Understanding the motivations and activities of transnational advocacy networks against child sex trafficking in the Greater Mekong Subregion: The value of cosmopolitan globalisation theory

Child sex trafficking has become one of the most highly publicised social issues of our time and, due to its global nature, transnational anti-trafficking advocacy networks are well placed and central to lead campaigns against it. Whilst there is an abundance of literature on the subjects of child sex trafficking and transnational advocacy networks we lack an understanding of the motivations of these networks that act as buffers against trafficking. Cosmopolitan globalisation theory remains a compelling framework for examining the motivations of transnational anti-child sex trafficking networks in the Greater Mekong Subregion. Applying a cosmopolitan globalisation lens, this article discusses the social justice goals of transnational advocacy networks, their centrality in combating child sex trafficking, and their ability to perform cosmopolitan ‘globalisation from below’ to counter global social problems. Introduction In the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS) transnational advocacy networks (TANs) have been forming since the 1990s to combat child trafficking for sexual exploitation. Child sex trafficking (CST) occurs in all Southeast Asian countries. In a region where the demand for young brides, adoptive infants, sex with children, images of child pornography, and cheap labour is strong, children may be trafficked at source or during migration, either en route or after reaching their destination. Origin, transit and destination countries for child trafficking exist throughout the Southeast Asia region with some countries characterised as origin, or transit, or destination, and others encompassing all three (UNICEF 2009, p. 19). Internal trafficking, from rural to urban centres and from small towns to big cities, is also a considerable dynamic although far less researched than cross-border trafficking. Complex push and pull factors including poverty, gender inequality, unemployment, and forced migration complicate the CST issue. The regional picture that emerges from the available literature is one in which children experience serious physical, psychological, emotional and


Introduction
In the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS) transnational advocacy networks (TANs) have been forming since the 1990s to combat child trafficking for sexual exploitation.Child sex trafficking (CST) occurs in all Southeast Asian countries.In a region where the demand for young brides, adoptive infants, sex with children, images of child pornography, and cheap labour is strong, children may be trafficked at source or during migration, either en route or after reaching their destination.Origin, transit and destination countries for child trafficking exist throughout the Southeast Asia region with some countries characterised as origin, or transit, or destination, and others encompassing all three (UNICEF 2009, p. 19).Internal trafficking, from rural to urban centres and from small towns to big cities, is also a considerable dynamic although far less researched than cross-border trafficking.Complex push and pull factors including poverty, gender inequality, unemployment, and forced migration complicate the CST issue.The regional picture that emerges from the available literature is one in which children experience serious physical, psychological, emotional and social consequences as a result of being trafficked (Dottridge 2004;Rafferty 2007;UNICEF 2009).This article examines two important themes: First, the significance of cosmopolitan globalisation theory for explaining the proliferation of TANs against CST, their motivations, and the response of TANs to the CST problem; and, second, TANs' creation of a form of 'globalisation from below' to respond to CST as a form of social injustice.Research into these areas is important for both improving our understanding of TANs in the current era of This article is divided into three sections.First, it discusses the definitions, estimates and dynamics of CST in the GMS as well as the complex 'push' and 'pull' factors of CST with a particular focus on poverty in the current era of globalisation.Second, the article examines cosmopolitan globalisation theory as a compelling framework for examining the motivations and activities of TANs.Third, the article discusses TANs' cosmopolitan response to CST through the creation of a form of 'globalisation from below'.

Methods
Data collection for this research was conducted in Thailand and Cambodia over a six month period in 2010.Twenty-two interviews were conducted with child trafficking experts employed in nongovernment organisations (NGOs), United Nations (UN) agencies, TANs, and academia in Bangkok (Thailand), Pattaya (Thailand), Chiang Mai (Thailand) and Phnom Penh (Cambodia).The purpose of the semi-structured interviews was to build a complete picture of the child trafficking problem in Thailand and Cambodia; a picture of TANs and their diverse structures; an understanding of the anti-trafficking advocacy strategies employed; and a picture of TANs' campaign highlights and successes.Additional methodologies included process tracing and participant observation (performed while I was employed as a researcher at an international NGO in Bangkok and attending regional anti-trafficking fora, seminars and meetings).Thailand and Cambodia were chosen as the focus countries for the research as they are widely considered the CST 'hot spots' of Southeast Asia and therefore many TANs have their head offices and field offices in these two countries.

Central questions for this research included:
• What are the advantages and disadvantages of anti-trafficking TANs?How is it important that NGOs and UN agencies organise their advocacy in networks rather than anti-trafficking organisations working independently of each other?
• What is occurring in TANs' internal politics and what are the internal and external factors that facilitate or impede organisations' participation in TANs?
• What are the motivations for TANs?What are their activities and goals?
• How are TANs contributing to a cosmopolitan 'globalisation from below'?Interview questions focused on the history of the organisation, processes (for example, decision making, conflict resolution), motivations and values, and activities (programs, policy strategies), reasons why the network chose to work on anti-trafficking initiatives, and how the network defined its success and effectiveness.Since little was known about TANs and their organisational structures, I adopted an exploratory, naturalistic approach to help answer the research questions.Due to the difficulties of quantifying a complex and transnational social problem, employing a qualitative research methodology allowed the exploration of normative and theoretical questions within the social science framework.

Definitions, estimates and child trafficking dynamics
Defining child trafficking CST is an important component of the broad sex trafficking industry, which in turn is a subsection of the general phenomena of human trafficking.Human trafficking can refer to trafficking for sexual exploitation, labour exploitation (for example sweat shops, the fishing industry), organ trafficking, adoption and trafficking for other purposes.However, sex trafficking is often considered the most sinister of the human trafficking types, and is therefore one of the most researched.There is a broad consensus in the literature that CST is an issue that urgently needs to be tackled.Most CST research reports start from the premise that child trafficking is a 'sinister', 'serious', or 'major' problem.Early twentieth century conventions defined trafficking as internal or cross-border movement for purposes of prostitution, and defined all sex work as trafficking, whether the women and girls were in the profession voluntarily or not.Pointing out that until recently there was no internationally agreed-upon definition of trafficking, a handbook from the Global Alliance Against Trafficking in Women (2007) gives some modern definitions of trafficking from the UN and from the Human Rights Standards for the Treatment of Trafficked Persons.Common elements in these definitions include movement from community of origin; fraud, force, deception, or coercion; and exploitation in slavery, near-slavery, or servitude with or without pay (GAATW 2007, pp. 3-4).The modern definitions do not require that sexual exploitation be involved for it to be called trafficking and GAATW emphasises that movement for sexual exploitation is only one type of trafficking, though it has arguably been the most prioritised form for concern (2007, p. 4).

