email icon Email this citation


NGO use of Computer-Mediated Communication: Opening New Spaces of Political Representation?

Jayne Rodgers

International Studies Association
March 1998

Introduction

Analysis of the impact of computer-mediated communication (CMC) 1 is now common in the social sciences and is increasingly being undertaken by political theorists. Its significance for social and political theorizing is evident; the dynamics of contemporary life have been profoundly influenced by CMC's permeation of social, cultural and, most conspicuously, economic spheres. That CMC is altering the material conditions of human existence, even for people who have little or no direct access to these technologies (see: Kitchin 1998; McChesney 1997) is virtually incontestable. Whether changes wrought by CMC provide any new forms of access to political processes is an important area of enquiry, however, which this paper seeks to address.

The paper has two key aims. It first briefly outlines some of the spatial theories which are gaining currency in IR/IPE research, with the aim of applying these as an ontological framework for analysis of non-governmental organizations (NGO) use of CMC. Examination of the nature of political practice as conceived by NGOs in the international arena, and in particular their perceptions of how CMC can be of benefit to them, is then undertaken. 2 Thus, underpinning analysis of changing practices in international affairs is a methodological approach which suggests that political activity can, and should, be understood and interpreted outside of the frameworks offered by the extant discourse(s) of IR/IPE. This approach connects with a growing body of thought in the field which finds that traditional perceptions of space in the discipline provide an inadequate interpretative framework for contemporary political practice (see, for example: Agnew 1994; Murphy 1996; Rosow et al 1994; Walker 1991, 1993; Youngs 1996). The paper draws upon the writings of Lefebvre and Soja to produce a format through which analysis of NGO use of CMC is pursued. 3

Spatial Theory

Henri Lefebvre argued that the ways we perceive space are neither accidental nor incidental: “the spatialization of society and history are ideological; (it) belongs to the realm of conceived and not lived space” (1996: 48). That is, our conceptions of space both define and situate agents and actions conceived to be of significance, to the exclusion of others. Though the writings of Lefebvre were often rather abstruse, he elucidated some key notions about space. This paper condenses Lefebvre's tripartite conceptualisation of space: spatial practice, representations of space and the spaces of representation (see: ibid.; Soja 1989, 1996). These three elements of spatial process are closely inter-related: though distinguishable from each other in form, the nature of each is critically influential on the others.

Spatial practice relates to the ways in which societies are organized, both by the material environment, and through the social behaviours of people within them. As Soja puts it:

“Spatial practice, as the process of producing the material form of social spatiality, is (thus) presented as both medium and outcome of human activity” (ibid.: 66).

That is, spatial practice encompasses the relations between people, their environment, their modes of interaction, and the nature of the work, leisure, social and political opportunities and so on available to them. As a consequence, spatial practices differ from society to society, and to greater or lesser degrees from person to person.

Representations of space relate to conceptualized spaces which, for Lefebvre constitute control over knowledge, signs and codes. The ways societies represent space are articulated in dominant discourses and theories, through the lexicons of academic disciplines, through accepted codes of social behaviour and so on. Representations of space effectively define our perceptions of ourselves and the world(s) we inhabit. Consequently, for Lefebvre, representations of space are “the dominant space in any society” (cited Soja 1996: 67), and for Soja they constitute “a storehouse of epistemological power” (ibid.) For these reasons, representations of space are obviously an important tool of hegemony, authority and control and to a significant extent form the structural component of spatial theory.

Spaces of representation, on the other hand, equate most closely with concepts of agency and particularly with social practices of resistance, of struggle and of opposition to dominant values. The suggestion here is that spaces of representation are the lived spaces of human action, both distinct from the other two spaces and encompassing them (ibid.) In essence, individuals exist within and through spatial practice, and are constrained within representations of space. The social and political choices we make in relation to these real and metaphoric demarcations constitute our own spaces of representation. Originally associated by Lefebvre with artists, writers and philosophers seeking to describe the worlds we inhabit, the notion of spaces of representation has been developed by Soja under his 'thirdspace' designation. As 'thirdspace', he describes this aspect of social practice as:

“the terrain for a generation of “counterspaces”, spaces of resistance to the dominant order arising precisely from their subordinate, peripheral or marginalized position” (ibid.: 68).

