Civil Society Capacity Building for Democratic Reform: Experience and Lessons from Indonesia

This article examines civil society strengthening experience in Indonesia to illuminate issues, challenges, and lessons for non-governmental organization (NGO) capacity building and international donor-supported democratic reform. The authors conceive of capacity as a function of contextual factors, and internal factors associated with an individual NGO or a network of NGOs. Contextual factors that need to be taken into account in Indonesia include weak reform implementation, state distrust of NGOs, and backsliding on some basic freedoms. Among the important internal features of NGOs in democracy promotion are overreliance on confrontational advocacy strategies, shallow organizational capacity, inability to cooperate to leverage impact, limited outreach to indigenous constituencies and sustainability problems. Indonesia’s democracy-promotion NGO coalitions have largely operated as instruments of donor-supported reforms. As they seek to become socially embedded actors pursuing indigenous agendas, they face the need to confront the various expectations of their stakeholders regarding their roles and legitimacy, develop flexibility to respond to new engagements with government and with citizens, and address their internal capacity gaps. Three cases are presented that illustrate both the problems and the encouraging progress with government–NGO collaborations in democratic governance.     

Follower or Challenger? How Chinese Non-governmental Organizations Manage Accountability Requirements from Funders

Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) sometimes disagree with their funders’ accountability requirements; however, their dependence on the funders’ resources makes it difficult to express their disagreement. This dilemma for NGOs may keep funders from substantively holding NGOs to account and cause mission drift for the NGOs. This paper analyzes an in-depth case study of an understudied scenario: how a newly founded NGO engages with multiple funders with varying competence in accountability practices. By analyzing a Chinese NGO’s accountability relationships with its funders, we found that the NGO’s responses varied according to its organizational interests and how it perceived the funders’ competence. Better trust meant better compliance. Therefore, to secure compliance, it is important to enhance NGOs’ trust in funders’ competence. Based on the findings, we suggest that funders be more aware of NGOs’ agency, be ready to engage in ongoing collaborative learning with NGOs and align NGOs’ interests with the accountability requirements.

     

NGOs’ transnational advocacy networks: from ‘legitimacy’ to ‘political responsibility’?

NGOs that operate as part of transnational advocacy networks face a number of ‘legitimacy challenges’ concerning their rights to participate in the shaping of global governance. Outlining the legitimacy claims that development NGOs make, the article argues that ‘legitimacy’ is a socially constructed quality that may be ascribed to an NGO by actors and stakeholders with different viewpoints. NGOs operating transnationally link disparate communities and conceptions of legitimacy, and undermine the discourse and practice of sovereignty. Therefore such NGOs will find it difficult to be universally regarded as legitimate, especially by states that hold a sovereignty‐based conception of legitimacy. However, relationships are the building blocks of networks, and efforts to improve them should not be abandoned simply because ‘legitimacy’ is too closely connected with sovereignty. In particular, NGOs ought to improve their relationships with the poor and marginalized communities whose interests they claim to promote. To this end, the concept of ‘political responsibility’ is suggested as a pragmatic approach to understanding power relations as they arise in transnational advocacy networks and campaigns.     

Framing contests in global NGO networks: How controversies enable and challenge collaboration and action

In multistakeholder sustainability initiatives, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) need not only to negotiate with actors from other sectors, but also with other NGOs. Taking a framing perspective, this study examines how NGOs engage in framing contests because of their collaborative attitude toward the private sector. Through an analysis of Oxfam's participation in the Shrimp Aquaculture Dialogues, the paper examines the interplay between NGOs that propose and oppose certification as a viable strategy for ensuring sustainability in the farmed shrimp sector. The results show that controversies among NGO groups related prognostic framing (i.e., regarding the proposed solution to a problem) are characterized by specific ontological and normative attributes. The paper offers NGOs strategies for dealing with such controversies and shows that, depending on the nature of the controversy, engaging in framing contests might enlarge or constrain the roles that an NGO is able to play in a multistakeholder setting, particularly, when it comes to preserving its independence while securing interdependence with others.     