Child trafficking estimates
The United Nations Inter-Agency Project on Human Trafficking (2008) states that there are no universally accepted estimates of child trafficking numbers throughout the world.
Difficulties in identifying victims and differences in applying trafficking definitions to local realities make such estimates virtually impossible.However, some commonly quoted figures provide some sense of the magnitude of the problem.UNICEF (2009) suggests that globally, about 10 million children, mainly girls, are subjected to various forms of sexual exploitation worldwide.A further one million children are estimated to enter the commercial sex trade each year (UNICEF 2009).UNICEF (2009) further estimates that a third of all sex workers in Southeast Asia are between the ages of 12 and 17.Kristof (1996) similarly notes that more than a million girls and boys, aged 17 and younger, are engaged in forced prostitution in Asia.
A recent study by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) (2009) estimates that 43 per cent of all victims of forced labour worldwide are trafficked for sexual exploitation.
According to Child Wise (2007), an Australian NGO working on the human trafficking issue both domestically and internationally, more than 250 000 sex tourists visit Asia each year, with 25 per cent coming from the United States, 16 per cent from Germany and 13 per cent from both Australia and the United Kingdom.This includes those seeking sex with children, a practice better known as child sex tourism, and those specifically targeting pre-pubescent children, that is, paedophilia (Peters 2007).However, in most countries the major demand that creates a market for commercial sexual exploitation of children is still domestic.Local perceptions of childhood, which often differ from the international legal norm, contribute to this phenomenon (World Bank 2003, p. 15).In many traditional cultures in the Mekong region young people aged between 15 and 17 are often considered 'adults' in their own societies (Peters 2007, p. 27).They may marry, and otherwise function as adults (Peters, 2007 p. 27).This view is supported by Qvortrup who argues that "what children do and what is expected from them is largely historically and culturally determined" (2004, p. 267).
Furthermore, the age of 'consent' to work or engage in prostitution varies across states and countries and according to the age and agency of the individuals involved in sex.The age of consent is not static either and has changed over the centuries especially with regards to same sex intercourse (Waites 2005, pp. 45-46).Thailand, for example, increased its minimum age from 13 to 15 in 1987, and to 18 in relation to prostitution in 1996 (Waites 2005, p. 49).

Child trafficking dynamics
Over the past three decades international NGOs, together with UN agencies, governments and other bodies, have become increasingly aware of the widespread phenomenon of child trafficking -both across borders and within nation-states themselves.Much attention has been given to the Asia-Pacific region, and especially the GMS, which has become a hub for trafficking in children, particularly for the purposes of sexual servitude.The Asian countries surrounding the Mekong River (the six countries of the GMS -Cambodia, China, Laos PDR, Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam) have among the highest incidence of internal and transnational migration in the world (Zheng, 2008).Hundreds of thousands of men, women and children in this region leave their homes to cross borders each year in search of new economic opportunities and a better life.The countries of Cambodia and Thailand are therefore within a region where the ease of cross-border movement coupled with the relative economic prosperity and political stability of some countries has attracted large numbers of would-be economic migrants.Despite the ease of cross-border mobility, political sanctions against would-be migrants in destination countries have created a need for networks of 'people-movers' to facilitate cross-border movement.That these facilitators often serve as links to low-paid, exploitative and slave type jobs, including sex work, in the destination countries is hardly surprising.Further impacting the migration of adults and children in the region, the lucrative tourism industry in the GMS has not only created jobs within legitimate sectors but has also stimulated a demand for women and children -both male and female -in the entertainment sector, which generally translates as the sex sector (Dottridge 2004, p. 23).
Many of the children in this sector are poor and have low education levels (Peters 2007, p. 20).The sex sector can offer these poor migrating children higher paid jobs than they would find elsewhere (Peters 2007, p. 24).
In the Southeast Asia region children are trafficked either within their own countries or over the border into neighbouring countries, for example from Laos to Thailand or Cambodia to Thailand, or Thailand to China, or Myanmar to Laos, and so on.Some children are moved across international borders and some are trafficked across the world into developed regions such as Europe, the United States and Australia (Marshall 2001, p. 21).Lim (1998) argues that whilst adults might choose sex work as an occupational choice, children can only be considered victims of coercion and trafficking.Children, in contrast to adults, "are clearly much more vulnerable and helpless against the established structures and vested interests in the sex sector, and are much more likely to be victims of debt bondage, trafficking, physical violence or torture" (ILO 1998).In a similar vein Marshall (2001) has argued that children's 'choice' is questionable as it is often motivated by poverty or other extenuating circumstances.Because of extreme poverty, families in the Southeast Asia region have been known to be manipulated into giving up their children to recruiters to make ends meet when faced with bleak economic opportunities (Leung 2003).Some children are turned over to recruiters by their families in situations of debt bondage, in which children, usually girls, are sent to work for creditors until they pay off a family's debt (Blackburn et al. 2010, p. 108).In many cases of trafficking in the GMS, the children have themselves initiated the migration process, motivated by real and/or perceived differences in lifestyles, employment opportunities and pay levels between Thailand and surrounding countries (Huijsmans 2008, p. 341).
The global and public policy response to human trafficking has been profound.As Wong (2004) suggests, "from a poorly funded NGO women's issue in the early 1980s, human trafficking has entered the global agenda of high politics, eliciting in recent years significant legislative and other action from the US Congress, the EU and the UN".While End Child Prostitution, Child Pornography and Trafficking of Children for Sexual Purposes (ECPAT) (2006) reports that, to date, "there is no clear strategy to deal with the demand for sex with children", it is the cosmopolitan response of TANs through political activism, campaigning and creation of child protection policy and systems that has influenced the promotion of child trafficking as an important issue for domestic and international policy concerns.