Though Soja, and to a lesser extent Lefebvre, emphasise struggles against power and authority within this aspect of social life, in many senses all human action involves negotiating our own spaces of representation.

Space in IR/IPE

Perhaps of all academic disciplines, IR/IPE has the most potent, and the least analysed, conceptualizations of space. Walker has argued that modern theories of IR depend upon a discourse “that systematically reifies a historically specific spatial ontology” (1993: 5). Agnew and Corbridge suggest that the geographical division of the world into mutually exclusive territorial states has served to define the field of study by providing clear demarcations of space which represent centres of power (1995: 78). Drainville claims that the analytical tradition of Realism, which he refers to as the “governing paradigm of international relations”, is founded on the refusal of space, in viewing states as “vectors of power moving in an unconstraining and untheorized milieu” (1995: 53).

Representations of space as conceived within these discursive parameters imply practices which are frequently out of synch with the real and metaphoric boundaries encountered by political actors. In particular, 'the state' in IR/IPR representations remains an abstract monolith which is something of a discursive fiction. Despite the best efforts of scholars of a more critical (with a small or large 'c') bent, to subvert the Realist discursive hegemony in IR/IPE, the state remains the definitional device through which other actors in this area of study are identified. Consequently, the stage set for interpretation of history, and of contemporary politics, is the state and protractions of it such as 'the international' or 'the global'.

To challenge the centrality of the state in spatial conceptions is not to deny the significance of territory or location, nor to dispute the importance of state practices in many aspects of global politics. However, it is evident that representations of space in IR/IPE do not adequately reflect contemporary political practices, either of non-state actors or of states themselves. The argument for most spatial theorists is that the territorial imagination is a spatialized imagination which imposes unhelpful conceptual boundaries. The territorial state in international theory separates discourse from practice, in the process denying the essential constituent of politics: human existence.

The common contention of many spatial theorists in IR/IPE, therefore, is that there is a conceptual rigidity to the mapping of political spaces in the discipline which is at odds with lived socio-political practices. The centrality of the state in representations of space is also adversely influential on epistemological approaches. Agnew highlights the “methodological nationalism” in political analysis (1994: 93), which sees government classifications, such as immigration statistics, validated as categories of evidence in the social sciences. These state-centred statistics and evidential categories reiterate the legitimacy of the state as the analytical baseline, and also perpetuate gendered application of evidence, as many of the 'official' classifications assume male-led households, family groups, labour markets and so on.

Political practices have been changing rapidly in recent decades and there has been an increased aknowledgement of macro- and micro-level transcendence of traditional agendas. Issue-based activism, as opposed to political activity as designated by elite-defined agendas, highlights the relevance of spatial considerations for IR/IPE. Transcendent socio-political organizations and collectives rarely have the state - any state - as their principal point of reference.

Social and political practices, in and of themselves, may provide more appropriate analytical frameworks than locational or state-spatial referents can. Assuming that states have devised, created and maintained the spaces of politics, we quite explicitly do in IR/IPE is problematic in two more important respects. Firstly, it situates the territorial state as essentially a fixed variable in political analysis, which suggests that it is a critical component of analysis in all instances. The state, or the shadow of it, generally forms a palpable presence in analyses, even of political affairs which have little or no direct relationship with state activity. Secondly, and as a consequence of this assumption, methods of political interaction or activity are understood primarily by how they affect, or appear to affect, state behaviour.

Activities which do not appear to influence states in some way have a very low profile in the study of international politics. Reification of the state is widely acknowledged as an ontological limitation in IR/IPE and the need to expand discursive parameters to allow non-state political practices to be interpreted as consequntial in their own right is apparent. The use of CMC by NGOs represents one form of political engagement which can, and should, be interpreted as discrete from state activity in some respects; the limited overview of CMC given in the next section of this paper provides the context for this analysis.

