Europe and North America Regional GCED Network

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chart 2 : Typology of organization by region North- America Europe Civil society organization Education institution Governmental body Intergovernmental organization Thematic network Table 3 illustrates the distribution of the scale of action across the typologies of organizations we have interviewed. Civil society organizations and educational institutions operate at three levels: international, multiscalar, and local level. We define multiscalar organizations as those that operate at local, national, and international levels. Only a minority of organizations are operating mostly at the local level. Table 3 : Typology of organization and scale of action Local International Multiscalar Total Civil society organization 5 8 9 22 Education institution 2 6 1 9 Governmental body 1 2 3 Intergovernmental organization 5 1 6 Thematic network 3 2 5 Charts 4 and 5 show the distribution by region of the number of resources devoted and importance attributed to GCED. The height of the bar is the ratio of organizations for each region. Chart 4 : Resources devoted to GCED distributed by region 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 less than 20% resources between 20% and 50% resources more than 50% resources Europe North-America 040ㆍ041
Chart 5 : Importance attributed to GCED by region 0.7 0.6 Europe North-America 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 most important somewhat important not very important least important not applicable Charts 4 and 5 show that there is consistency between the level of importance attributed to GCED and the percentage of resources organizations devote to this topic. There are only a few exceptions: 2 institutions declare that GCED is most important but dedicate less than 20%, and 3 institutions declare that GCED is most important, yet they dedicate between 20% and 50% resources. A possible interpretation for this is that these are large institutions that operate on a global scale, with GCED as a distinct, yet ringfenced activity. Or, they may be academic institutions that simply do not have sufficient resources. Chart 6 shows, by typology of organization, the number of resources attributed to GCED. The height of the bar is the ratio of organizations for each class of resources. Chart 6 : GCED importance by typology of organization 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 less than 20% resources between 20% and 50% resources more than 50% resources 0.2 0.1 0 Civil society organization Education institution Governmental body Inter governmental organization Thematic network In summary, our sample is composed mostly of civil society organizations. Most organizations operate at international and multiscalar levels, while a minority operate only at the local level. Our respondents are mostly in leadership positions. This element suggests that the organizations considered the research relevant. More than 48% of the organizations interviewed allocate more than 50% to GCED. Europe and North America Regional GCED Network
Page 1 and 2: Europe and North America Regional G
Page 5 and 6: 039 039 042 047 055 062 062 064 064
Page 7 and 8: Executive Summary Global citizenshi
Page 9 and 10: characteristics. This network struc
Page 11 and 12: Introduction This report presents t
Page 13 and 14: About Studying Networks As mentione
Page 15 and 16: References Bourdieu, P. (1986). The
Page 17 and 18: knowledge development and critical
Page 19 and 20: from within the modern/colonial ima
Page 21 and 22: Monaghan, C., & Spreen, C. A. (2017
Page 23 and 24: informants are required to nominate
Page 25 and 26: Possible examples of typologies of
Page 27 and 28: We adopted a whole network design,
Page 29 and 30: The goals for the SNA are to define
Page 31 and 32: DEAR Multi-Stakeholder Group meetin
Page 33 and 34: We conducted four pilot interviews
Page 35 and 36: possible patterns of proximity. The
Page 37 and 38: McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & C
Page 39: Social Network Analysis Results In
Page 43 and 44: - Node position is determined by th
Page 45 and 46: Chart 7 shows the distribution of i
Page 47 and 48: We also analyzed whether organizati
Page 49 and 50: interaction. Table 13 illustrates t
Page 51 and 52: Table 16 shows that the vast majori
Page 53 and 54: Graph 5 : Technical/scientific info
Page 55 and 56: 3.2. Summary of main results In thi
Page 57 and 58: 4.1.2 Organization-keyword network
Page 61 and 62: International Policy Pink No Easy A
Page 63 and 64: egression analysis of dyadic data.
Page 65 and 66: 2.1. Methods and data set To unders
Page 67 and 68: ease of reading and to identify pat
Page 73 and 74: Another set of interconnected organ
Page 75 and 76: 5) Conclusion and Further Questions
Page 77 and 78: https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051156
Page 79 and 80: in this summary, we would like to h
Page 81 and 82: While some qualitative results emer
Page 83 and 84: Appendices Appendix A: List of Orga
Page 85 and 86: UNESCO Chair in Democracy, Global C
Page 87 and 88: Global Citizen 3610 @GlblCtzn Globa
Page 91 and 92:
Europe and North America Regional G
Page 93 and 94:
All organizations (as per list in A
Page 95 and 96:
Appendix D: Question 14 Answers Ala
Page 97 and 98:
Enabel; Engagement Global, GENE als
Page 99 and 100:
CONTENTS 100 100 100 101 101 101 10
Page 101 and 102:
2. How do the actors work individua
Page 103 and 104:
Knoke, D. & Yang, S., (2008). Socia
Page 105 and 106:
Name of organization Code (es 01EU,
Page 107 and 108:
• Explain that the interview will
Page 109 and 110:
advisable to skip the formal ethica
Page 111 and 112:
Policy development & decision makin
Page 113 and 114:
B: Sometimes one organization provi
Page 115 and 116:
the study. Findings will be present
Page 117 and 118:
9.3 Invitation letter Dear My name
Page 119:
Europe and North America Regional G
show all

Europe and North America Regional GCED Network

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?