Child trafficking push and pull factors: Globalisation and poverty
According to a critical cosmopolitan globalist reading, it is not only inequality between rich and poor states that is increasing but also inequality and poverty within states (Held 2002, p. 81).Globalisation exacerbates poverty, which leaves more people vulnerable to contemporary forms of slavery, such as child labour, child trafficking and bonded labour (Van Den Anker 2004, p. 16).The new global division of labour has reorganised rather than ameliorated patterns of global inequality and exclusion (Held 2002, p. 81).Consequently, the world is no longer divided as it once was on geographic lines, that is, between North and South, but rather exhibits a new social architecture (Held 2002, p. 81).This architecture, which divides humanity into elites, the bourgeoisie, the marginalised and the impoverished, cuts across territorial and cultural boundaries, rearranging the world into the winners and losers of globalisation (Hoogvelt 2001).Poverty and increased economic inequality are important risk factors associated with child trafficking and child sexual exploitation (Shifman2003).Child trafficking is but one symptom of the unevenness of globalisation.
Scholars of human trafficking suggest that there are a number of key reasons for the growth of trafficking internationally.Gupta (2010) argues that there are six global trends that accentuate vulnerability to trafficking and have caused the surge in growth of trafficked people.First, an increase in demand for trafficked people, from end users to those who make a profit from the trade, has become the most immediate cause for the expansion of the human trafficking industry.Second, new technologies have made moving and recruiting people much easier.Third, petty criminals have been replaced by organised criminals in the human trade, turning it into a large-scale industry.Fourth, natural disasters have driven people from their homes.Fifth, displacement and migration and the absence of protection mechanisms have increased vulnerability to human trafficking.Sixth, the global economic crisis of 2008 to 2010 has increased unemployment and undermined social safety nets, contributing to increased vulnerability by exacerbating the effects of existing sources of marginalisation (Gupta 2010, pp 70-71).These events have led to an increase in the number of vulnerable people that can easily be targeted by traffickers, "disposable people" as Bales (2004) calls them.In a similar vein,Nanu suggests that the factors that lead to trafficking in destination countries can be broadly classified in economic, political and social clusters (2010, p. 153).
On the supply side, vulnerability to trafficking can be linked to poverty, unemployment, economic crisis, political conflict, dysfunctional family situations, lack of education, and tolerance of violence, amongst others.On the demand side, vulnerability to trafficking is caused by the growing informal economy, the world demand for cheap labour, ineffective law enforcement, and discrimination against marginalised groups (Nanu 2010, p. 153).
The factors contributing to child trafficking can be broadly divided into two major levels (Roby 2005).First, the macro-level, constituting the international, national and local demographic, social, economic, ethnic and cultural environments in which trafficking occurs, and, second, the micro-level of individual and familial risk factors (Roby 2005, p. 137).
Economic injustice and poverty are among the major macro-level risk factors for sex trafficking (Roby 2005, p. 137).
There are several major ways in which globalisation has served to further escalate the effects of poverty as a cause of human trafficking.The first of these is the widening of the wealth gap between countries and regions around the world (Chuang 2006, p. 138).Improved and increased use of technology such as the internet and television has made the supply side of poverty much more clear, with the poor becoming increasingly aware that development has eluded them.Poor people, including children, realise their poverty comparatively to others and seek access to the jobs that will enable them to buy televisions, cars and other modern wants.Traffickers have the increasing opportunity to exploit this situation by luring young people into promises of jobs in neighbouring regions or countries.As human trafficking has such close ties to slavery and has existed prior to the latest period of globalisation, it cannot be argued that globalisation is the only cause of trafficking of humans.Globalisation has, however, played an important role in the escalation of the trafficking problem, and the problem of child trafficking in particular (Emmers 2004, p. 19).
Poverty, unemployment and economic crises are felt profoundly by females and it is often young girls in the GMS who, due to economic stress, are driven to cross borders in search of work.Until recently, the 'supply' side of poverty -meaning the human beings that are trafficked into sexual exploitation for the lucrative international sex trade -has been the most studied by NGOs, multilateral organisations and governments and is therefore the side of trafficking that is best understood amongst stakeholders (Danailova-Trainor&Belser 2006).This is reflected in the advocacy efforts of TANs that have largely focused on campaigning on issues related to the supply side of trafficking.This has, of course, led to the 'demand' side of trafficking (the users of children and adults' sexual exploitation and labour) being largely overlooked.Journal, Vol.5, No.1, 2013   47 The 2009 to 2010 global financial crisis has provided a new episode in history for viewing the transformation of child trafficking.Economic crises affect countries in many important ways that can result in the exploitation of children (ECPAT 2009).An economic downturn may involve reduced capital inflows, reduced development aid, declining export markets, changing terms of trade and a reduction in overall GDP.As a result, countries already weakened by recent food and fuel price increases experience high unemployment, subsequently exacerbating income gaps.Children are at particular risk, resulting in poor health indicators, lower educational attainment, reduced family incomes and subsequently increased child labour (Patel 2009, p. 50).With the recent worldwide economic downturn, a number of anti-trafficking agencies and analysts began to look at the potential impact of the recession on the phenomenon of human trafficking (ECPAT 2009, p. 10).ECPAT found, along with a number of scholars, that poverty will grow significantly as a result of financial crises (ECPAT 2009, p. 11;Percy 2009;Kane 2009).Widespread impoverishment is already being accompanied by a fall in world exports, a rise in unemployment and consumer prices, returns of unemployed migrants to countries of origin and a decline in remittances, with the consequent deterioration of living conditions of entire households, thus making families even more vulnerable to trafficking (ECPAT 2009, p. 11;Percy 2009).Compounding this is the reaction from governments that tend to adopt more restrictive immigration policies towards foreign workers, which in turn results in more irregular migration and strengthening of the informal labour market (IOM 2009).Another negative effect of economic crises is that budget spending for social services, child protection and child care often decreases (ECPAT 2009, p. 11).Furthermore, development aid is drastically reduced during economic downturns (ECPAT 2009, p. 11;Patel 2009).All these factors serve to exacerbate children's vulnerability to exploitation and trafficking.