What is CMC?

The brief outline of CMC which follows is designed to illustrate what it is, how it differs from other forms of communication and why its development and growth are of particular relevance to the study of international affairs. Functionally, CMC has two unique features. Firstly, it represents a convergence of information and communications technologies which departs from historical precedent. More usually, developments in communications technologies have increased either the amount of information which may be produced and transmitted (for example through the invention of the printing press) or the numbers and/or types of potential recipients (as in the case of direct dial telephones which replaced operator-mediated services). CMC represents a conflation of these functions, allowing the transfer, transmission or duplication of potentially limitless quantities information to large and/or specifically targetted audiences, significantly intensifying possibilities for and processes of communication.

The second unique technical feature of CMC relates to the modes of interaction which it permits. Communications theorists have distinguished three types of interaction in which humans engage; 'face-to-face', 'mediated interaction' and 'mediated quasi-interaction' (Thompson 1994). 'Face-to-face' interaction is, as the label suggests, premised on the shared presence of participants. 'Mediated interaction' uses a technical medium, such as a letter, to convey information to a party not sharing the same spatio-temporal frame of reference. The third form of communication, 'mediated quasi-interaction' is also dependent upon a time-space differential between communicating parties, but refers to a monological flow of information from sender to receiver. This form is explified by mass communication media, with the temporal framework largely determined by the sender; programmes are scheduled according to broadcasters' priorities, newspapers are published daily or weekly, and so on.

CMC differs from all of these modes of communication in two important ways. Firstly, unlike other communications technologies, CMC can be both mono- and dia-logical in character. Monological through the use, for example, of WWW home pages which do not accept user-responses, and dialogical through person-to-person email, the use of bulletin boards and so on. CMC also has the capacity to be 'multi-logical', offering the opportunity for individuals to communicate in groups through the use of newsgroups and other networks which users elect to join. The multi-logical form of CMC is used for both intellectual and recreational purposes. This feature of CMC, its unique logicality and the resulting ways in which interest groups can be formed, is crucial to understanding of its impact on spatiality, as it provides an aggregative facility for political actors from separate locations.

The construction of audiences is the second important feature of CMC in relation to spatial interpretation. Users of this form of communication may receive, access or participate in the production of information impeded by few barriers. Users of CMC have a significant degree of choice in and control over the use of its facilities, with a wide range of options regarding the reception and exchange of information available. It is possible to be both part of audiences and to effectively instigate them.

Although these technical permutations are pertinent to spatial analysis, there is little opportunity to explore them in detail in this paper. The most important point to note is that the audiences for CMC may be constituted of individuals, pre-existing groups or those newly-formed by access to particular information. They may also interact as individuals, as members of a given group focusing on a particular issue, or by extending or creating groups by sharing and exchanging information. Additionally, given the ways in which users may access, retrieve and store data, CMC invokes spatio-temporal relations which differ significantly from those offered by any previous forms of communication technologies; hence location and time restraints may be of less relevance to the construction of political collectives with the use of CMC.

To summarise, CMC constitutes a new dimension in the field of communications forms, and is characterized by a range of unique functions. One of these is the specific combination of information and communications technologies which it embodies, the other is the particular forms of communicative interaction it permits. These characteristics in combination give users of CMC increased scope in choosing and directing information and data. The range of interactive possiblities, mono-, dia- and multi-logical, are only available through CMC, as are the ways in which users may access and receive information. 4

Potential audience constructions, data exchange permeations and so on do not in and of themselves provide a mechanism for social or political change. There is no technological determinism inherent in the introduction of a new form of information exchange. Fischer points out that “(M)echanical properties do not predestine the development and employment of an innovation. Instead struggles and negotiations among interested parties shape that history” (1992: 16). Technologies do not exist outside of social context; commercial interests, regulatory systems, consumer demand and so on all influence the ways in which a particular technology may be adopted or applied (see: Cockburn & Ormrod 1993). The dynamic relationships between user and technology constitute an important element of spatial interpretation: how technologies are used evidently influences the opportunities which they afford.

