Measuring the Grassroots: Puzzles of Cultivating the Grassroots from the Top Down

Does a participatory, open‐ended organizational format inspire creativity and draw on participants' local knowledge? Many nonprofits operate under this assumption, and many of their financial sponsors agree, and therefore demand precise accounts documenting the nonprofits' “participatory” formats. In the U.S. youth civic engagement projects described here, the practice of accounting itself had an effect, regardless of funders' goals. Volunteers devoted more time to documenting just how participatory, open‐ended and grassroots they were than they devoted to any other topic. Organizers strenuously tried to avert attention from accounting's importance, but could not avoid it. Volunteers could not reflect on the accounting process, or on the political questions behind it; knowledge of it became a repressed institutional intuition.     

“Close to home”: The work of avoiding politics

Theory and Society -     

Top-Down Civic Projects Are Not Grassroots Associations: How The Differences Matter in Everyday Life

Research on civic associations blurs an important distinction between the unfunded, informal, ongoing associations that theorists like de Tocqueville described versus current participatory democracy projects that are funded by the state and large nongovernmental organizations, are open to all, and are usually short-term. Based on a long-term ethnography of youth programs in the United States, this paper shows that entities like these, which participants and researchers alike often called “volunteer” or “civic” groups, operate very differently from traditional civic groups. The ethnography systematically details prevalent tensions that actors face when they try to cultivate the civic spirit in these increasingly typical organizations.