Understanding TANs: the value of cosmopolitan globalisation theory
Whilst it is the political activism of TANs that has moved the CST issue onto the global agenda, theorists continue to struggle over how to define the motivations and activities of these fluid transnational networks.Scholarly attention on TANs has tended to focus on measuring campaign 'impact' over internal network dynamics or network motivations.
Network scholars have developed theories about network campaign tactics including the 'boomerang theory' (Keck & Sikkink 1998) and campaign 'blocking' and 'backdoor moves' (Hertel 2006).International Relations scholars, opposing the state-centred paradigm of an anarchical international political system, have analysed non-state actors in international politics (Piper &Uhlin 2004).Other scholars have made use of social movement theory and focused explicitly on transnational activism (Keck & Sikkink 1998).Sociologists and political scientists interested in social movements have analysed the extent of social movements to a transnational or global level (Della Porta et al. 1999).However, these theories are not particularly useful for explaining TANs'motivations for collective action and their campaign activities, goals, and politics.
Cosmopolitanism is a useful theoretical framework for examining TANs against CST as it both provides a lens to examine the links between globalisation, poverty and inequality, and it also explains the proliferation of TANs advocating for universal values, poverty eradication and their motivations for acting as buffers against child trafficking.Cosmopolitanism has been criticised as being a "vague" or "diffuse" theory (Skrbis et al. 2004, p. 117), however, as Miller claims, cosmopolitanism is now the "preferred self-description of most moral philosophers who write about global justice" (2007, p. 23).Given the increasing pressures of globalisation, the recognition that we are in need of some global conception of humanity is not surprising -increasing globalisation demands some normative understanding of global community, responsibility and governance.
The underlying dynamic of globalisation is cosmopolitan, that is, it is simultaneously but increasingly differentiated growth of world markets, interstate institutions, and global civil society and norms.This dynamic, once unleashed, can have diverse consequences (Brysk & Shafir, 2004, p. 5).Thus while the political economy of hegemony dictates an unequal distribution of resources among and within states and a general weakening of state citizenship, the resulting dynamic is more complex in that power is moving from weak states to strong states, from states to markets, and away from state authority entirely in certain domains and functions (Strange 1998).For this research, a perspective that recognises the relationship between contemporary globalisation, inequality and trafficking is in line with that of Devetak and Higgott (1999) and their argument that globalisation inhibits liberty and justice for many people.This research also supports the idea put forward by Delanty (2006) that cosmopolitanism concerns a dynamic relation between the local and the global.This is suggested by the term itself: the interaction of the universal order of the cosmos and the human order of the polis (Delanty 2006, p. 36).Cosmopolitanism thus concerns the multiple ways the local and the national is redefined as a result of interaction with the global (Delanty 2006, p. 36).Cosmopolitanism is a useful theory for making sense of social transformation and in opening up discursive spaces of world openness and thus in resisting globalisation (Delanty 2006, p. 36).Current debates in political theory draw attention to the revival of the Kantian cosmopolitan ideal, which, it is argued, is relevant in the present context of globalisation, the alleged crisis of the nation-state and the need for global civil society (Bohman & Lutz-Bachmann 1997).Cosmopolitanism offers a basis to establish a more just global order, predominantly through its espousal of a commitment to humanity as a whole, facilitated by building consensus on values that demonstrate a commitment beyond the nation TANs have a key role to play in activating the cosmopolitan system -producing frameworks for universal ethical values -given their cosmopolitan credentials (Carey, 2003, p. 1).
Contemporary cosmopolitan theory is a response to a range of global problems including economic injustice, poverty, malnutrition, human rights abuses and ecological degradation (Eckersley 2007, p. 675).Cosmopolitanism has emerged as an important theoretical approach in the social sciences in recent years (Delanty & He 2008, p. 323).Originally a development within moral and political philosophy concerning a universalistic orientation towards world principles, it has become increasingly pertinent to social science especially in the context of issues relating to globalisation and transnational movements of all kinds (Delanty& He 2008, p. 324).While for early cosmopolitans such as Kant cosmopolitanism was primarily a demand for the recognition of universal rights, today it has a considerable impact in the human and social sciences as a way to respond to contemporary globalisation (Delanty& He 2008, p. 327).
Cosmopolitans argue that problems such as poverty and injustice arise from, or are intensified by, the processes of globalisation.According to a cosmopolitan reading the growing range and intensity of cross-border flows of money, people, goods, services, pollution, disease, weapons and communication have undermined the distinctions between 'internal/external' and 'inside/outside' that have been central to the formation and practice of modern states (Eckersley 2007, p. 675).Contemporary cosmopolitanism takes the individual to be the ultimate unit of moral worth and to be entitled to equal consideration regardless of his or her culture, nationality or citizenship, besides other morally arbitrary facts about the individual person (Tan 2002, p. 461).As Nussbaum has put it, the cosmopolitan view holds that, wherever he or she is, "each human being is human and counts as the moral equal of every other" (1996, p. 133).As a thesis about responsibility, cosmopolitanism guides the individual outward from local obligations, and prohibits those obligations from crowding out responsibilities to distant others (Brock 2009, p. 3).The borders of states, and other boundaries considered to restrict the scope of justice are considered irrelevant roadblocks in appreciating responsibilities to all in the global community (Brock 2009, p. 4).
One of the principal expressions of cosmopolitanism as a political condition concerns the search for alternatives to purely instrumental economic and security relations between societies (Delanty & He 2008, p. 324).Cosmopolitans take seriously their allegiance to the entire community of human beings by seeking global institutional reforms that dilute state sovereignty, weaken national identifications and globalise citizenship (Eckersley 2007, p. 675).Their inquiry thus focuses on such questions as: Do contemporary international economic arrangements promote or harm the life chances of those who are most vulnerable, particularly the poor in developing countries, relative to feasible alternative arrangements?
How has the international trade regime influenced global poverty rates and global income distribution?Does the global economy and its associated policies help the poor, or does it work against them?How can the international economic structure be reformed to meet the basic needs of the poor and least advantaged?(Kaptstein 2004, p. 74).Cosmopolitans refuse to grant any privilege to the state and are, in fact, quite sceptical that government policies serve the interests of those who are most vulnerable (Kapstein 2004, p. 74).They take seriously, in a way that others do not, the problem of state failure and also unjust states (Kapstein 2004, p. 74).While they recognise that states could serve the cosmopolitan end of a social arrangement in which each individual is treated equally or fairly, they also accept that many governments around the world lack the will or capacity to provide for the basic needs of their citizens especially those who, due to income, gender, race, religion or other factors, are most vulnerable (Kapstein 2004, p. 74).As a result they argue that efforts to secure justice should focus on the reform of social arrangements beyond the nation state (Kapstein 2004, p. 74).They also hold that global economic arrangements should be reformed so that they no longer bring about or permit such significant shortfalls from minimally adequate living conditions for so many people (Kapstein 2004, p. 74).One example of the 'source' of this economic unfairness that needs addressing is the set of international trade rules that oppress poor nations and individuals.Cosmopolitans argue that there is good reason to believe that the current structure of the international trade regime, to provide just one prominent example, is tilted in important respects against the interests of the poor (Kapstein 2004, p. 74).
Alexander highlights the link between globalisation and the cosmopolitan TAN response in his argument that globalisation has appeared as a response to the trauma of the twentieth century in a moment of hope when it seemed that the possibility for a worldwide civil society was finally at hand (2007, p. 85).Cosmopolitanism has also been theorised as a transnational mode of practice whereby actors construct bonds of mutual commitment and reciprocity across borders through public discourse and socio-political struggle (Kurasawa 2004).The crux of the matter lies in grasping the work of constructing and performing cosmopolitanism from below via normatively and politically oriented forms of global social action (Kurasawa 2004, p. 234).In a similar vein Delanty and He argue that to speak of cosmopolitanism is to refer to a transformation in self-understanding as a result of the engagement with others over issues of global significance (2008, p. 324).The ongoing challenge for cosmopolitans is to develop and sustain dialogue across cultural and civilizational worlds (Delanty & He 2008, p. 324).
Held argues that cosmopolitanism today must start by building an ethically sound and politically robust conception of the proper basis of political community and of the relations among communities, which requires recognition of four fundamental principles (2003, p. 470).Supporting Kapstein (2004), Held argues that the first of these is that the ultimate units of moral concern are individual people, not states or other particular forms of human association (Held 2003, p. 470).The second principle emphasises that the status of equal worth should be acknowledged by everyone (Held 2003, p. 470).In other words, each person has an equal stake in this universal ethical realm and is, accordingly, required to respect all other people's status as a basic unit of moral interest (Held 2003, p. 470).At the centre of the cosmopolitan view is the idea that human well-being is not defined by geographical or cultural locations, that national or ethnic or gendered boundaries should not determine the limits or rights or responsibilities for the satisfaction of basic human needs, and that all human beings require equal moral respect and concern (Held 2009, p. 537).The principles of equal respect, equal concern and the priority of the vital needs of all human beings are not principles for some remote utopia but are, rather, at the centre of significant post-Second World War legal and political developments including human rights law and the statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) (Held, 2010, p.95).Held's third principle, the principle of 52 Cosmopolitan Civil Societies Journal, Vol.5, No.1, 2013 consent, recognises that a commitment to equal worth and equal moral value requires a noncoercive political process in and through which people can negotiate and pursue their interconnections, interdependence and differences (Held 2003, p. 470).The fourth principle is inclusiveness and subsidiarity, which seeks to clarify the fundamental criterion for drawing proper boundaries around units of collective decision-making, and on what grounds (2003, p. 471).Held argues that those significantly affected by public decisions should have an equal opportunity, directly or indirectly to influence and shape them (2003, p. 471).Therefore, collective decision-making is best located when it is closest to, and involves, those whose opportunities and life chances are determined by significant social processes and forces (Held 2003, p. 471).Held highlights the fact that the fourth principle points to the necessity of both the decentralisation and centralisation of political power (2003, p. 471).If decision-making is decentralised as much as possible, it maximises the opportunity of each person to influence the social conditions that shape his or her life (Held 2003, p. 471).
In sum, therefore, cosmopolitanism can be understood as the moral and political outlook that builds upon the strengths of the post-1945 multilateral order, particularly its commitment to universal standards, human rights and democratic values, and that seeks to specify general principles upon which all could act (Held 2004, p. 389).These are principles that can be universally shared and that can form the basis for the protection and nurturing of each person's equal interest in the determination of the institutions that govern their lives (Held 2004, p. 389).The aim of modern cosmopolitanism and the TANs that support and promote it, therefore, is the conceptualisation and generation of the necessary background conditions for a 'common' or 'basic' structure of individual action and social activity (Held 2009, p. 539).

