Organizational Sets, Populations and Fields: Evolving Board Interlocks and Environmental NGOs (original) (raw)
2000, SSRN Electronic Journal
Related papers
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 2020
What predicts the formation and evolution of partnerships in unstable institutional contexts? We answer this question by examining the partnership field of environmental nonprofit organizations based in Lebanon. Employing descriptive and inferential network methods, we find organizational attributes such as scope, operations, and age to be significant predictors of partnership formation. In particular, organizations working in the same issue areas are more likely to partner with each other; age and scope complementarity also drives the partnership formation over time. Furthermore, the results reveal that organizations are more likely to form partnerships with their partners' partners, and consequently stable clusters or subgroups emerge over time. These findings are suggestive but are the first to provide a multilevel analysis of nonprofit partnership formation and evolution.
Organizational Ecology and Institutional Change in Global Governance
Abstract: The institutions of global governance have changed dramatically in recent years. New organizational forms—including informal institutions, transgovernmental networks, and private transnational regulatory organizations (PTROs)—have expanded rapidly, while the growth of formal intergovernmental organizations has slowed. Organizational ecology provides an insightful framework for understanding these changing patterns of growth. Organizational ecology is primarily a structural theory, emphasizing the influence of institutional environments, especially their organizational density and resource availability, on organizational behavior and viability. To demonstrate the explanatory value of organizational ecology, we analyze the proliferation of PTROs compared with the relative stasis of intergovernmental organizations (IGOs). Continued growth of IGOs is constrained by crowding in their dense institutional environment, but PTROs benefit from organizational flexibility and low entry costs, which allow them to enter “niches” with limited resource competition. We probe the plausibility of our analysis by examining contemporary climate governance.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.