The Development of Grassroots Chinese NGOs Following the Wenchuan Earthquake of 2008: Three Case Studies,Four Modi Vivendi

Many analysts consider 2008 to have been “NGO year zero” for China, as the relief and reconstruction process following the Wenchuan earthquake witnessed a significant surge in NGO activity. This study traces the development trajectory of three NGOs in Y City over the eight years since the area was severely struck by the Wenchuan earthquake. These NGOs actively assisted in the post-disaster recovery. By the time the reconstruction was complete, they had translated their distinct resources, development plans, and relationships with local government into different approaches to helping the local community. This study proposes an interactive model that captures the nuanced dynamics over time on both sides of the NGO–local government relationships. The model focuses on variations in NGOs’ orientations and bargaining power. This yields a matrix with four elementary types of relationship: “parent-–child,” “mercantile,” “predator–prey,” and alienated relationships. These interaction patterns and their effects are clearly seen in the case studies.     

Strategies and tactics in NGO–government relations

Relationships between nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and government agencies have been variously described in the nonprofit literature as cooperative, complementary, adversarial, confrontational, or even co‐optive. But how do NGO–government relationships emerge in practice, and is it possible for NGOs to manage multiple strategies of interaction at once? This article examines the experience of three leading NGOs in Mumbai, India, involved in slum and squatter housing. We investigate how they began relating with government agencies during their formative years and the factors that shaped their interactions. We find that NGOs with similar goals end up using very different strategies and tactics to advance their housing agendas. More significant, we observe that NGOs are likely to employ multiple strategies and tactics in their interactions with government. Finally, we find that an analysis of strategies and tactics can be a helpful vehicle for clarifying an organization's theory of change.     

The Role of Indigeneity NGOs in the Legal Recognition of Adat Communities and Customary Forests in Indonesia

The main assumption of indigeneity NGOs in Indonesia is that state recognition will strengthen indigenous peoples’ rights to their land and forests against ongoing or future dispossession. In Indonesia, legal recognition has become central to the approaches of indigeneity NGO campaigns, while the local realities and problems among indigenous communities seem to receive less attention. Has legal recognition of indigenous communities turned into a national NGO project that does not solve the communities’ land and forest-related problems? In this article, we compare two locations where communities have succeeded in obtaining state recognition. By focusing our analysis on the steps in the recognition process, from articulating community problems to eventually solving them, we show how indigeneity NGOs have had a dominant role, but achieved limited success. Instead of resulting in community autonomy and tenure security, the legal recognition process reproduces state territorialisation over customary forests and communities.     

Changing partners: Northern NGOs,Northern governments

Northern NGOs live with an increasing level of insecurity and change. Governmental pressures to professionalise contribute to bureaucratisation, while inadequate overheads, an outdated project approach and lengthy approval procedures work against professionalism. Although they spend tens of millions of dollars annually through NGOs, few OECD governments have taken evaluation seriously. Northern NGO survival, theorefore, has been largely de-linked from performance. More fundamental is the growing identity crisis that Norther NGOs have in relation to their iincreasingly crisis that Northern NGOs have in relation to their increasingly effective Southern counterparts. Recession and faltering public support have pushed governments into reduced aid budgets and new concepts of accountability, participation and the role of ‘civil society’. Adding to the burden these shifts place on NGOs, many governments now deal directly with Southern NGOs. Many governments have also restricted their matching or ‘responsive’ NGO funding programmes, while providing massive funding increases — on highly favourable terms — for emergency and refugee work. Most OECD governments have also initiated special funds for AIDS, women, democracy and special geographical troublesports, channelling NGOs towards governmental priorities. Some basic principles are proposed for remedying the problems and for treating NGOs as important elements of civil society rather than as delivery mechanisms for governments. The author, who takes full responsibility for all errors, omissions and opinions, is very grateful to Elena Borghese, Tim Brodhead, Sharon Capeling-Alakija, Tim Draimin, Ian Filewod, Anna Foca, Henny Helmich and Terry Mooney for helpful comments on an early draft. An earlier version of the paper appeared in Smillie and Helmich (1993).     

Civil Society Partnerships: Power Imbalance and Mutual Dependence in NGO Partnerships

This study examines the distinction between power imbalance and mutual dependence to better understand how NGOs manage resource dependencies in their relationships with civil society partners. The NGO leaders we interviewed emphasized mutual dependence in the relationships they developed with other NGOs regarding access to financial and information resources. In contrast, discourse about their relationships with IGOs focused on the acquisition of legitimacy and access, and was dominated by power imbalance. NGOs were largely accepting of both forms of dependence in pursuit of the community’s shared goals and for the greater good of constituents. Our finding that NGOs refrain from terminating suboptimal relationships also reflects the extent to which mutual dependence governs NGOs partnering strategies.     