NGO use of CMC

Although the term 'NGO' is firmly situated within the IR/IPE vocabulary, it is rarely examined in detail. To situate analysis of their use of CMC, a general overview of the NGO phenomenon follows. The term 'non-governmental organization' was first used by the United Nations in 1950 to refer to 'officially recognized organizations with no governmental afficiliation that had consultative status within the United Nations' (Vakil 1997: 2068). Despite a huge rise in NGO numbers in recent decades, they retain the negative 'non-governmental' definition, described through other institutions rather than in their own right. It is now widely acknowledged, however, that NGOs play a key role in defining some non-state political communities by providing an organizational framework around which political action may be structured or mediated.

NGOs differ from other major actors in IR, most critically in their perceptions of political agendas. There are many thousands of NGOs, often engaged in activities which defy the significance of state borders. It is not possible to produce a standard model of NGO behaviour. Many are a partial product of broader social movements and many of their concerns are seen as indivisible, from each other, and from wider political issues.

The scale of NGO activity also varies widely; while some consider themselves to be global actors, others may be highly localised, focusing their operations on specific regions. Such local concentration, however, does not limit their activities within state borders, with coalitions across boundaries fairly common (see: Frederick 1997). Given the breadth, scale and diversity of the NGO movement, it is prudent to illustrate in general terms their form of political agency, rather than to attempt to generalize about their objectives and the means of achieving them.

NGOs can be viewed as a conceptually distinct but empirically imprecise organizational category (Charlton et al 1995: 19). Their key characteristics are that they are largely independent of state control, in terms of decision-making processes, and that they are institutions, in that they structure social behaviours around a particular set of goals. For Willetts “NGOs become theoretically important when it is appreciated that they are agents of social change, projected to the level of global politics” (1996: 57). As agents of social change, NGOs cover a diverse range of interests, areas and objectives; there is, therefore, no such thing as a typical NGO and organizational structure arises as social movements grow (ibid.) Computer mediated communications may be viewed as a both a feature and constitutive component of such organizational structures. Given the transcendental, issue-based perceptions of politics which many NGOs endorse, it is evident that the potential to transcend territory and forge links through and across organizational boundaries (both those internal to NGOs and in the wider political realm) is a facet of CMC which closely reflects the objectives of international NGOs.

NGOs do not necessarily assume a government to be the primary actor when seeking to elicit social or political change. To some degree, politics as defined by NGOs as non-state actors differs from that outlined and applied by governments, and certainly challenges many of the state-centric assumptions of IR. The spaces which NGOs perceive to be of political relevance are often dependent upon the territorial assumptions of states, such as the 'national' statistics mentioned earlier, but frequently extend beyond the public parameters outlined in the dominant discourse.

As a consequence of the looser definitions of politics under which NGOs operate, they are generally less closely bound by the agendas of high politics. That is, they may act in cooperation with government agencies, international organizations and so on, but are often responsible for introducing new items to standard political agendas, in line with their particular area of interest or operation. For Charlton et al, NGOs are generally distinguished by pursuit of collective action on the basis of 'voluntaristic mechanisms', based on processes of bargaining, accommodation, discussion and persuasion which are conceptually distinct from the operational principles of either states or profit-driven market institutions (1995: 26). The work of some NGOs is widely credited with introducing issues such as human rights, environmental change and gender discrimination to international political agendas. Analysis of regime formation also often acknowledges the normative role NGOs play in the ongoing evolution of international political processes.

The attributes of CMC can be adapted to reflect institutional requirements. States, markets and NGOs have widely differing interpretations of the benefits of CMC. All are, however, applying this mode of communication to their current operations, and are developing ways to further incorporate CMC into future institutional designs. Thus the uses made and potential applications of CMC for NGOs can be expected to differ significantly from those of governments and of commercial enterprises.

