The purpose of this research is to analyze, through quantitative methodology techniques, the organizational capacity of Civil Society Organizations (CSO) in Mexico and their influence on public policy. It will seek to determine CSOs’ main characteristics (internally and externally) to identify the different channels through which they can exercise their influence, specifically in the agenda-setting process and the implementation of their proposals. The final objective of this article is to lead its findings toward public policy recommendations that empower CSOs by means of strengthening their organizational capacities.
AnheierH. K.KrlevG.PreussS.MildenbergerG.BekkersR.MensinkW.BauerA.KnappM.WistowG.HernandezA.AdelajaB.2014. “Social Innovation as Impact of the Third Sector.” Deliverable 1.1 of the Project: “Impact of the Third Sector as Social Innovation (ITSSOIN).” European Commission—7th Framework Programme, European Commission, DG Research, Brussels, August.
3.
ArcadeJ.GodetM.MeunierF.RoubelatF.2009. “Structural Analysis with the MICMAC Method & Actors’ Strategy with MACTOR Method.” In The Millennium Project: Futures Research Methodology Version 3.0, edited by GlennJ. C.GordonT. J., 7–25. Washington, DC: The Millennium Project.
4.
Civil Society Organizations.2014. “Annual Report 2014.”Commission for the Promotion of the Activities of Civil Society Organizations, Mexico, DF.
5.
DodgeJ.2014. “Civil Society Organizations and Deliberative Policy Making: Interpreting Environmental Controversies in the Deliberative System.”Policy Sciences47 (2): 161–85.
6.
EdwardsM.HulmeD.1992. “Scaling Up NGO Impact on Development: Learning from Experience.”Development in Practice2 (2): 77–91.
7.
FrumkinP.2002. On Being Nonprofit: A Conceptual and Policy Primer. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
8.
GándaraG.VeraF. J. O.2014. Métodos Prospectivos: Manual para el estudio y la construcción del futuro [Prospective methods: Manual for the study and construction of the future]. Mexico: Paidos.
9.
GodetM.2000. De la anticipacion a la accion: manual de prospectiva y estrategia [From anticipation to action: manual of foresight and strategy]. Mexico: Alfaomega/Marcombo.
10.
GodetM.DuranceP.2007. Prospectiva estrategica: problemas y metodos. La caja de herramientas de la prospectiva estratégica [Strategic foresight: Problems and methods. The toolbox of strategic foresight]. Cuaderno num. 20, 2a. ed. Paris: CNAM-Prospektiker (Cuadernos del Laboratoire d′Investigation Prospective et Stratégique).
11.
HelmsM. M.RodriguezM. A.RíosL. De losHargraveW. B.2011. “Entrepreneurial Potential in Argentina: A SWOT Analysis, Competitiveness Review.”An International Business Journal21 (3): 269–87. doi:10.1108/10595421111134859.
12.
KaragiannisN.WagnerP.2008. “Varieties of Agonism: Conflict, the Common Good, and the Need for Synagonism.”Journal of Social Philosophy39: 323–39.
RajasekaranN.2009. “Non-governmental Devel-opment Organizations in India: A SWOT Analysis.”ICFAI Journal of Managerial Economics7 (2): 50–69.
17.
RaustialaK.1997. “States, NGOs, and International Environmental Institutions.”International Studies Quarterly41:719–40.
18.
SalamonL. M.Wojciech SokolowskiS.2004. Global Civil Society: Dimensions of the Nonprofit Sector. Vol. 2. Johns Hopkins Center for Civil Society Studies. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press.
19.
StermanJ. D.2000. Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World. Mexico: McGraw-Hill.
VillacortaP. J.MasegosaA. D.CastellanosD.LamataM. T.2012. “A Linguistic Approach to Structural Analysis in Prospective Studies.” In Advances on Computational Intelligence. IPMU Communications in Computer and Information Science, edited by GrecoS.Bouchon-MeunierB.ColettiG.FedrizziM.MatarazzoB.YagerR. R., vol. 297, 1–10. Berlin: Springer.