Evolving Network Roles in International Aid Efforts: Evidence from Croatia’s Post War Transition

Social capital is created when members and organizations in a society enact relationships with others. The outcome of these relationships includes new opportunities, information, and access to a variety of resources. The purpose of this article is to study donor communication and relationships that help to build social capital. The site for this study is the evolving nature of donor organization relations with voluntary associations in Croatia from 1999 to 2002. Using network analysis, this article traces how donor–NGO-media relations changed over time and provides suggestions for international donors and NGOs in transitions to maximize the outcome of their communicative relationships.     

Saving the Moral Capital of NGOs: Identifying One-Sided and Many-Sided Social Dilemmas in NGO Accountability

The literature on nonprofit management has embraced the concept of “accountability” to target urgent challenges related to NGO probity and integrity, and there have been attempts in the literature to use rational-choice-based governance approaches to solve them. Although the existing principal–agent frameworks provide important insights, they are limited to the analysis of financial relationships between NGOs and donors. We contribute to the literature in developing a comprehensive rational-choice-based governance approach to analyze all stakeholder relationships of NGOs. Applying the research program of ordonomics, we unpack two fundamental interaction problems: (a) the “stakeholder dilemma” between the NGO and a single accountability holder as a one-sided social dilemma and (b) the “competition dilemma” among rival NGOs as a many-sided social dilemma. We show that improving NGO accountability in relation to intended beneficiaries, peer organizations, and the general public also requires identifying the underlying governance problem as a competition dilemma focusing on collective self-regulation as a solution.     

Why some greens are more powerful than others: on destabilisation,power shifts and the democratic potential of NGOs

This article studies how the collective empowerment of NGOs that is embodied in the destabilisation of world politics is distributed among individual organisations in the NGO community. The article focuses on non-governmental power in three global environmental conventions. It seeks to explain power differences between individual organisations in terms of possession of resources such as income, expertise, prominence and independence. In contrast to previous NGO research, this article applies an extensive and statistical approach. The main finding is that there is a global green elite of well-equipped NGOs that is allotted most power. This result is discussed in the light of recent debates on the democratic potential of an expanded role for NGOs in global politics.     

Mission Impossible? Defining Nongovernmental Organizations

This paper provides a synopsis of current interpretations of the term nongovernmental organization (NGO). Although NGOs have become recognized actors in international affairs, particularly over the last decade, it has not yet been clearly defined what the term NGO encompasses. It is argued that two major tracks of NGO interpretations can be distinguished: the juridical approach, and the sociological perspective. In juridical studies, the emphasis is placed on the legal status of NGOs in the national context and their implications for international law. Sociological works, instead, are based on studies of societal actors, and try to capture the term while examining more specifically the composition and functions of NGOs in the transnational arena. Acknowledging both tracks, the paper concludes with a comprehensive definition of the term NGO.     

The strategies that bind: NGO coalitions and their influence

Abstract This article examines NGOs as strategic organizations that form coalitions in order to influence other actors, particularly international financial institutions. It has three primary aims: to examine NGOs as strategic organizations; to look at a particular type of NGO network, the coalition, which unlike a network involves more value and commitment; and to assess the factors that contribute to their strategies such as changes to the NGO environment. To do this, the resource dependency perspective is utilized to evaluate the influence of various resources (funding, legitimacy and information) on NGOs’ organizational strategy. Oxfam International, the NGO Working Group on the World Bank, and the Bretton Woods Project are three NGO coalitions examined. I conclude that there are differences between NGO networks and coalitions and that the coalitions strategically act and react to changing resources in their environments.     

The Quest for Aid Complementarity: Reforming Co‐operation between Nordic+ Donors and NGOs

Aid fragmentation is a maddening problem in the aid business. NGOs are part and parcel of this fragmentation problem; hence calls for more complementarity between Northern NGOs and (their) governments have led to a series of co‐funding reforms. This article analyses the co‐funding reforms of the Nordic+ donors and situates them within the broader evolutions that have taken place in donor‐NGO relations in these countries. It finds that these donors have interpreted complementarity in very different and even contradictory ways. Where some require NGOs to develop activities within the confines of the official bilateral strategy (intensive complementarity), others allow NGOs to do very different things (extensive complementarity).     