Hurrell suggests that NGOs in the environmental movement possess four strengths, which make them important players in their own right. These characteristics are transferable, and can be equally applied to NGOs which focus on other concerns. Firstly, NGOs have the ability to develop & disseminate knowledge. Such knowledge will generally be issue-specific, transcending both discursive barriers and national borders. Secondly, NGOs often articulate a powerful set of human values and, thirdly, their actions may harness a growing sense of cosmopolitan moral awareness. These last two are related, in that the actions of NGOs are often based on a concern to develop more equitable social and political systems than exist at present. As the growth of the NGO movement testifies, this type of concern has widespread support. Finally, NGOs respond to the multiple weaknesses of the state system, both at global and local levels (see: Hurrell 1995). As Smith notes, NGOs are able to adopt less pragmatic positions than governments and have less need to satisfy competing domestic interest groups (1995: 306). The many features of late-twentieth century life which serve to undermine profit-driven mathe state as the prime political actor, such as increasingly global markets and economies, and the spread of new communications technologies, may often be advantageous to NGOs, given that they are unrestrained by the bureaucractic mechanisms associated with the management of territory.

The characteristics highlighted by Hurrell illustrate the key strengths of NGOs as political actors, and reflect the relevance to such organizations of CMC. The development and dissemination of information across barriers and borders, the articulation of human values, the harnessing of an apparently growing moral sensibility and responding to the weaknesses of the state system are all features which CMC has the potential to consolidate, in terms of both extending audiences and influencing discourse.

New communications technologies have made a considerable difference to the ways in which NGOs can approach their activities. Electronic communications networks are partially responsible for “producing forms of social organization - social networks, communications networks, and especially the emergence of multiorganizational networks - that allow people and groups to play an increasingly significant role in international relations as governmental and market hierarchies are eroded by the diffusion of power to smaller groups” (Frederick 1997: 256). This view is supported by Hurrell, who argues that an increased level of economic globalization provides an infrastructure for increased social communication. Hence the communications networks which have evolved in tandem with economic structures are a mechanism for “facilitating the flow of values, knowledge and ideas and in allowing like-minded groups to organize across national boundaries" (Hurrell 1995: 144).

NGO membership decisions are made proactively, and are based upon the information available to individuals and groups. For organizations with a trans-state or global reach, it is essential to make use of communications media which can be accessed by a wide audience. In the UK, for example, ninety percent of charities in one recent survey believe that new technology is important for developing communications in the voluntary sector (Pharoah and Welch 1997). The Charities Aid Foundation (CAF), which conducted the survey, links some two hundred UK-based NGOs, many with international operations, to the Internet, via its CharityNet pages (see: Pharoah and Welch 1997). Globally, the Association of Progressive Communications (APC), which specializes in the communication needs of NGOs, had connections in one hundred and thirty three countries in 1997, a figure which is likely to increase further, given APC's rate of growth since its inception in 1984 (Frederick 1997: 258). All of the organizations surveyed link to one or both of these networks, as well as to others.

NGO undertakings are characterised by a diffusion of activities across a range of actors, often with a wide-ranging geographical reach. CMC provides an efficient, cost-effective means of facilitating contact with the various agencies and individuals with whom NGOs interact, as well as providing a multi-dimensional information exchange facility. Depending on the ways organizations structure CMC provision, individuals may also be able to contact people with similar concerns or interests via NGO sites, forgin and/or consolidating socio-political networks.

In their capacity as socio-political organizations which defy some of the spatial limitations of traditionally-conceived political structures, both geographically and metaphorically, NGOs are using CMC as a means of further eroding distinctions between high/low, public/private political distinctions. Many NGOs provide hyperlinks to organizations with similar concerns and some offer connections to institutions such as the United Nations, the European Union and the World Trade Organization. In this respect, they extend the spaces of representation available to individuals and groups by facilitating some form of public access to otherwise relatively inaccessible decision-making bodies. In addition, e-mail provides a facility for NGOs to transcend some traditional institutional barriers through its use as a medium to contact agencies and actors across the political spectrum. All of the organizations surveyed for this research now use email as an intrinsic feature of their administrative procedures. Although comparable in some respects with letter-writing, the lack of formality associated with email, and the disregard for status which this implies, suggests that some of the conventional, elite-defined distinctions between political actors are being challenged.