Criticisms of cosmopolitan theory
While cosmopolitanism has been used as a new moral and ethnic standpoint suitable for 21 st century global life, it has also been criticised as a manifestation of the mentality of the upper and middle classes (Featherstone 2002).Cosmopolitanism has also been criticised for being an elitist, Western concept with little draw in the context of nationalism, ethno-nationalism, and territoriality -all instrumental in shaping identity among many affected by globalisation and other dynamics of change.Authors such as De Sousa Santos and Rodriguez-Garavito argue that cosmopolitan projects have a long and ambiguous history anchored in Western modernity (2005, p. 14).Some theorists such as Calhoun (2002) have criticised cosmopolitanism as a "discourse centred in a Western view of the world".In a similar vein Van der Veer (2002) has called it the Western and profoundly colonial engagement with the "rest of the world".The mapping of cosmopolitanism has concerned not where in the world you find the cosmopolitans, but where in the social structure you find them (Hannerz 2006, p. 16).Hannerz suggests that in theoretical statements about cosmopolitanism there is a "rather uncosmopolitan" disregard for other parts of the world (2006, p. 15).An alternative view is set forth even more sharply by Ashis who suggests that Europe and North America have increasingly lost their cosmopolitanism, paradoxically because of a concept of cosmopolitanism that considers Western culture to be definitionally universal and therefore automatically cosmopolitan (1998, p. 146).

Critics of cosmopolitanism argue that more often than not cosmopolitan projects have been as
Western or Northern-centric and exclusionary as the global designs they oppose (De Sousa Santos & Rodriguez-Garavito 2005, p. 14).For example, human rights institutions and doctrines, with their Western roots and liberal bent, have often been blind to non-Western conceptions of human dignity and collective rights that hold out the prospect for an expanded, cosmopolitan conception of rights (De Sousa Santos & Rodriguez-Garavito 2005, p. 14).
Cosmopolitanism also articulates an impulse to be rootless -to be a cosmopolitan means having no allegiance or loyalty to any particular community, being capable of renouncing identity, being motivated by universal values and the capacity to be mobile.These functions are, according to Yegenoglu, those of an elite class (2005, p. 118).Furthermore, Ong argues that cosmopolitanism "gives the misleading impression that everyone can take equal advantage of mobility and modern communication and that transnationality has been liberatory, in both spatial and political sense, for all peoples" (1999, p. 11).Pollock et al. (2000, p. 582) posit that cosmopolitans today are often the victims of modernity, failed by capitalism's upward mobility, and bereft of those comforts and customs of national belonging.Refugees, peoples of the diaspora, and migrants and exiles represent the spirit of the cosmopolitical community (Pollock et al. 2000, p. 582).Too often in the West these people are grouped together in a vocabulary of 'victimage' (Pollock et al. 2000, p. 582).Such benevolence is well intentioned but it fails to acknowledge the critique of modernity that minoritarian cosmopolitans embody in their historic witness to the twentieth century (Pollock et al. 2000, p. 582).Ignatieff (1994) further argues that cosmopolitanism fails to appeal to ethno-cultural minorities because the rarefied language of cosmopolitanism is antithetical to the "vernacular" politics of minority struggle.
Critics of cosmopolitanism have also addressed their criticisms at the civil society actors that espouse the universal values that cosmopolitanism espouses.De Sousa Santos and Rodriguez-Garavito, (2005, p. 11) highlight the links between hegemonic and counterhegemonic actors -for instance, between philanthropic foundations in the North and human rights organisations in the South -as well as the contradictions within transnational activist coalitions.From this viewpoint such links and tensions reveal that, far from "happily coexisting in this effort to work together to produce new and emancipator global norms" (Dezalay& Garth 2002, p. 318) NGOs and other actors of counter-hegemonic globalisation are part and parcel of the elites benefiting from neoliberal globalisation and thus contribute to the construction of new global orthodoxies through programs to export Western legal institutions and expertise (De Sousa Santos & Rodriguez-Garavito 2005, p. 11).Thus, access to globality is not an even one: while globalisation enables diasporas in the developed world to fight with the weapons provided by the discourse of democratic rights and equality, access to such claims are severely curtailed for the underclass in the Third World mainly because the nation-state in the Third World is in the business of adjusting itself to the injunctions of global capital (Yegenoglu 2005, p. 105).Welfare structures in the South cannot emerge due to the priorities of transnational agencies as civil society shifts its understandings from service to citizen to capital maximisation (Spivak 1997, p. 90).According to the critics of cosmopolitanism, transnationalism in fact diminishes the possibility of a functioning civil society in developing nations (Spivak 1997, pp. 90 -91).

