CIVIL SOCIETY AND

GOVERNANCE:
A Contextual and
Conceptual
Background
Civil Society encompasses major
groups, that is farmers, women, the
scientific and technological community,
children and youth, indigenous peoples
and their communities, workers and trade
unions, business and industry, non-
governmental organizations as well as
local authorities..
.
Civil society or civil institutions
refers to the totality of voluntary
civic and social organizations or
institutions which form the basis
of a functioning society as
opposed to the force backed
structures of a state (regardless
of that state's political system).
Many authors view the
main source of social
capital as residing in the
realm of civil society
Civil society commonly
embraces a diversity of
spaces, actors and
institutional forms, varying in
their degree of formality,
autonomy and power.
 A deeply rooted network of
organizations and institutions th
at mediate between the citizen a
nd the State: the connective tiss
ue of a democratic culture.

ALSO KNOWN AS THE “THIRD SECTOR”

 Civil society’s three
(3)main functions:

(a) Promoting voluntarism,

(b) building social capital,
(c) creating an enabling
environment for policy
input.
Voluntarism is a
key aspect of
civil society.
Robin Guthrie (1994) defines Civil
Society as:
It is what citizens do together in their own
right at the bidding of no higher authority, for
the common good, and apart, generally
speaking, from direct party political affiliation
or alignment.

The civil society is not concerned primarily

with power, although it may be ranged
against the excessive concentration or abuse
of power in any quarter.
Civil societies are often populated
by organizations such as registered
charities, development non-
governmental organizations,
community groups, women's
organizations, faith-based
organizations, professional
associations, trades unions, self-
help groups, social movements,
business associations, coalitions
and advocacy groups.
Examples of civil society institutions:
•non-governmental organizations (NGOs)
•private voluntary organizations (PVOs)
•peoples' organizations
•community-based organizations
•civic clubs
•trade unions
•gender, cultural, and religious groups
•charities
•social and sports clubs
•cooperatives
•environmental groups
•professional associations
•academia
•policy institutions
•consumers/consumer organizations
•the media
•citizens' militia
•organized religion
Such organizations are seen as serving
several essential functions:
•Providing a means for expressing and actively
addressing the varied and complex needs of society
•Motivating individuals to act as citizens in all aspects of
society rather than bowing to or depending on state
power and beneficence
•Promoting pluralism and diversity in society, such as
protecting and strengthening cultural, ethnic, religious,
linguistic and other identities
•Creating an alternative to centralized state agencies for
providing services with greater independence and
flexibility
•Establishing the mechanisms by which governments
and the market can be held accountable by the public
The majority of these
organizations are referred to as
non-governmental organizations
(NGOs) for the purpose of defining
the primary operational target
group
As catalysts for
achieving local and
global sustainable
development
Promoting the “triple
bottom-line”

Economic viability
Social equity
Environmental integrity
THE CHALLENGES

Globalisation which re-

,

shapes patterns of global poverty, a

ccentuates inequalities, and promot
es new levels of insecurity in the wo
rld.
The reform of international
co-operation to deal with these
developments, moving away from
foreign aid to embrace a broader
focus on rules, standards and
interventions to protect the most
vulnerable.
“Complex political
emergencies", which are cha
racteristic of the post-Cold War d
isorder as state authority erodes
and people take refuge in ethnicit
y and religion.
NEEDED:

new forms of
solidarity - or new
"social contracts"
Between citizens of
different polities and ne
w structures of
authority at different lev
els of the world system
New relationships -
expressed through partners
hips, alliances and other for
ms of collaboration
BECAUSE:

Nation-states and their

governments cannot
manage development and
reforms on their own
RELATED CONCEPTS:

SOCIAL CAPITAL

 CIVIL SOCIETY

 SOCIAL NETWORKS
Social capital is generally
referred to as the set of trust,
institutions, social norms, social
networks, and organizations that
shape the interactions of actors
within a society and are an asset for
the individual and collective
production of well-being.
At the macro level, social
capital can affect the
economic performance and
the processes of economic
growth and development.
Social capital is a socio-
economic concept with a variety
of inter-related definitions, based
on the value of social networks.
In The Forms of Capital (1986)
Pierre Bourdieu defines social
capital as "the aggregate of the
actual or potential resources
which are linked to possession
of a durable network of more or
less institutionalized
relationships of mutual
acquaintance and recognition."
Social capital "refers to the
collective value of all
'social networks' and the
inclinations that arise from
these networks to do
things for each other,"
according to Robert
Putnam
Francis Fukuyama described
"Social capital simply as the
existence of a certain set of
informal values or norms
shared among members of a
group that permit cooperation
among them."
TYPES OF SOCIAL
CAPITAL
 BRIDGING
It is inclusive and cuts
across such social
boundaries as those
constituted by
language, race,
ethnicity or religion.
 BONDING
exclusive and primarily
associated with strong
enforceable rules
within a group where
individuals know each
other, but allow for a
different standard when
dealing with outsiders
 BINDING
which we see as
bringing people
together, for example,
into inter-ethnic or
trans-religious
organizations without
becoming bridging in
 BLINDING
It arises in modern societies
where exclusivist groups
emerge, not as a result of
race or ethnicity, but belief in a
cause, i.e. something that
serves to mobilize individuals
into an organization where
membership is determined by
ideological commitment and
A social network is a social
structure between actors,
mostly individuals or
organizations. It indicates the
ways in which they are
connected through various
social familiarities ranging
from casual acquaintance to
close familial bonds.
Social network theory views
social relationships in terms of
nodes and ties.

In its most simple form, a

social network is a map of all
of the relevant ties between the
nodes being studied.
Nodes are the individual
actors within the networks,
and ties are the relationships
between the actors.

There can be many kinds of

ties between the nodes.
The network can also be
used to determine the
social capital of
individual actors.
These concepts are often
displayed in a social
network diagram, where
nodes are the points and
ties are the lines.
The shape of the
social network helps
determine a
network's usefulness
to its individuals.
Smaller, tighter networks
can be less useful to their
members than networks
with lots of loose
connections (weak ties) to
individuals outside the
main network.
A group of individuals
with connections to
other social worlds is
likely to have access to
a wider range of
information.
It is better for
individual success
to have connections
to a variety of
networks rather
than many
connections within
More "open" networks, with
many weak ties and social
connections, are more likely
to introduce new ideas and
opportunities to their
members than closed
networks with many
redundant ties.
In other words, a
group of friends
who only do things
with each other
already share the
same knowledge
and opportunities.
Similarly, individuals can
exercise influence or act as
brokers within their social
networks by bridging two
networks that are not directly
linked (called filling social
holes).
 NGOs, STATE,
BUSINESS, CIVIL
SOCIETY
RELATIONSHIPS
3 ROLES
FOR NGOs
NGO IN THE 21ST CENTURY

NEEDS
PROBLEMS
OPPORTUNITIES
NGOs as the:

Third FORCE

ALTERNATIVE

LEADER

LINK
 ROLES OF NGOs
ADVOCACY (Policy)
BRIDGE (Network)
CATALYST (Change agent)
DOLE-OUT (Provider)
EMPOWERMENT (Equipper)
 ATTRIBUTES OF NGOs

RELEVANCE
RELIABILITY
RESOURCEFULNESS
RESPONSIBILITY
RESILIENCE
RESEARCH-ORIENTED
RELATIONAL
The voluntary sector can influence main-
stream development in the following ways
(Clark 1991):

1.encouraging official aid agencies and

government ministries to adopt
successful approaches developed
within the voluntary sector;

2. educating and sensitizing the public as

to their rights and entitlements under
state programs;
3. attuning official programs to
public needs by acting as a
conduit for public opinion and
local experience;

4. operational collaboration with

official bodies;
5. influencing local development
policies of national and international
institutions; and

6. helping government and donors

fashion a more effective
development strategy through
strengthening institutions, staff
training and improving management
capacity.
NGOs have become important
actors in development assistance
for at least three reasons:

· First, because of their scale.