The operational principles of NGOs are based upon the forging of contacts between and across interested, affected and influential groups and individuals. CMC is both elemental to and constitutive of the construction of operational spaces, spaces which for NGOs are by nature socio-political. The assumption of an anti-hierarchical flexibility in political communication flows underscores the operating principles of international NGOs, and contrasts with the prevailing norm in inter-state behaviour, and to some extent in international organizations such as the UN.

NGOs can provide indirect access to 'official' political structures for otherwise marginalized actors, by coalescing the realms of the social and the political. This coalescence has a critical impact on representations of space, rendering 'the political' an increasingly imprecise category. Most institutional political arrangements, representative or otherwise, mitigate against the direct involvement of the public. One important strength of NGOs is their potential to provide a mechanism for some form of popular participation in political processes. The World Bank holds the view that NGOs often act as social and political intermediaries who “can create links both upward and downward in society” (Charlton et al 1995: 24). Moreover, as Willetts argues, in lobbying both governments and international governmental organizations, NGOs can be both part of broader social movements, and effective organizations in their own right (1996: 61). Development theorist Syed Rahim view cyberspatial technologies and the links they promote between institutional and 'social actors as an important feature of local-group empowerment (1997: 97).

All of the NGOs who contributed to the research for this paper emphasised the importance of partnership between themselves, governmental agencies, international governmental organizations and 'ordinary people'. The value of effective communications systems in this respect, both in terms of technological provision and access to information, across a range of actors, is apparent. In terms of technological provision, Oxfam, the only development organization surveyed, indicated that providing network computing facilities was an important way of increasing opportunities for socio-political engagement to marginalized groups. Among their information technology initiatives, therefore, Oxfam has provided funds, equipment and training to NGOs in the Caribbean, to Bedouin women in the Negev desert and to grassroots organizations and NGOs in Mexico. In each case, the objectives have been to improve local, regional and international communication, to provide network facilities to dispersed collectives and to promote more efficient data-gathering and administrative systems for the groups involved.

NGOs may also often be structurally less prone to gender imbalance than are state agencies and international institutions. Though women are barely represented at the 'top' of politics, they are widely active as members of local, national and international organizations (Peterson & Runyan 1993: 149). As social organizations, of course, NGOs are not gender-neutral. Participation in the socio-political activities of an NGO may, however, match the lives of 'ordinary people' more closely than other systems of political engagement can. That is, not everyone can participate effectively in state politics, but anyone (at least in theory) can join an NGO. Many NGOs place gender awareness high on their agendas, arguing that women's human rights must be taken into account at both grassroots and policy-making levels.

Research on NGOs in IR tends to be “concerned with the bureaucratic politics of pressure groups working within the established system to influence policy, at both the governmental and the global level" (Willetts 1996: 59). Recent research suggests, however, that the influence of NGOs is not experienced only at the level of policy-making but are experienced much more broadly, as trans-border social concerns impinge on political agendas (see: Bailie & Winseck (Eds) 1997). NGOs are inherently de-centralizing, working across multiple dimensions of political space, both geographical and metaphoric. Patterns of NGO behaviour are reflected by the spatial forms of network communications. These too are essentially decentralizing “in the sense that they democratize information flow, break down hierarchies of power, and make communication from the top and bottom just as easy as from horizon to horizon” (Frederick 1997: 256). The forms of network communication enabled by CMC, such as e-mail contact and Web sites, can be seen as organizational structures (see: Willetts 1996). Although complex, there are identifiable patterns of construction and use of CMC which provide a tangible communications infrastructure. In this respect, “(O)rganizationally, networking is seen ... as the NGO's trump card” (Charlton et al 1995: 27), and the use of CMC simply compliments the modus operandi of NGOs.

NGO use of CMC relates, of course, to the broader structural change fostered by the diffusion of telecommunications technologies across real and metaphoric boundaries. Thus NGO use of CMC links to a wider adjustment of power and control relations wrought by the 'information age'. The spatial logic which undergirds the running of states, based in the protection of territorial integrity, operates in many senses in direct contradiction to the promotion of informational networks. For NGOs, however, network technologies appear to provide a digital continuum of their existing operations.

