Critique
the role of NGOs in development. Are they more effective as service
providers or as advocates/change agents?
Barry
Gilheany (c)
To answer this question fully it
is necessary to arrive at a full
definition of Non Governmental
Organisations (NGOs) and to appreciate their role in global
governance and wider global civic
society. To assess their success or otherwise in
promoting development, it is also
important to delineate where NGOs act as service
providers or as advocacy
organisations or where the lines between the two roles can
become blurred. The essay then goes
on to look at the comparative advantage of NGOs,
constraints to greater NGO involvement
in UN program and the problematic issues of
accountability and transparency. It
concludes by arguing for a change in mind-set among
NGOs as they deal with new global
challenges and opportunities (Smillie,1997).
An
NGO is generally defined as an essentially non-profit,
voluntary
citizens' group organised at a local, national, or international
level, and is locally,
nationally,
or internationally active. The World Bank defines NGOs as 'private
organisation
that pursue activities to relieve suffering, promote the interests of
the poor,
protect
the environment, provide basic social services, or undertake
community
development.
Most NGOs rely almost entirely on private donations and voluntary
service
(Vedder,
Ed, 2007).
The literature on NGOs emphasises
their separateness from
governments, political parties,
business corporations, activist groups and social
movements. However, in practice, such
distinctions can be fluid. For examples, although
NGOs are independent of local and
national and transnational government, they can be
financed by them or contracted to
carry out tasks for them.(Vedder, Ed: p.3).
Volker Heins seeks to solve the
philosophical conundrum of whether NGOs can be seen
as genuinely independent of other
political or decision-making actors by defining them as
post-traditional civil
associations. (Heins, 2008). He
argues that that post-traditionality
means that NGOs do not fit easily into
classical definitions of the political; for example the
Weberian definition of politics as
striving for a share of power or attempting to redraw
power distribution whether within the
state system or between groups within a state
(Heins: p.4).
Thus, NGOs, unlike political parties,
do not aspire to public office or run countries. They
are close to states and international
organisations without being part of them or forces
opposed to them. A significant part
of the [post-traditional nature of NGOs are that they
tend to be universalistic in outlook.
They do not wish to pursue the cause of their
members, nor that of nation or social
class. For them, self-interested action coincides with
interests of humanity as a whole.
(Heins, p.4)This ideal of universal and impartial
benevolence of course sets NGOs up for
a searching analysis of precisely this
benevolence in terms of their
transparency, accountability and service delivery.
NGOs play the following roles in
global governance. They can seek the best venues to
present issues and to apply pressure.
They can provide new ideas and draft texts for
multilateral treaties; they can help
government negotiators understand the science behind
environmental issues they are trying
to address. Development and relief groups often
have the advantage of being on the
ground”and able to “make the impossible possible by
doing what governments, and sometimes
Intergovernmental Organisations cannot or will
not (Karns and Mingst, Ed 2010).
Many NGOs are organised around a very
specific issue area, while others are organised
to address broad issues such as human
rights, peace, or the environment (Amnesty
International, The Nature
Conservancy). Some provide services, such as humanitarian aid
(Catholic Relief Services) or
development assistance (Grameen Bank), while many do
both. Oxfam, for example, not only
provides emergency relief at times of famine, but also
works at long-term development,
helping fishermen in Asia manage water resources and
coastal environments. CAR delivers
relief as well as being involved in community building
among women. Other NGOs are
information-gathering and disseminating bodies
(Transparency International).
Millions of small local NGOs are active at grass roots level.
Most NGOs are headquartered in the
developed North (Amnesty International in London;
Oxfam in Oxford, UK) and receive
funding from private donors and increasingly from and
a governments and ISOs. Others have
roots in the developing countries in the South, but
receive funding for local programmes
or training from international groups (Development
Alternatives with Women for a New
Area [DAWN]. Some operate independently, others
are connected to counterpart groups
through transnational networks or federations. For
example, Oxfam International has been
transformed from a British NGO into a
transnational federation, with member
chapters in Australia, Belgium, the United States,
Netherlands and New Zealand among
others. Such large federated NGOs have overall
shared goals but devolve fundraising
and activities to the individual country chapters
(Karns and Mingst: pp.222-23).
NGOs are an expression of people's
need for organisation, self-improvement and change.
