, commission on human igh s, unch , ch , human igh s commission, o ice o he high commissione o human
igh s, ohch , human igh s o ice, high commission, wo king g oup on a bi a y de en ion, wgad, wo king g oup on busi-
ness and human igh s, wgbh , commi ee on he elimina ion o acial disc imina ion, ce d, commi ee on economic, social
and cul u al igh s, cesc , commi ee on he p o ec ion o he igh s o all mig an wo ke s and membe s o hei amilies,
cmw, commi ee on he igh s o he child, child igh s commi ee, c c, special appo eu , human igh s commi ee, com-
mi ee on human igh s, high commissione o e ugees, e ugee agency, unhc , in e na ional o gani(z|s)a ion o mig a ion,
iom, elie and wo ks agency o pales ine e ugees in he nea eas , un wa, unice , child en und, wo ld heal h o ganiza ion,
wo ld heal h o ganisa ion, wo ld heal h assembly, p og amme on hi and aids, p og am on hi and aids, unaids, hi /aids
agency, ood and ag icul u e o gani(z|s)a ion, ao, in e na ional labo o gani(z|s)a ion, ilo, wo ld ood p og am, w p, ood sys-
em summi , indus ial de elopmen o ganiza ion, unido, wo ld uism o gani(z|s)a ion, unw o, popula ion und, un pa, pa,
popula ion (agency|g oup|uni ), popula ion con ol agency, popula ion con ol o gani(z|s)a ion, und o popula ion, amily
planning und, ep oduc i e heal h und, icpd +20, ma e nal and newbo n heal h hema ic und, ma e nal heal h und, mh ,
in e na ional con e ence on popula ion and de elopmen , icpd, cai o in e na ional con e ence, cai o +20, icpd, popula ion
di ision, commission on popula ion and de elopmen , cpd, popula ion and de elopmen commission, popula ion in o ma-
ion ne wo k, popin, undp, de elopmen p og am, de elopmen ( und|agenda|sys em|pa ne ), con e ence on en i onmen
and de elopmen , unced, io de janei o ea h summi , io summi , io con e ence, ea h summi , wo ld summi on sus ain-
able de elopmen , io +, con e ence on sus ainable de elopmen , uncsd, ea h summi 2012, sus ainable de elopmen g oup,
unsdg, undg, human de elopmen index, hdi, de elopmen coope a ion o um, dc , sus ainable de elopmen g oup, de elop-
men g oup, in e na ional und o ag icul u al de elopmen , ida , millennium summi , millennium decla a ion, millennium
de elopmen goals, mdg, sus ainable de elopmen goals, sdgs, agenda 2030, wo ld summi , *educa ional, scien i ic and cul u al
o ganiza ion, unesco, s a is ical commission, unsd, s a is ics di ision, unda a, unu, esea ch ins i u e o social de elopmen ,
un isd, in e egional c ime and jus ice esea ch ins i u e, unic i, human se lemen p og am, habi a assembly, * ax commi -
ee, in e na ional ci il se ice commission, icsc, depa men o public in o ma ion, dpi, uni ed na ions uni e sal pe iodic
e iew, un uni e sal pe iodic e iew, uni e sal pe iodic e iew, up , ocha, humani a ian ai se ice, peacekeeping o ces,
55Dic iona y compiled using egex, accoun ing o a ious al e na ing o ms o keywo ds. No all de ails a e lis ed he e o
enhance eadabili y. Sc ip s a e a ailable upon eques and will be published alongside he manusc ip .
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S026021052510137X Published online by Camb idge Uni e si y P ess
22 Jelena Cupać and Tobias Heiden eich
appeals ibunal, una , in e na ional law commission, law commission, ilc, us eeship council, in e go e nmen al commi -
ee o expe s on sus ainable de elopmen inancing, in e go e nmen al commi ee, economic commission o la in ame ica
and he ca ibbean, uneclac, eclac, o ice a gene a, unog, in e na ional c iminal cou , icc, icc , in e na ional c iminal ibunal,
ic , ic y, disa mamen commission, undc, you h assembly, o ice on d ugs and c ime, unodc, en i onmen p og amme, unep,
in e na ional ci il a ia ion o ganiza ion, icao, in e go e nmen al panel on clima e change, ipcc, con en ion on he igh s o
pe sons wi h disabili ies, c pd, uni ed na ions con en ion on he igh s o he child, unc c, c c, uni ed na ions amewo k con-
en ion on clima e change, un ccc, gene a con en ion, uni e sal decla a ion o human igh s, cha e o he uni ed na ions,
#cha e , in e na ional con en ion on he elimina ion o all o ms o acial disc imina ion, esolu ion 1325, s anda d minimum
ules o he ea men o p isone s, sm s
Figu e A1. A e age sen imen o e ime o eminis NGOs.