It is important not to confuse the issue of CMC use by NGOs with questions of teledemocracy. The argument on spatial change in this paper is not that place-based politics are being, or will be, replaced by some form of 'cyberdemocracy'. The assertion is actually much more basic - that representations of space in IR/IPE still focus on an ontologically limited dimension of political behaviour which, though important, is much less cohesive than the disciplinary discourse gives it credit for. Moreover, the restrictive nature of represented space in IR/IPE allows little room for epistemological development in that the recursive appraisal of political behaviours through state-spatial representations undermines understanding of socio-political movements and their impact.

Conclusion

Analysis of NGO use of CMC highlights three specific points pertinent to the study of contemporary international politics. Firstly, territorial assumptions presume pre-existing political communities, states, which are representive of political legitimacy, thereby largely eliding other forms of political community, such as pressure groups and localised collectives which are not sanctioned by national governments or international organizations. NGOs can be central to imagined political communities and appear to view CMC as a valuable mechanism for enhancing their role in this respect. Secondly, and related to this, the orthodoxy of territorial spaces of politics generally adopted in the discipline(s) of IR/IPE serves to marginalize and/or delegitimise other forms of political activity or engagement, such as involvement in non-governmental community organizations. NGO use of CMC can encourage links across the political spectrum, creating connections between marginalized groups which is currently unaccounted for in IR/IPE epistemologies. Thirdly, the discourse of contemporary IR/IPE is gendered by the exclusion of individual agency and non-elite political activity which the discursive prioritization of the state pre-supposes. The NGOs which participated in research for this paper demonstrated clear policy directions which challenge gender inequality, both intra-organizationally and in their broader publications and practices.

It is quite apparent that communications technologies have an impact on socio-political structures and questions of agency. It is important, therefore, that IR/IPE develops ontologies which permit synchronous, rather than retrospective, analysis of change. Lefebvre's spatial trialectic provides one such ontological approach. Spatial practices are affected by the introduction or absence of CMC, representations of space are subject to challenge as political practices change and the potential spaces of representations individuals create through their social and political choices are (again, theorietically) enhanced by acces to this form of communication. Analysis of NGO use of this type of technology provides a practical organizational system on which to base this form of analysis. Spatial theories therefore provide an ontological approach which links discourse and practice, matching our theories with our realities.


Notes:

Note 1: In the absence of consensus on the most appropriate label for the convergence of telecommunications and computing facilities, a range of labels are applied - telematics, informatics, new communications technologies (NCTs), information and communications technologies (ICTs), and so on. Any of these terms is applicable to this analysis; CMC is used here as a personal preference. Back.

Note 2: Five international NGOs, Anmesty International, Oxfam, Christian Aid, Friends of the Earth and the Institute for War and Peace Research, have provided evidence on their uses of CMC, upon which the claims made in this paper are based. The substantive material supplied is too detailed to apply to this paper and is the subject of more specific questions addressed in forthcoming publications. Back.

Note 3: This paper condenses material from a much larger research project. It therefore treats some of the issues in less depth than might be desired and some subtlety is lost in this abridgement. A range of relevant issues, such as a more detailed examination of spatiality, development concerns and access to CMC, and market dominance of regulatory mechanisms and the questions of public service interests, are all underexplored, or elided in this paper. The aim here is to raise questions about the application of spatial theories to international affairs and to examine one aspect of the use of new communications technologies in political practices. More detailed analysis of CMC in relation to other, wider political concerns also provides material for future publications. Back.

Note 4: There are many other features of CMC which provide some justification for claims that it has profound implications for the future(s) of social interaction. The use of CMC in fantasy games, its (theoretical) instantaneity, its impact on employment practices, its challenge to accepted notions of identity, the body and so on all contribute to change. See Castells (1996) and Kitchin (1998) for interesting insights. Back.


References