Defence of cosmopolitan theory
The assertion that cosmopolitanism is an elite project overlooks the potential of world society, of trans-cultural sympathisers and the growing densification of contacts and support for TANs that work on behalf of such world-order values as humane governance, economic sustainability, non-violence, human rights and environmental protection, essentially for those who live underprivileged lives (Carey 2003, p. 4).Moreover, as argued by Hannerz, significant changes in the world including new patterns of global migration and activism demonstrate there has not for a long time, or perhaps ever, really been a world divided between "haves" who move and "have nots" who stay put (2006, p. 17).Cosmopolitanism is no longer only an elite phenomenon (Hannerz 2006, p. 17).
As argued by Skrbis et al. (2004) what matters most is not whether cosmopolitanism is a Western invention but, rather, whether it can serve as a shared universal value, applicable across different cultural and social contexts.In a similar vein, Hannerz asserts that looking for the points and areas in the social structure where some kind of cosmopolitanism may grow should not be a matter only of looking up or down in the social strata as conventionally understood -we should, rather, seek out, along more varied dimensions, the loci where experiences and interests may come together, in individuals and groups, to expand horizons and shape wider sets of relationships (2006, p. 19).In questions of socio-economic justice there are significant parallels between domestic and global spheres which do allow us to identify similarities between theories of domestic and global justice (Walker 2011, p. 83).We see that, on a global level, the defining principles of liberal democracy are embodied in the cosmopolitan position that all human beings are of equal moral worth, entitled to liberty and equality of rights and resources (Walker 2011, p. 83).This research supports the theories put forward by supporters of cosmopolitanism such as Held (2002) who argues that cosmopolitanism entails a distinct ethical orientation towards selflessness, worldliness and communitarianism.The close connection between ethical commitment and cosmopolitan disposition has been one of the key characteristics of cosmopolitanism since the Stoics, but it became distinctly pronounced in the modern era, characterised by the seemingly unstoppable thrust of time-space compression fuelled by information technologies and the media (Skrbis et al. 2002).It is cosmopolitanism's distinctly ethical commitments that drive much of the contemporary environmental, anti-war, antiglobalisation and other social movements (Skrbis et al. 2002, p. 128).Since 1945 there has been a significant entrenchment of cosmopolitan values concerning the equal dignity and worth of all human beings in international rules and regulations; the reconnection of international law and morality; the establishment of complex governance systems, regional and global; and the growing recognition that the public good requires coordinated multilateral action if it is to be achieved in the long term (Held 2002, p. 135).The principal political question of our times is how the issues of inequality and unevenness in the global economy can best be addressed and governed (Held 2002, p. 134).Cosmopolitan theory provides a useful framework for further thought and action on this question, in a domain of overlapping ideas that unites a significant body of progressive opinion.
Cosmopolitan theory is useful as it explains the motivations and activities of TANs.It demonstrates that there is an alternative to hegemonic, neoliberal, top-down globalisation, and that is counter-hegemonic solidarity or "bottom-up globalisation" (De Sousa Santos 2006, p. 398).Falk (1999) has devoted almost as much work to delineating the problems of an eliteimposed "globalisation from above" as he has to defending what he persuasively argues is a more liberating ideal of "globalisation from below" (Furia 2005, p. 336).In claiming that cosmopolitanism is not inevitably elitist, Falk echoes many previous scholars who have invoked transnational social movements as evidence of a 'bottom up' response to certain really existing exercises of global citizenship (Furia 2005, p. 336).As argued by Held, only a cosmopolitan outlook can ultimately accommodate itself to the political challenges of a more global era, marked by overlapping communities of fate and multilevel/multilayered politics (2003, p. 469).