Disability Research by Disabled and Non‐Disabled People: Towards a Relational Methodology of Research Production

This paper explores some of the problems and opportunities that may derive from the development of working relationships between disabled and non‐disabled researchers. First a number of key barriers that face disabled researchers from the outset of research are sketched out. However, these barriers are not dwelt on as they have been documented and challenged well by others. Rather, in seeking to identify good research practice that can challenge such barriers, it is suggested that enabling modes of research production may often be uncovered through a careful examination of the working relationships between members of research teams. This approach is illustrated through a discussion of a range of relational issues that have impacted upon the authors’ own research partnership: (i) Relating in research: Tackling fears and issues around self‐disclosure; (ii)Psychoanalytic sensitivity: Privileging ontological experience and reflexivity; (iii) Towards a feminist ethics of care: Challenging methodological individualism; and (iv) Interdependence in research: towards enriched analysis. In terms of advancing an agenda for inclusive disability research, it is believed that making explicit the complexity of disabled/non‐disabled research relationships like this is one practical way in which general assumptions of a binary disabled/non‐disabled split may be challenged, whilst simultaneously recognizing that equitable working partnerships can only derive from the equal valuing of difference.     

Negotiating the Boundaries of Voluntarism: Values in the Indian NGO Sector

Values are an essential part of the identity of non-government organizations (NGOs), distinguishing them from other sectors and contributing to their legitimacy. Values are neither uncontested nor wholly self-determined, but rather are products of the broader social and political environment. The meaning of values must be negotiated with multiple actors, such as funding agencies, the state, and the general public including their “clients.” This paper looks at the ways that the meaning of a particular NGO value—voluntarism—is negotiated and contested in India. I argue that conceptualizations of voluntarism are neither singular, nor static, and that NGOs draw on these to claim legitimacy, or contest them through counter-narratives. These struggles over the meaning of voluntarism are in themselves productive, shaping organizational identity, and functioning. Values can thereby be a useful analytical tool to understanding NGOs.     

South African NGOs and the public sphere: between popular movements and partnerships for development

This article examines the widespread notion that post‐apartheid democracy can be deepened and civil society strengthened by NGO activities in the sphere of public debate and participation. I focus on a number of interrelated processes which I argue may compromise NGOs' ability to expand the public sphere: first, donors' overwhelming focus on NGOs as the sole representative of civil society may contribute to a homogenous and institutionalised public sphere; second, the tendency for NGOs to be drawn into partnerships with government bodies and corporate sponsors casts doubt on their ability to open up spaces for critical public debate. By directing attention to popular movements as potentially offering a site for the production of critique, NGOs' relationships to such movements are examined. It is argued that attention must be paid to the processes of NGO‐isation and reformism by which NGOs themselves come to define what civil society should be and may consequently contain counterpublic spheres.     

NGO Networks,the Diffusion and Adaptation of NGO Managerialism,and NGO Legitimacy in Latin America

Nongovernmental organization (NGO) networks have become key instruments used by NGOs in Latin America. Because these networks have important roles to play in advocating for the sector, earning public support, and improving the provision of public goods and services, understanding these networks is important to understanding the NGO sector more broadly. The article examines how NGO networks use collective texts to diffuse and adapt managerial practices. NGO networks use elements of managerialism and their adaptations to signal quality, secure recognition in social development, identify strengths and weaknesses of the sector, and define civil society in order to garner sector legitimacy. While looking at managerialism from a critical perspective, the article finds that understanding NGOs networks and the diffusion and adaption of NGO practices can further pinpoint effective sources of sector legitimacy and help to strengthen the sector’s role in social development.     

NGOS AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF CIVIL SOCIETY IN BULGARIA AND THE USA

This study examines the development of civil society and its ability to facilitate stronger democratic practices in Bulgaria using the USA as a comparison. Using data gathered from surveys of NGOs in 2006, we examine three sets of questions. First, what is the level of NGO organizational capacity? Second, to what degree are NGOs performing their mediating roles? Third, how do NGOs perceive their effectiveness in working with the state and its citizens. Our findings suggest that Bulgarian NGOs face a number of challenges when compared with US NGOs, which affect their ability to engage in civil society activities such as establishing horizontal ties with citizens and other groups.