In 1989, they contributed US$6.4 billion to
developing countries (including $2.2 billion
of official funds), representing some 12
percent of total development assistance
(Bebbington and Farrington 1992a and
1992b).
Second, because of their style of
work.
Many NGOs have demonstrated an ability to
reach poor people, work in inaccessible areas,
innovate, or in other ways achieve things
which are difficult for official agencies (Tendler
1982).
Third, many of them represent
poorer people.
Many NGOs have close links with poor
communities. Some are membership
organizations of poor or vulnerable
people. Others are skilled at participatory
approaches (Bratton 1988 and 1990).
The NGO attributes cited above have
become increasingly important in
recent years as:

a. Official aid agencies and many governments

seek to give greater attention to assisting
women, the food insecure, indigenous peoples,
AIDS sufferers/orphans and other vulnerable
groups, which NGOs are better able to reach
(Bebbington and Farrington 1992a and 1992b).
b. Long experience of work
with communities living in
environmentally sensitive
areas (including forests, desert
margins, urban slums, etc.)
provides NGOs with certain
comparative advantages in
dealing with environmental
issues.
c. There is a more clearly
recognized need for pluralism
and prominent citizens' voices in
national development planning.

NGOs can contribute to this in

many ways including, at the
local level, by the promotion of
grassroots mobilization for
social change (Clark 1991) or
participatory development
d. There is increasing
realization of the need to
"roll back the State" in
many countries where it
has become over-
extended.

This gives greater

prominence to the private
e. The rapid growth in
numbers of NGOs many highly-
specialized or localized which
gives donors a wide choice of
partners and considerable
influence over those partners
in many countries.

This proliferation is highly

country-specific.
 A Healthy State-NGO
Relationship
Share common objectives

A degree of financial autonomy of

the NGO sector is necessary to ensu
re their independence.
Inviting NGO leaders to serve on
government commissions or by holding publ
ic consultations in which grassroots organiz
ation are able to voice their concern and exp
erience

Consultation can be a surprisingly

productive process and reduce tensions.
Genuine partnership between
NGOs and the government to
work on a problem facing the
country or a region... based on
mutual respect, acceptance of
autonomy, independence, and
pluralism of NGO opinions and
positions.
When both parties see that
their solutions are not competi
ng alternatives but are comple
mentary contributions, the pos
sibility for a genuine collaborat
ion is opened.
Official aid agencies are able to influence
the State-NGO relationship and to enhanc
e the political will necessary for constructi
ve engagement.

NOTE: The health of the State-NGO

relationship (and the features
determining the quality of that
relationship) is sector-specific.
 Barriers to a Healthy State-
NGO Relationship

a.A highly political policy environment.

NGOs often fall in the opposition camp
and the government or ruling party may
see itself as the sole legitimate voice of
the people. The root cause of such
political polarization warrants study.
b. NGOs preference for isolation hence
unwillingness to dialogue with
government, and poor coordination
with one another. Some NGOs prefer
to keep well separated from the government
orbit to avoid drawing attention, and
therefore outside control, to their activities.

c. Jealousy of civil servants towards

the NGOs' access to resources.
d. Pressure on successful
NGOs from major donors
to receive more funds,
leading to a decline in
performance.
e. The NGOs constituency.

If as frequently is the case it is a narrow

constituency (such as one kinship group, or
even just the poorest farmers) the government
may consider it too selective since it must
consider the common good. Similarly, NGOs
have the "luxury" to pick one or two issues
which dominate their attention, while
governments must juggle with a multitude of
concerns.
f. NGOs capacity.

NGO projects may not be as effective as

claimed, the professional skill of NGO
staff, the accountability of NGOs to the
grassroots, and strategic planning poorly
developed.
g. The public sector's capacity.

The government's commitment to

improving services, eradicating
discrimination and poverty may be weak;
there may be a shortage of competent staff
especially at local level; corruption and
nepotism may be rife.

In countries driven by strife there is often a

legitimacy issue when much of the country
is not under government control.
h. Political jealousy.
Governments may not want to foster a healthier
NGO sector for fear of bolstering the political
opposition. How NGOs survive and operate in
an adverse policy environment is an important
issue for study. In some countries they have
been crushed, but elsewhere they have thrived
on controversy.
i. Dependence on foreign donors.
A government might be more suspicious of
NGOs which are highly dependent on foreign
funds and therefore might impugn their
motives as "guided by a foreign hand."
Conversely, an NGO which derives a
considerable proportion of its funding from
its members has maximum authenticity.
When the NGO sector is dominated by
foreign or international NGOs as has been
documented by Edwards (1991 ) and Hanlon
(1990), there can be problems between the g
overnment and the NGOs.
 Fostering an Enabling
Environment
How can governments construct
a policy environment conducive
to the strengthening of the NGO

sector ?
This will depend significantly on the initial
relationship between the two sectors, as described by
Tandon (1991).