Responding to global social injustice: Transnational advocacy networks against child sex trafficking in the Mekong Subregion
In Southeast Asia, especially since the 1997 financial crisis, there has been a growing tendency for NGOs, social movements and activist networks to organise and work transnationally (Caouette 2007).In the fight against child trafficking in the GMS and internationally there are three major categories of contributors: National governments, the UN (and its various agencies) and NGOs from both the 'North' and the 'South'.Many network partners, particularly NGOs, are on the ground, carrying out day-to-day operations such as protecting victims, performing 'rescues' and repatriating victims to their home countries.The UN serves as the important forum where international consensus on human trafficking is built and where the bulk of coordination takes place.National governments, of course, remain important contributors because they have the power to legislate and have access to enforcement mechanisms, intelligence and resources to fight trafficking (Dyrud et al. 2007, p. 22).Historically these organisations -NGOs, government and UN agencieshave had little experience of coordination, largely due to financial constraints and economic, labour, and political concerns and differences.
Cosmopolitan Civil Societies Journal, Vol.5, No.1, 2013 57 While international and grassroots NGOs had been campaigning against trafficking for a number of decades, funding from the United States and other governments pushed the trafficking issue onto the global agenda.The demands of donors and the history of antitrafficking funding from the United States were key reasons for the development of, initially, anti-trafficking organisations in the GMS and, subsequently, anti-trafficking networks.The creation of UNIAP -a key inter-agency anti-trafficking network in the GMS -and that of a handful of other anti-trafficking organisations was largely the result of a significant (1 billion US dollar) donation from the Turner Foundation, a private American trust.The substantial Turner Foundation grant, as a research participant explained, aimed to "get the various UN agencies to work together on human trafficking issues and for the UN to work with NGOs and the private sector where possible and appropriate".Subsequently UNIAP was established in the early 2000s and mandated to consist of and coordinate UN agencies, NGOs, and Southeast Asian governments.The donor funding provided for trafficking could be seen by some critics as antithetical to TANs' goal of creating a form of 'globalisation from below' but in the case of TANs against CST this was not the case.Anti-trafficking organisations had already been forming partnerships prior to this funding and the will to form partnerships and a united front against the CST issue was already present -the donor funding merely provided the anti-trafficking organisations with the much needed resources to formalise and expand their already existing relationships.
Human trafficking also received attention in the 1990s and 2000s because of the HIV/AIDS pandemic.Health experts during this time visited brothels and talked to sex workers about public health and how and why sex workers started working in the brothels and, as a research participant explained, "realised that many of the prostitutes had not consented to their employment".Anti-trafficking and anti-forced labour campaigns in the region were subsequently launched to combat forced prostitution and more organisations became interested in issues to do with HIV/AIDS and human trafficking.From there, with the Ted Turner funding, campaigning against human trafficking simply snowballed.
In the 1990s, at the same time as the Ted Turner Foundation was providing large amounts of funding for anti-trafficking activities, the United States government was creating new legislation on human trafficking.The US passed its first human trafficking bill in 2000, which led to the US Trafficking in Persons law and the US Trafficking in Persons Report Card (US TIP) for countries all over the world except itself.The US government was also actively encouraging the development of anti-trafficking legislation in all countries and provided funds for the development of this legislation.It also actively encouraged antitrafficking advocacy, particularly the development of awareness programs to prevent trafficking from occurring.However, an early problem in anti-human trafficking advocacy was that US money for anti-trafficking campaigning was conditional.In the early years of this funding under the Bush administration the majority of funding from the US government was reserved for NGOs that specifically did not support women working as prostitutes.
Therefore the bulk of US anti-trafficking funds in these early years were given to non-secular NGOs and faith-based advocacy networks.
TANs against child trafficking also formed in the GMS as a result of shared values and social justice concerns.Katcher (2010) argues that what ultimately holds advocacy networks together is the common values shared by network members and the collective interest in stopping human trafficking, helping victims and punishing the perpetrators of this exploitative practice.Research participants expressed a desire to eradicate child trafficking and all participants also mentioned the importance of having 'mutual interests ', 'commitment' and 'common values'.Staff of NGOs and UN agencies discussed their desire to create a more 'just world', secure 'justice for all', 'alleviate poverty and inequality', and 'protect children'.
Research participants also discussed their desire to transform systems for children, develop new legislation on child trafficking and associated problems, work with other sectors such as government for improved inter-agency collaboration and capacity building, and streamline victim services.A key theme derived from interview data was that the representatives of NGOs and UN agencies were initially drawn to their organisations because they strongly adhered to the organisation's mandate.Another important theme was that the staff of these organisations sought networking opportunities in order to create a coherent and consistent message with governments and GMS communities regarding child trafficking.
Research participants explained that what motivated TAN partners and the staff that worked within them was the collective desire to build systems to protect children as well as create new legislation and policy to protect children and punish traffickers.Through the process of working collaboratively and pooling knowledge and resources, TANs were much more successful at achieving these goals than in previous decades when anti-trafficking organisations worked independently of each other.TANs were also motivated by the desire to TANs against CST have achieved a number of important successes.In the GMS transnational advocacy networking against child trafficking has enabled organisations with different mandates and expertise to share skills and capacity for a broader and improved response to child trafficking including prevention, protection, and prosecution activities and rehabilitation of victims.The network UNIAP has been extremely successful in encouraging GMS states to collaborate on the CST problem and worked closely with states to improve trafficking legislation and policy, and the development of extraterritorial legislation (whereby traffickers and sex tourists can be arrested and prosecuted in their home countries after they have fled the GMS).While child trafficking continues unabated, networks such as UNIAP have succeeded in increasing trafficker prosecutions, a fact that will hopefully deter would-be traffickers and paedophiles in future.In addition, by networking against this problem, TANs have been able to have a stronger voice in lobbying for new child trafficking policy and legislation, and improved opportunities for working collaboratively on improving child protection systems in the GMS.Most importantly, transnational advocacy networking has contributed to a redistribution of knowledge, power, influence and material resources from the rich North to the core Southern actors working on the ground in local NGOs in the GMS.
Advocacy networking against child trafficking in the GMS has helped to ensure a number of important benefits for victims.Foremost amongst these has been the benefit that victims are able to access a wide range of services.TANs have facilitated the streamlining of victim services and once victims are identified, networks have been effective in referring victims to partner agencies for a range of protection and rehabilitation services.In addition, advocacy networks are helping vulnerable children acquire knowledge and tool sets to mitigate their risks of exploitation.Networks such as Chab Dai have successfully turned their attention to the 'demand' side of trafficking and have been working in sex tourism hot spots to educate travellers about the CST issue and provide them with information regarding the identification of victims and traffickers, the existence of extraterritorial legislation, and the ramifications for paying for sex with local children.
TANs in the GMS are facilitating effective collaboration among law enforcement agencies across jurisdictions so that bureaucratic obstacles are minimised and perpetrators of child trafficking do not escape justice.Improved prevention-oriented coordination has facilitated the involvement of all sectors of society so that anti-trafficking networks can move toward the ultimate goal of preventing the exploitation of children.In providing such victim services, and through the direct sharing of global political economy knowledge, networks are bringing an equal level of counter-activity to a social problem that is clearly enhanced, even promoted, by the economic connectedness of the globalisation of criminal networks that sell children's sexual labour as a commodity.
A further major benefit of collaboration through TANs is that anti-trafficking campaigns can reach all corners of the globe rather than just a small geographic corner.Campaigns have been adapted and developed to target citizens not just in the GMS but also in a large number of developed countries to teach such developed nation citizens about slavery, trafficking and ethical consumerism and make the West aware of the strict penalties imposed on those who travel to poorer countries to sexually abuse children.This expansive outreach, beyond the borders of the GMS, and the incorporation of cultural difference and engagement, reflects the essentially cosmopolitan nature of advocacy networks and provides an important model for addressing global social problems.
Through performing anti-trafficking advocacy through TANs and promoting collective action, organisations were promoting cosmopolitan values in the region and creating a social movement against CST that embraced NGOs, UN agencies, governments, academics, churches, and civil society.With a united voice advocacy network members have provided an effective buffer against child trafficking.As one research participant commented, "there is real value in coming together, the voices together are a lot more difficult to quiet than on their own".