Figu e A2. A e age sen imen o e ime o conse a i e NGOs.
ID: 183. ARROW (1 Augus 2017). ‘Taking s ock o gains and losses – hough s om he 2017 high-le el poli ical o um
(HLPF)’. Re ie ed om h ps://a ow.o g.my/ aking-s ock-gains-losses- hough s-2017-high-le el-poli ical- o um-hlp /
ID: 333. ARROW (24 June 2015). ‘Sachini o ARROW a he 6 h IGN a he Uni ed Na ions’. Re ie ed om h ps://a ow.
o g.my/a ow-sachini-ign-june/
ID: 357. ARROW (22 Sep embe 2014). ‘Si a o ARROW a he Special Session o he UN Gene al Assembly on ICPD
Beyond 2014’. Re ie ed om h ps://a ow.o g.my/a ow-si a-ungass-icpd-special-e en /
ID: 451. AWID (15 Decembe 2020). ‘Whe e is he money o eminis o ganising? New analysis inds ha he answe is
ala ming’. Re ie ed om h ps://www.awid.o g//news-and-analysis/whe e-money- eminis -o ganising-new-analysis- inds-
answe -ala ming
ID: 459. AWID (14 Oc obe 2020). ‘We demand g ea e anspa ency and accoun abili y om he Human Righ s
Council’. Re ie ed om h ps://www.awid.o g//news-and-analysis/we-demand-g ea e - anspa ency-and-accoun abili y-
human- igh s-council
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S026021052510137X Published online by Camb idge Uni e si y P ess
Re iew o In e na ional S udies 23
ID: 564. AWID (18 Sep embe 2017). ‘Raising women’s oices: Recommenda ions o he Eu opean Commission
& Uni ed Na ions’. Re ie ed om h ps://www.awid.o g//news-and-analysis/ aising-womens- oices- ecommenda ions-
eu opean-commission-uni ed-na ions
ID: 814. AWID (19 Ap il 2015). ‘Challenging he powe o he one pe cen ’. Re ie ed om h ps://www.awid.o g//news-
and-analysis/challenging-powe -one-pe cen
ID: 823. AWID (20 Ma ch 2015). ‘CSW 59 – Beijing be ayed’. Re ie ed om h ps://www.awid.o g//news-and-analysis/
csw-59-beijing-be ayed
ID: 851. AWID (3 Oc obe 2014). ‘Con lic , po e y and clima e change emain challenges o achie ing he MDGs In
I o y Coas , should be p io i ies pos 2015’. Re ie ed om h ps://www.awid.o g//news-and-analysis/con lic -po e y-and-
clima e-change- emain-challenges-achie ing-mdgs-i o y-coas
ID: 1139. AWID (15 June 2021). ‘Time o ac ion: S op he an i- igh s in il a ion o he UN!’. Re ie ed om h ps://www.
awid.o g//publica ions/ ime-ac ion-s op-an i- igh s-in il a ion-un
ID: 1418. CARE (13 No embe 2021). ‘No b eak h ough in Glasgow: De eloped coun ies do no ake esponsibil-
i y o damage done’. Re ie ed om h ps://www.ca e-in e na ional.o g/news/p ess- eleases/no-b eak h ough-in-glasgow-
de eloped-coun ies-do-no - ake- esponsibili y- o -damage-done-1
ID: 1492. CARE (3 Ma ch 2021). ‘CARE epo e eals UN and weal hy na ions’ lack o unding o women in eme gencies’.
