Foundation Position and Actions in the Multi-national Arena: A Case Study of Ocean Conservation in the Arctic

• Main Author: Danahey Janin, Patricia Clare
• Other Authors: Paarlberg, Laurie E., Shaker, Genevieve G., Badertscher, Katherine, Hellwig, Timothy
• Format: Doctoral or Postdoctoral Thesis
• Language: English
• Published: 2023
• Subjects: case study; global governance; government-nonprofit relations; international frameworks; risk mitigation; sustainable market solutions; Arctic; Arctic Ocean
• Online Access: https://hdl.handle.net/1805/32285; https://doi.org/10.7912/C2/3126

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) This study examines private foundation positioning and actions in respect to governance and market considerations in the multi-national arena around the issue of ocean conservation in the empirical setting of the Arctic Ocean. Existing research has focused primarily on foundations in their domestic setting or alternatively in their international engagement within a foreign country. There is evidence that foundation creation and activity addressing global issues are rising. Questions remain around the role of foundations in global governance and their relationship to the market. Using a qualitative case study methodology, this study was guided by a framework based on governance and market. The framework incorporated Young and Frumkin’s conceptualization of government-nonprofit relations enhanced by three additional United Nations ocean-related frameworks, and an orientation toward the market based on empirical studies. Five key actions carried out by foundations were also considered. The study was organized around two ocean conservation policy contexts to see similarities and differences. The research focused on a total of eleven foundation case studies, drawing on data from publicly available documents, grant databases, the observation of public events, and sixteen semi-structured on-line video interviews of experts, foundation, government, and NGO representatives. The study supports the theoretical model demonstrating that foundations generally complemented government activity underway and took adversarial stances at specific decision-making junctures. Foundations were attentive to international frameworks that intersected with their issue area and approach. The study challenges the model due to the difficulty in differentiating the supplemental and complementary positioning. Governance architecture and interlocking policy fields kept foundations from driving the agenda. Primary actions were funding and deploying a variety of non-financial assets. No ...