Those that extend beyond their own
community can reach places that governments and
multilateral agencies cannot, dealing
directly with the poor. Using participatory
techniques, they are often more
effective and less expensive than traditional, top-down
development efforts. They have
become recognised as an important element of civil
society, fostering citizen awareness
and participation in development, and as part of a
new approach to governmental
accountability and transparency (Smillie: p.571).
However over the last two decades, the
fount of goodwill surrounding the role of NGOs in
development has come under sustained
scrutiny. Throughout the 1990s large scale
omnibus evaluations were carried out
by the governments of the UK, Australia, Norway,
Finland and Sweden as well as by the
UK's Overseas Development Institute (ODI)
(Smillie: p.571).
These evaluations provided mixed
results. The 1995 UK study found that the majority of
projects were successful and that
significant benefits were received by the poor, but that
there had been little change in the
existing social or economic status quo, and that
institutional and financial
sustainability had not been achieved. The Swedish study found
that the vast majority of projects in
receipt of Swedish state funding. had either achieved
or well on the path to achieving their
objectives. However when judged against more and
more of the nine broader criteria
against which the projects were assessed, their
aggregate performance dropped
progressively. The 1995 UK review found a lack of
emphasis by NGOs on evaluation of
their projects (Smillie: pp.571-72).
Demands for greater evaluation of
their output is just one of the contemporary challenges
facing NGOs working in the realm of
development. Jenny Pearce identifies four. First the
neo-liberalism and globalisation
driven by the values of neo-liberalism (privatisation,
structural adjustment policies) has
damaged the anti-poverty and anti-exploitation struggle
in the world today. The idea of NGOs
as value-driven engines of change has been
seriously compromised by the decision
of many to implement programmes of economic
liberalisation. As the hegemony of
neo-liberalism gives way in this millennium to to the
imperatives to build a more
regulated global capitalism, NGOs have to decide what
stance to take in relationship to it
(Pearce, ed. 2000).
Secondly, the relationship between
Southern and Northern NGOs has to evolve to reflect
the emerging global order and a more
transparent debate needs to take place between
them. Some NGOs may choose to
institutionalise themselves as service providers,
others on to engage in global
governance debates. However, Pearce cautions that the
survival of the NGO sector in its
current form cannot be guaranteed (Pearce: p.37).
Third, NGOs must and cannot replace
the state in promoting 'development'. There has
been plenty of debate on how NGOs can
make the state more accountable and
responsive to the needs of the poor
but less on the role of the state and should NGOs to
be the collective intermediary between
the individual and the state (Pearce: p.37) In this
regard, it is important to visit the
the theoretical debate over “civil society” and NGOs.
Civil society is usually held to be
the collective intermediary between the individual and the
state (Whaites, 2000). Since 1990,
the concept of civil society has been 'grabbed' by
NGOs as one fitting their own natural
strengths. On the surface, civil society is closely
bound up with the role of local
community associations, and with the indigenous NGO
sector. For Northern NGOs, this
creates an intellectual association between civil society
and local 'partner' or implementing
organisation (Whaites: p.126).
Among donors, interest in civil
society became tied up with the evolution of the
conditionality of aid. In the 1990s,
conditionality developed a political complexion when
some donors became fixated with 'good
governance'. This tendency acquired an
economic imperative with the World
Bank's 1991 World Development Report in which
democracy was projected as more
efficient as well as being ethically more desirable
(Whaites: p.126).
The apparent congruence between NGOs
and civil society begs one vital question: what
kind of civil association strengthens
civil society? (Whaites, 1996). To resolve this
dilemma, it is helpful to turn to
engage with two contrasting views in political theory on civil
society. For the 19th
century American theorist Alexis de Tocqueville, civil society (in
contrast to traditional society)
provides a buffer to the increased powers of the modern
state. It provides the space for
society to interact constructively with the state not to
destroy it. Hence civil society
groups mobilise not on primordial attachments (ethnicity,
language and religion) but on 'small
issues' that unite people across ethnic boundaries.
De Tocqueville cites the US
temperance movement and Britain's anti-slavery and anti
-Corn Law movements cases in point
(Whaites: p.241).