Re ie ed om h ps://www.ca e-in e na ional.o g/news/p ess- eleases/ca e- epo - e eals-un-and-weal hy-na ions-lack-o -
unding- o -women-in-eme gencies
ID: 1556. CARE (12 July 2020). ‘UN Secu i y Council o u he es ic humani a ian access o no h-
wes Sy ia’. Re ie ed om h ps://www.ca e-in e na ional.o g/news/p ess- eleases/un-secu i y-council- o- u he - es ic -
humani a ian-access- o-no hwes -sy ia
ID: 2000. CARE (11 Ma ch 2015). ‘JAPAN UN wo ld con e ence on disas e isk educ ion’. Re ie ed om h ps://www.
ca e-in e na ional.o g/news/p ess- eleases/japan-un-wo ld-con e ence-on-disas e - isk- educ ion.
ID: 3576. DAWN (12 Ma ch 2015). ‘CSW59 news elease: Women’s oices shu ou o UN poli ical decla a ion on
women’s igh s’. Re ie ed om h ps://dawnne .o g/2015/03/csw59-news- elease-womens- oices-shu -ou -o -un-poli ical-
decla a ion-on-womens- igh s/
ID: 4190. ISHR (7 Oc obe 2021). ‘UNmu e ci il socie y say 61 s a es a he UN Thi d Commi ee’. Re ie ed om h ps://
ish .ch/la es -upda es/unmu e-ci il-socie y-say-61-s a es-a - he-un- hi d-commi ee/
ID: 4388. ISHR (5 Oc obe 2020). ‘Déjà u all o e again a he Human Righ s Council’. Re ie ed om h ps://ish .ch/
la es -upda es/deja- u-all-o e -again-human- igh s-council/
ID: 4454. ISHR (3 May 2020). ‘Rep isals | UN and S a es can and mus do mo e o p e en and add ess ep isals’. Re ie ed
om h ps://ish .ch/la es -upda es/ ep isals-un-and-s a es-can-and-mus -do-mo e-p e en -and-add ess- ep isals-0/
ID: 4986. ISHR (5 Sep embe 2017). ‘Make no mis ake | The dos and don’ s o ea y body s eng hening’. Re ie ed om
h ps://ish .ch/la es -upda es/make-no-mis ake-dos-and-don s- ea y-body-s eng hening/
ID: 5020. ISHR (12 June 2017). ‘HRC35 | UN expe s on business and human igh s o de elop guidance on
suppo ing de ende s’. Re ie ed om h ps://ish .ch/la es -upda es/h c35-un-expe s-business-and-human- igh s-de elop-
guidance-suppo ing-de ende s/
ID: 5029. ISHR (29 May 2017). ‘LGBT igh s | UN expe ’s i s epo calls o global e o s o ensu e uni e sal applica ion
o human igh s’. Re ie ed om h ps://ish .ch/la es -upda es/lgb - igh s-un-expe s- i s - epo -calls-global-e o s-ensu e-
uni e sal-applica ion-human/
ID: 5060. ISHR (27 Ma ch 2017). ‘HRC34 | Ci il socie y p esen s key akeaways om Human Righ s Council’. Re ie ed
om h ps://ish .ch/la es -upda es/h c34-ci il-socie y-p esen s-key- akeaways-human- igh s-council/.
ID: 5093. ISHR (15 Feb ua y 2017). ‘Co po a e accoun abili y | UN ju isp udence a key ool o p o ec ing human
igh s de ende s om business- ela ed abuses’. Re ie ed om h ps://ish .ch/la es -upda es/co po a e-accoun abili y-un-
ju isp udence-key- ool-p o ec ing-human- igh s-de ende s-business/
ID: 5815. Plan In e na ional (7 July 2017). ‘Be e aid and solu ions o e ugees’. Re ie ed om h ps://plan-in e na ional.
o g/blog/2017/07/be e -aid-and-solu ions- e ugees
ID: 5866. Plan In e na ional (15 June 2015). ‘We canno use old indica o s o measu e new ideas in SDGs’. Re ie ed om
h ps://plan-in e na ional.o g/blog/2015/07/we-canno -use-old-indica o s-measu e-new-ideas-sdgs
ID: 5910. Plan In e na ional (9 July 2014). ‘Educa ion o all: P omises a e no enough’. Re ie ed om h ps://plan-
in e na ional.o g/blog/2015/05/educa ion-all-p omises-a e-no -enough
ID: 6283. WILPF (28 Sep embe 2020). ‘P ess elease: New analysis o UN sys ems du ing COVID-19 e eals dys unc-
ion, calls o immedia e ac ion’. Re ie ed om h ps://www.wilp .o g/wilp - eleases-an-analysis-o - he-un-sys em-du ing-
co id-19/
ID: 6408. WILPF (6 Ma ch 2015). ‘Demanding a Special Rappo eu on clima e change’. Re ie ed om h ps://www.wilp .
