<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Links I Liked</title>
	<atom:link href="https://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/links-i-liked-109/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/links-i-liked-109/</link>
	<description>How active citizens and effective states can change the world</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Jul 2017 10:09:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.15</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Wells-Dang</title>
		<link>https://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/links-i-liked-109/#comment-274202</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Andrew Wells-Dang]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Nov 2016 06:51:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/?p=23489#comment-274202</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Duncan, re the CIVICUS monitor link, some caution may be warranted about the basis for their ratings - as with so many such international rating systems. At least for Vietnam, where I live, CIVICUS&#039;s finding of &quot;Closed&quot; is inaccurate and misleading, and it seems to be based more on the view of one overseas human rights group than any civil society actors in the country. I wonder if readers in other countries have the same reaction?

Civic space is a lot more complex than a label of &quot;repressed&quot;, &quot;obstructed&quot; and so on. Many contexts are restricted in some ways, open in others. The task for advocates is how to identify and support openings, while also acting to protect existing spaces. If anyone&#039;s interested in a more in-depth view of civic space in Vietnam, see https://oxfam.app.box.com/files/0/f/11515238639/Oxfam_Civic_Space_Assessment_Vietnam (or for non-Oxfamers, feel free to ask me directly)!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Duncan, re the CIVICUS monitor link, some caution may be warranted about the basis for their ratings &#8211; as with so many such international rating systems. At least for Vietnam, where I live, CIVICUS&#8217;s finding of &#8220;Closed&#8221; is inaccurate and misleading, and it seems to be based more on the view of one overseas human rights group than any civil society actors in the country. I wonder if readers in other countries have the same reaction?</p>
<p>Civic space is a lot more complex than a label of &#8220;repressed&#8221;, &#8220;obstructed&#8221; and so on. Many contexts are restricted in some ways, open in others. The task for advocates is how to identify and support openings, while also acting to protect existing spaces. If anyone&#8217;s interested in a more in-depth view of civic space in Vietnam, see <a href="https://oxfam.app.box.com/files/0/f/11515238639/Oxfam_Civic_Space_Assessment_Vietnam" rel="nofollow">https://oxfam.app.box.com/files/0/f/11515238639/Oxfam_Civic_Space_Assessment_Vietnam</a> (or for non-Oxfamers, feel free to ask me directly)!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