An opposing perspective is given by
authors like Jean-Francois Bayart whereby all
associations and community groups are
indeed elements of civil society. Bayart' s work
The State in Africa: The Politics
of the Belly examines societies' attempt to subvert and
control the state. He argues that it
is largely inappropriate to apply Western concepts of
civil society to contexts such as
Africa where primordial attachments are likely to remain
embedded for the near future.
(Whaites, p.242). However evidence is emerging to
indicate that primordial attachments
do shift with the currents of social change. The
example of Pakistan suggests that the
development of a native bourgeoisie may foster
integrative groups based on 'small
issues', even in the face of entrenched ethnic or
religious cleavages. (Pearce, Ed,
p.129).
If it is to be accepted that it is
desirable for the state to have some degree of effectiveness
at the local level (ideally under the
mandate of a) democratically elected government, then
questions regarding the replacement
of state provision by NGO activities become crucial.
For international NGOs have
contributed significantly to situations of strong civil societies
and weak states through gap filling
by taking advantage of the shrinkage of government
services resulting from structural
adjustment programmes (SAPs). SAPS have tended to
emphasise the drastic reduction of
fiscal deficits leading to health and education spending
and the imposition of user charges.
Few NGOS have had qualms about providing
agricultural extension workers or
offering training for health volunteers and traditional birth
attendants; activities that are part
of the work streams of NGOs but are functions that are
nominally the responsibility of the
state (Whaites: pp.133-34).
It must be emphasised that, unless
there are mitigating circumstances such as repressive
or corrupt regimes, the NGO should
also seek to build up the capacity of the state as an
integral part of local grass
roots work. Through supporting civil associations and building
the capacity of local state
service-providers, NGOs can avoid by-passing civil society or
undermining the state. An example is
the DFID funded World vision community health
project in Konpong Tralach, Cambodia
where project staff worked alongside government
employees and provided training and
essential equipment over five years. The project
nurtured civil associational groups
such as women's health clubs and microcredit
associations balanced with greater
involvement of district-level government structures with
individual communities (Whaites;
p.135).
Similarly, in Brazil World Vision in
its involvement with the drought-stricken community of
Jucuri had local government capacity
building as central to its objectives. Government
health workers involved with the
project visited the community and worked closely with the
Farmer Association to provide basic
healthcare awareness campaigns including one on
cholera. The participation of local
government health workers also enabled community-
level education in nutrition to take
place, with small vegetable gardens being started
individually in most homes (Whaites:
pp.135-36).
To conclude, the efficacy of NGOs in
development work matters less whether they provide
service delivery or advocacy/change
roles than in how they meet the challenges posed by
economic globalisation,
neo-liberalism and donor demands for accountability standards.
This essay has traced out a template
for NGO activity in the 21st century involving the
facilitation of greater integration
between civil society and state actors. NGOs must see
macro-political change as a
legitimate objective of the development project, and not just
the preserve of donors (Whaites:
p.139). They must rescue the idea of global civil society
from the priorities of donors, and
develop the critical micro-macro linkages that affect the
daily lives of the poor.
Bibliography:
Heins, V.(2008) Nongovernmental
Organisations in International Society. Struggles over
Recognition Basingstoke,
Hants; Palgrave Macmillan
Karns, M.P. And Mingst, K.A. (2010)
International Organisations. The Politics and Processes of Global
Governance. Second Edition. London: Lynne Rienner Publishers
Pearce, J. Development, NGOs and Civil
Society; the Debate and its Future in Oxfam, GB (2000) Development,
NGOs, and Civil Society pp.15-43 Oxford:Oxfam Publishing
Peters, A, Koechlin, L. and
Zinkernagel Non-state Actors as Standard Setters: Framing the Issue
in an Interdisciplinary Fashion in Peters, A. et al (2009)
Non-State Actors as Standard Setters Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press pp.1-32
Smillie, I (1997) NGOs and
Development Assistance: a Change in Mind-Set Third World
Quarterly, Vol. 18, No.3, Beyond UN Subcontracting; Task-Sharing with
Regional Security Arrangements and Service-Providing NGOs pp.563-577
Whaites,A. Let's get Civil Society
Straight: NGOs, the State, and Political Theory in Oxfam (2000)
Development, NGOs, and Civil Society pp.124-41)
Whaites, A (1996) Let;s Get Civil
Society Straight; NGOs and Political Theory. Development in
Practice, Vol. 6, No.3 pp.240-44
No comments:
Post a Comment