o g/wilp -ad ocacy-documen s/39/
ID: 8064. Eu opean Women’s Lobby (3 Feb ua y 2017). ‘Eu opean In es men Bank mo es o suppo women’s igh s:
Towa ds a s uc u al shi ?’. Re ie ed om h ps://womenlobby.o g/Eu opean-In es men -Bank-mo es- o-suppo -women-
s- igh s-Towa ds-a-s uc u al
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S026021052510137X Published online by Camb idge Uni e si y P ess
24 Jelena Cupać and Tobias Heiden eich
ID: 9217. Eu opean Women’s Lobby (23 Augus 2017). ‘UNESCO con e ence in Pa is: Fos e ing women’s empowe men
and leade ship’. Re ie ed om h ps://womenlobby.o g/UNESCO-Con e ence-in-Pa is-Fos e ing-Women-s-Empowe men -
and-Leade ship
ID: 10126. Alliance De ending F eedom (28 No embe 2018). ‘UN e en o commemo a e 70 h anni e sa y
o human igh s decla a ion’. Re ie ed om h ps://ad legal.o g/p ess- elease/un-e en -commemo a e-70 h-anni e sa y-
human- igh s-decla a ion
ID: 10158. Alliance De ending F eedom (14 Sep embe 2018). ‘I’m human, igh ? In ’l campaign commemo a ing 70 h
anni e sa y o human igh s decla a ion’. Re ie ed om h ps://ad legal.o g/p ess- elease/im-human- igh -in l-campaign-
commemo a ing-70 h-anni e sa y-human- igh s-decla a ion
ID: 15658. C-Fam (13 Ap il 2017). ‘WHO s ill pushing dange ous con acep i e on A ican women a isk’. Re ie ed om
h ps://c- am.o g/ iday_ ax/s ill-pushing-dange ous-con acep i e-a ican-women- isk/
ID: 15679. C-Fam (11 Augus 2016). ‘Did WHO co e up e idence o con acep i e–HIV link?’. Re ie ed om h ps://c-
am.o g/ iday_ ax/co e -e idence-con acep i e-hi -link/
ID: 15779. C-Fam (2 July 2021). ‘U.S. and o he dono s pledge billions a UN e en o p omo e abo ion and adical em-
inis policies’. Re ie ed om h ps://c- am.o g/ iday_ ax/u-s-and-o he -dono s-pledge-billions-a -un-e en - o-p omo e-
abo ion-and- adical- eminis -policies/
ID: 15832. C-Fam (18 June 2020). ‘Wa con inues be ween U.S. and UN o e abo ion p omo ion in COVID esponse’.
Re ie ed om h ps://c- am.o g/ iday_ ax/wa -con inues-be ween-u-s-and-un-o e -abo ion-p omo ion-in-co id-
esponse
ID: 15921. C-Fam (29 No embe 2018). ‘Will he T ump adminis a ion s op humani a ian abo ion?’. Re ie ed om
h ps://c- am.o g/ iday_ ax/will- ump-adminis a ion-s op-humani a ian-abo ion/
ID: 15958. C-Fam (19 Ap il 2018). ‘Edi o ial: Is i ime o UN eminis s o pack i in?’. Re ie ed om h ps://c- am.o g/
iday_ ax/edi o ial- ime-un- eminis s-pack/
ID: 15961. C-Fam (13 Ap il 2018). ‘UN e en highligh s challenges, hopes o amilies in mig a ion and u baniza ion’.