The first form of relationship is where

NGOs are in a dependent-client
position vis-a-vis the government; in
which NGOs implement state-prepare
d programs and/or receive funding thr
ough the State (a dependency of mon
ey, ideas and resources).
The second type of relationship is
adversarial in which there are no com
mon starting points and no wish from
either side to search out areas of agre
ement.
The third and most constructive
relationship emerging in certain
liberal democracies is a
collaborationist one; a genuine
partnership to tackle mutually
agreed problems, coupled with
energetic but constructive
debate on areas of
disagreement.
The State has various instruments
it can use, for good or ill, to influen
ce the health of the NGO sector (Br
own 1990).

The level of response can be non-

interventionist, active encourageme
nt, partnership, co-option or control
.
The policy instruments used can be:

a.Factors of governance (encouraging

public debate and consultation, and the
right to organize interest groups);

b. NGO regulations and the legal

framework (for example, regarding
registration and reporting, auditing and
accounting requirements);
c. NGO incentives (including
taxation policies on income
or local fund-raising, duties
on imports, subsidies for
NGOs, etc.);

d. Collaboration (use of
NGOs in program/project
implementation);
e. Involvement in policy-making (serving on
committees, assisting with public consultations);

f. Public disclosure of information (NGOs

serving as a conduit to inform the public about
development schemes which effect them);

g. Coordination requirements within the NGO

sector; and

h. Direct expenditure, including official support

(grants, contracts, etc.), and research benefiting
the NGO sector.
 Conclusions - The Major
Policy Issues
"Good Governance".
How can civil society be strengthened to help the
government be better attuned to popular concerns, to
develop public accountability of state institutions and to
improve efficiency? Of relevance are issues of plurality
(rights of association, rights to organize interest groups) and
information (public access to information about development
programs). Governments might reduce implementation
problems and enhance public support for their programs by
easing access to information and allowing affected
communities the opportunity to voice their concerns. NGOs
can play an important role as interlocutors and facilitators of
public
The Legal Framework Regulating NGOs.
Do registration and reporting requirements hinder NGO growth?
How might they become less restrictive while guarding against co
rruption and other malpractices within the sector?

Taxation Policies.
Do these stifle NGO initiative or provide incentives? Do they
make it difficult for NGOs to receive foreign funds and donated
goods? Do they hamper or encourage local philanthropy or
income generating activities of NGOs? Is there a perceived
arbitrariness or bias in the awarding of these incentives? Are
there tax exemptions for NGOs operating in priority sectors?
Might tax exemptions increase the risk of corruption?
Collaboration.
In what sectors/projects does the government collaborate with NGOs?
What is the attitude of the relevant central and local government officials to
such collaboration? What is the attitude of the major NGOs to
collaboration? How much encouragement, guidance and training is
provided for such collaboration? How are the NGO partners selected? At
what stage is collaboration sought (e.g. with projects: at identification,
design, appraisal, implementation, service delivery, monitoring, or
evaluation stages)? What different types of collaboration are practiced?
How does collaboration influence changes within government structures
(e.g. greater openness to the opinion of local communities, increased
preparedness to share information)? How does collaboration influence
changes within the NGOs (e.g. more attention to strategic planning,
deflection from their traditional constituencies and purpose, altering the
relative sizes and strengths)? When NGOs are engaged to make
development programs participatory, are they able to represent a broad
cross section of stake-holders or only certain interest groups? As
governments move towards contracting out services that were previously
provided by public employees, it is important to learn from experience
what has worked and where pitfalls lie. What are the public sector
management implications of expanded NGO collaboration, if both the NGO
and public sectors are to avoid damage?
Public Information, Education and
Consultation.
Does the government use NGOs for these purposes,
encourage, permit, or resist such activities? In which
sectors is the informational and educational work of
NGOs most valuable (e.g. AIDS prevention;
environmental awareness; combating
gender/ethnic/caste bias; promoting family planning;
adult literacy)? In which sectors/projects have NGOs
played an important role in public consultations (e.g.
environmental assessments, assessing social impact
of projects, identifying needs for resettlement and
rehabilitation)? In which policy areas have NGOs
played a significant role (public consultation,
information, or implementation)? Do NGOs serve on
government commissions or other official bodies? In
what capacity do they serve?
Coordination.
What structures exist for coordinating NGO
activities? What role does the government
play in these? Are there State-NGO
consultative or coordinating committees?
What agenda does the government take to
these (e.g. does the government use such
fora: simply for informational purposes, to
control or influence NGO programs, to avoid
overlap or gaps, to root out bad practices, to
identify needs to which it can respond such
as for training, etc.)?
Official Support.
Does the government finance NGO activities directly, and
if so, what mechanisms does it use? What impact does
this have on the work, constituency and autonomy of the
NGO sector? Are NGO representatives involved in such
funding decisions? Similarly does the government offer
contracts directly to NGOs? Does the government seek
to control the funding of NGOs by official aid agencies or
Northern NGOs? What is the role of donors in improving
or worsening the State-NGO relationship. Donors can
over-fund indigenous NGOs, or cause international NGOs
to start operations and eclipse indigenous ones.
In all of these areas there is potential for
conflict: conflict between NGOs and the
government, between different NGOs
(because in most countries they are far
from a homogenous group) and even
within an individual NGO.