Centrality of transnational advocacy networks in creating a form of 'globalisation from below'
Since Keck and Sikkink's (1999) seminal work on TANs as structures with the potential to transform the "terms and nature of the debate", a wave of scholarship has followed that has attempted to identify the relevance of such groups, focusing in particular on themes of globalisation and legitimacy (Gilson 2011).Recent studies on the benefits of collaboration among advocacy organisations conclude that TANs can have significant influence in key debates and discussion, increase their political standing, and improve access and leverage as well as political influence (Dutting & Sogge 2010, p. 351).Research participants highlighted the fact that the modern aid industry has changed in recent decades and now "encourages collaboration" and co-production and has created a range of relationships, not just between states, the UN and NGOs, and NGOs and civil society, but also amongst NGOs themselves, including alliances, coalitions and network.International NGOs and UN agencies seeking social transformation collaborate on a number of levels to influence global governance.They create and activate global networks, participate in multilateral arenas, facilitate inter-state cooperation, and act within states to influence policy and enhance public participation (Alger 1997).Even in areas often considered to be the sole domain of states such as international security, advocacy networks can play a role in shaping the agenda and contributing to policy change (Price 1998).
Through transnational advocacy networking against CST, TANs are conducting a form of "globalisation from below" in the GMS.TANs have demonstrated that there is an alternative to "globalisation from above" (Falk, 1999) and this is what Evans (2000) has labelled "globalisation from below".The idea of "globalisation from below" is to challenge and transform the negative features of globalisation from above, both by providing alternative ideological and political space to that currently occupied by market-oriented and statist outlooks and by offering resistance to the excesses and distortions that can be attributed to globalisation (Falk 1999, p. 139).Globalisation from below is currently occurring as organisations use global networks and ideologies to shift the balance of power in favour of the dispossessed (Evans 2000).TANs in the GMS have pushed CST onto the global social policy agenda, built global networks, and transformed opinion on child protection and child rights in order to shift the balance of power in favour of the vulnerable.As argued by Evans (2000), cosmopolitan activists are turning the old aphorism "think globally and act locally" around.They are "thinking locally" in discovering how to solve problems that manifest themselves at the local level, but "acting globally" in building transnational networks and campaigns that use extra-political leverage to make local improvements possible (Evans 2000).
TANs are promoting cosmopolitan values and the building of cosmopolitan systems in order to create and sustain an anti-trafficking movement.Networks are key cosmopolitan players for a number of reasons -they create norms, promote cosmopolitan values, protect the vulnerable, encourage inter-agency collaboration, build human rights institutions and child protection systems, and act as buffers against contemporary globalisation and transnational crime.TANs against CST in the GMS, as key cosmopolitan players, are successfully rejecting the notion that the bad luck of certain persons to find themselves locked up in states that deny or fail to provide basic human rights is reason enough for those of us who are more fortunate to turn our backs on their plight.In a similar vein to the women's rights and other social justice movements, TANs in the GMS are promoting the cosmopolitan notion of global justice and supporting the creation of global forums to fight child trafficking.Examples include the Global Forum on Human Trafficking, the Asian Taskforce, UNIAP, and also international legislation such as that provided by the CRC and the Palermo protocol, and extraterritorial legislation to intercept and punish perpetrators.Another important recent example is UN.GIFT, which was launched in March 2007 by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, in cooperation with the ILO, the IOM, UNICEF, OHCHR, and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) with the aim of eradicating human trafficking "by reducing both the vulnerability of potential victims and the demand for exploitation in all its forms; ensuring adequate protection and support to those who do fall victim; and supporting the efficient prosecution of the criminals involved, while respecting the fundamental human rights of all persons" (UN.GIFT 2012).Through conventional and unconventional advocacy activities such as rock concerts and social media campaigns, antitrafficking networks have been successful in broadening their appeal by reaching out to members of the public who may not be able to join protest marches but are willing to engage in and support "innovative activities with a critical edge" (Kurasawa 2004, p. 251).Further, anti-trafficking networks' development of forums and involvement in creating new legislation have pushed the child trafficking issue onto the global social policy agenda and promoted the goal of universal child rights.They have also provided participants with opportunities to exchange and acquire first-hand information about the difficult political, cultural and socio-economic circumstances faced by ordinary citizens on all continents, in order to gain more global perspective (Kurasawa 2004, p. 242).

Conclusion
This article has discussed the cosmopolitan motivations of TANs and posited that cosmopolitan theory is a useful framework for examining the collective motivations, values and activities of TANs advocating against CST in the GMS.This article has discussed how TANs are key cosmopolitan players for a number of reasons -TANs create norms, promote cosmopolitan values, protect the vulnerable, encourage inter-agency collaboration, build human rights institutions and child protection systems, and act as effective buffers against contemporary globalisation and transnational crime.Supporting cosmopolitan theory as put forward by Kapstein (2004), this research has demonstrated that TANs against CST, as key cosmopolitan players, have successfully rejected the notion that the bad luck of certain persons to find themselves locked up in states that deny or fail to provide basic human rights is reason enough for those of us who are more fortunate to turn our backs on their plight.The TANs observed for this research have supported the notion that efforts to secure social justice should focus on the reform of social arrangements beyond the nation state.They have also held that global economic arrangements should be reformed so that they no longer bring about or permit such significant shortfalls from minimally adequate living conditions for so many people.
globalisation and our understanding of in what circumstances and in what ways TANs act on partners' collective values and motivations.Research into these areas is also important for understanding how TANs can provide an effective cosmopolitan response to CST, and indeed other forms of social injustice, in today's global political economy.
This article has addressed the difficult question of TAN values and motivations.Recent scholarship on TANs has tended to focus on their campaign tactics and outcomes which, though worthwhile for expanding our understanding of TANs, does little to explain what motivates organisations to form TANs in the first place.Such theories also provide little explanation for what sustains TANs over time and what they endeavour to achieve.Such theories also fail to explain the effectiveness and achievements of TANs, and there are indeed many examples of recent successes against CST.This article has demonstrated that cosmopolitan globalisation theory is a compelling theoretical framework for examining anti-CST advocacy networks in the GMS.Cosmopolitan globalisation theory helps to explain the common values and goals of TANs that focus their efforts on securing justice for all.What these groups are achieving through their inter-agency collaboration is a new form of 'globalisation from below'.TANs in the GMS are successfully promoting cosmopolitan Cosmopolitan Civil Societies Journal, Vol.5, No.1, 2013 59 create behavioural norms regarding the protection and treatment of children.They worked collaboratively to keep the CST issue on the global agenda.Research participants acknowledged the enormity of the CST issue and suggested that TANs' political activism and globalisation from below was important because, as one interview participant stated, "it ultimately takes a network to combat a network".As another interview participant stated:We're working against the entrenched idea that inequality is ok.What we're trying to do is huge, it's much bigger than any individual organisation, it's much bigger than the networks, but what motivates us is the desire to eradicate poverty and promote equality.It's what started us working together in the first place and it's what sustains us and continues to motivate us.