Re ie ed om h ps://c- am.o g/ iday_ ax/un-e en -highligh s-challenges-hopes- amilies-mig a ion-u baniza ion/
ID: 15967. C-Fam (22 Ma ch 2018). ‘UN panel condemns “p ena al genocide” o child en wi h Down synd ome’. Re ie ed
om h ps://c- am.o g/ iday_ ax/un-panel-condemns-p ena al-genocide-o -child en-wi h-down-synd ome/
ID: 16009. C-Fam (29 June 2017). ‘New UN da abase p essu es coun ies on abo ion’. Re ie ed om h ps://c- am.o g/
iday_ ax/new-un-da abase-p essu es-coun ies-abo ion-2/
ID: 16027. C-Fam (23 Feb ua y 2017). ‘UN ies o as - ack LGBT accep ance and abo ion access, again’. Re ie ed om
h ps://c- am.o g/ iday_ ax/un- ies- as - ack-lgb -accep ance-abo ion-access/
ID: 16144. C-Fam (14 Feb ua y 2020). ‘P o-abo ion “independen ” UN commi ee lobbies Gene al Assembly o mo e
powe ’. Re ie ed om h ps://c- am.o g/ iday_ ax/p o-abo ion-independen -un-commi ee-lobbies-gene al-assembly- o -
mo e-powe /
ID: 16277. C-Fam (8 Feb ua y 2018). ‘Opinion: Who will igh o he amily a he UN?’. Re ie ed om h ps://c- am.
o g/ iday_ ax/opinion-will- igh - amily-un/
ID: 18278. Ci izen Go (20 Augus 2020). ‘S op he UN om disman ling eligious eedom’. Re ie ed om h ps://
ci izengo.o g/en-au/ /181702-s op-un-disman ling- eligious- eedom
ID: 19405. Family Resea ch Council (20 May 2020). ‘USAID ells UN ha abo ion is no “humani a ian aid”’. Re ie ed
om h ps://www. c.o g/blog/2020/05/usaid- ells-un-abo ion-no -humani a ian-aid
ID: 20040. Family Resea ch Council (20 Decembe 2016). ‘Ac ion #2 – De und UNFPA’. Re ie ed om h ps://www. c.
o g/blog/2016/12/ac ion-2-de und-un pa
ID: 26600. Family Resea ch Council (15 Ap il 2020). ‘Who’s WHO in he co ona i us co e -up’. Re ie ed om h p://
www. c.o g/upda ea icle/20200415/co ona i us-co e up
ID: 27016. Family Wa ch In e na ional (19 No embe 2020). ‘Ale : P o-li e Gene a Decla a ion unde a ack!’. Re ie ed
om h ps:// amilywa ch.o g/newsle e -a chi e/ale -p o-li e-gene a-decla a ion-unde -a ack/
ID: 27020. Family Wa ch In e na ional (7 Oc obe 2020). ‘Religious eedoms and amilies unde a ack a he UN. Join he
campaign o s op his assaul !’. Re ie ed om h ps:// amilywa ch.o g/newsle e -a chi e/ eligious- eedoms-and- amilies-
unde -a ack-a - he-un-join- he-campaign- o-s op- his-assaul /
ID: 27059. Family Wa ch In e na ional (19 Ma ch 2018). ‘Family Wa ch and pa ne s demand UNICEF s op sexualiz-
ing child en’. Re ie ed om h ps:// amilywa ch.o g/ esou ces/newsle e / amily-wa ch-and-pa ne s-demand-unice -s op-
sexualizing-child en/
ID: 28861. Human Li e In e na ional (7 June 2020). ‘T ump admin igh s UN, WHO e o s o use COVID-19
o sp ead abo ion’. Re ie ed om h ps://www.hli.o g/2020/06/ ump-admin- igh s-un-who-e o s- o-use-co id-19- o-
sp ead-abo ion/
ID: 29167. Human Li e In e na ional (17 Ma ch 2017). ‘HLI esponds o a ack on p o- amily g oups’. Re ie ed om
h ps://www.hli.o g/2017/03/hli-s a emen -lgb -a ack-p o- amily-g oups/
ID: 29761. Human Li e In e na ional (16 Ap il 2017). ‘P o ile: The Uni ed Na ions popula ion und’. Re ie ed om h ps://
www.hli.o g/ esou ces/p o ile-uni ed-na ions-popula ion- und/
h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S026021052510137X Published online by Camb idge Uni e si y P ess