Official support for NGOs involved in

service delivery may be resented by those
actively seeking reforms in government
policies and practice.
NEEDED:

Detailed knowledge of the NGO

sector in a given country, knowledg
e not just of the NGOs themselves,
but also of how they relate to the go
vernment, communities, the private
sector and donors.
NGO-BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP
Risks of Partnerships and Engagement
The Nordic report also sees several dangers when
companies and NGOs get into bed with each other.

NGOs risk jeopardizing their

legitimacy.

Businesses risk wasting resources.

 But there are also risks for the
partnership -- that the business simply
reaps the reputational reward without
making serious efforts to achieve
progress.

That could backfire on both partners, the report

says: for business, it is undeniable that
partnering with NGOs has positive effects on
their image.
However, if this benefit is
misused and not underscored by
a willingness to actually work
with NGOs towards shared
goals, it will quickly lose its
value, as NGOs credibility
diminishes, along with that of
business.
 NGO-BUSINESS
RELATIONSHIP

SustainAbility identified some

key success factors:
・ The company must be
serious about changing its
behavior, and should be able
to drive change in its own
sector and across the
business community more
generally.
・ The NGO must be able to
maintain clear accountability to
its own key stakeholders, and
must maintain its independence
from the business partner.

・ Each partner needs to benefit

directly, and to understand the
other benefits.
・ The rules of engagement need
to be clearly agreed at the
outset.

・ Individual participants must

be sufficiently senior to have
their organization mandate and
be able to take difficult
decisions without constantly
having to refer back.
・ The people involved must trust
each other.

The difficulty of achieving all those conditions

explains why effective partnerships are few and
far between. But if it works, companies
prepared to take the risk can benefit in more
ways than simply enhancing their reputations
as good corporate citizens. They can also learn
in ways which help them avoid or reduce risks,
seize new market opportunities, and stimulate
innovation.
IMPLICATIONS OF
THE CHANGING
GLOBAL CONTEXT
FOR NGOs
 SOCIAL
CAPITAL

SOCIAL
NETWORKS SUSTAINABLE
GLOBALIZATION
CIVIL DEVELOPMENT
SOCIETY

NGO/NPO

GOVERNANCE
HOW TO MOBILIZE A
GENUINELY-INCLUSIVE
CIVIL SOCIETY AT
EVERY LEVEL OF THE
WORLD SYSTEM?
HOW TO HOLD OTHER
INSTITUTIONS
ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR
ACTIONS AND ENSURE
THEY RESPOND TO
SOCIAL AND
ENVIRONMENTAL NEEDS?
HOW TO ENSURE THAT
INTERNATIONAL
REGIMES ARE BOTH
IMPLEMENTED
EFFECTIVELY AND WORK
TO THE BENEFIT OF
POOR PEOPLE AND POOR
COUNTRIES?
HOW TO ENSURE THAT
GAINS MADE AT THE
GLOBAL LEVEL ARE
TRANSLATED INTO
CONCRETE BENEFITS AT
THE GRASSROOTS AND
VICE VERSA.
REQUIRED ORGANIZATIONAL
CHANGES FOR NGOs

Roles
Relationships
Capacities
Legitimacy and
Accountability
SUMMARY QUESTIONS:

WHY are NGOs important

ACTORS of governance in
the pursuit of sustainable
development?

Are NGOs still relevant in

the next 15-20 years?