The Contributions of Non-Governmental Organizations to the Development of Civil Society - Essay Example

Civil society actors can play important roles in a variety of development initiatives, including delivering humanitarian relief, catalyzing and consolidating democratization, promoting economic development for the very poor, fostering the rule of law, creating social capital needed for economic and political development, fostering accountable governance, and building peace and conflict management institutions. The growing social roles of civil society organizations has in turn raised many questions about their capacities and their legitimacy, particularly from agencies that have been the targets of their growing influence. Thus Civil society can be defined as the political space between the individual and the government, expressed by membership of NGOs, social groups, associations and other organizations and networks. But its role in influencing state action and political processes, and in serving as a corrective and complement to market economies, implies that it should not be seen first and foremost as a channel for emergency and development assistance. However, Restrictions on civil and political rights, in particular the right to free association or free political expression, can serve to weaken civil society. Civil society may also be inhibited from playing a peace-building role by intimidation and attack. Information and communication networks may be especially vulnerable then. Thus civil society programme should be rooted in a firm analysis of the context and the role and position of civil-society groups in it. NGO’s thus help to build their capacity and reach by positively monitoring and supporting their provision of basic health and education services to facilitating advocacy roles and their promotion of dialogue (for peaceful dispute resolution, reconciliation etc.), information and other local and international issues. One pioneering consultation with NGO leaders from developing countries suggested that the nature of the state – democratic, one-party, or military dictator – is very important to the development of civil society (Tandon. 1989) More generally, analyses of experience across countries suggests that the “social origins” of civil societies in historical interactions among major social forces (e.g., elites, workers, the middle class, the Church, and so on) shape the size and resources of the sector (Salamon and Anheier. 1998) Economic globalization is one of the most powerful forces that seem to have shaped the postwar world. Non-Governmental Organizations that emphasize on humanitarian issues, developmental aid and sustainable developments more effectively counter the process of globalization of trade and finance and all such capitalist enterprises. In the late 1999, tens of thousands of people filled the streets of Seattle in one of the most visible manifestation of civil society, showing their opposition to World Trade Organization and the greater ideology that it represents. The cause of worry was the way international and national governments were fostering economic integration. This is where the transnational non-governmental organizations come to the picture, with their significant roles in critiquing and influencing decisions all with global governances, especially when governmental goals seem to clash with the greater interests of the cross-border masses, and then greater information, adjudication and intervention is required to address such multifaceted problems. Thus with technological revolution and greater global economic drive, human problems are losing significance within the confines of their national identity, but are being taken up with renewed force and concerns for their well-being. Thus, global conscience is on the rise that represents broad public interest that does not readily fall into the purview of territorial divisions. NGO’s become an important force for scrutinizing ethical lapses and serve an ideal for anti-corruption. The World Bank has named corruption as the single most problems that may hinder economic growth in the third world countries and the key enemy of good governance. And there have been suppositions about reducing the government’s role and influence on a country’s economy as a way of reducing corruption. Thus privatization of state companies has been encouraged. Another front where civil society intervened was with the national security issues. Nuclear arms control is a burning issue that requires more and more interruption from NGO’s. The success of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) did come from an active participation from civil society. Another important treaty, the NPT that stops countries from acquiring nuclear weapons, became the seat of hot debate even between NGO’s, with one group who saw it as an indispensable basis for promoting arms control and nonproliferation. The other groups others saw it as a discriminatory use by some country already in possession and continually promoting nuclear energy and banning the use of it in another countries (Florini, 2001) The World Bank tends to interact with two main categories of NGOs: i) Operational NGOs - whose primary purpose is the design and implementation of development-related projects, and; ii) Advocacy NGOs - whose primary purpose is to defend or promote a specific cause and who seek to influence the policies and practices of the Bank. The focus of this paper is operational collaboration, as opposed to policy dialogue with NGOs. As a result, the emphasis here will be on the first of these groups. These two categories are not mutually exclusive. From the anti-slavery society to the international Committee of the Red cross set up in 1863, NGO lobbying was crucial in including crucial aspects of the Human Rights in the UN charter and the Magna Charta of Human Rights came to existence. Also, global economic development and a revolution in information technology have brought about a subtle change. Global middle classes have begun to demand more rights and intervention in decisions that shape their lives, and take more control of areas that are of concern to them and directly or indirectly help them, like human rights, environment and unemployment. Thus a new demand for greater transparency has come to the question and this is the field where NGO’s wrestle with political and other economic forces to negotiate. International struggle for accountability always involves the government, NGO’s and related grass root movements that form the civil society. The more general policy reform campaigns tend to be dominated by international NGO’s, while the more intermediate local NGO’s draw public response and legitimacy by their locally driven enthusiasm and direct interaction with smaller grassroot level movements, while transnational NGO’s remain accountable to their local coalition partners. Citizens become the most important aspect of a civil society, whereas, NGO’s become the seat of dominant democratic voices of these people. But what about the subalterns? Does a civil society include them too? Thus the sphere of interaction between various actors becomes an important factor in a civil society. Thus if the basic needs of the citizens may be taken into account, and the second becomes association and awareness of such citizens about the other citizens, then the participation in various social causes makes them a civil society, beyond their immediate position in the social hierarchy. Implementing A Sustainable Development Project: Thus we arrive at a crucial juncture where one cannot but ask question about the conflict of interest between such non-governmental organizations (national and international) and other civil societies that may range from bodies like the Media, Class Societies, Educational Institutions, and various non-governmental, non-profit, charitable organizations may form Civil Society. But between basic welfare to a sustained growth in reaching out to more and more people may be difficult without an effective policy for action. This is where the NGO’s take up the task of leading and help such societies and derive help from them in return to work more effectively and in a peaceful manner. It is symbiotic growth towards greater manifestation of empowerment, rights and development of a democratic conscience and in fighting and resisting violence and exploitations. Thus encouraging multiple sources of support for civil society groups ensure independence and sustainability of global causes. At the same time, international networking among national NGOs from all parts of the globe and the proliferation of international NGOs (INGO’s) have coincided with the post-Cold War emergence of an international community continually confounded by intertwined and intractable crises at the national level. Violence and ethnic conflict in some countries dominate the global media, but the underlying poverty-environment-population crisis dominates the news in many more places. Fortunately, the emergence of indigenous NGOs over the last three decades is a positive addition to the political mix in the Third World. Indeed, NGOs strengthen the institutions of civil society that mediate between the individual and the state, both on their own and in conjunction with governments. This, in turn, can promote increased governmental responsiveness and accountability. Thus mediation at the international level helps the indigenous crisis. The rise of Third World NGOs has coincided with the increasing inability of the nation-state to muddle through as it confronts the long-term consequences of its own ignorance, corruption, and lack of accountability. Also with a greater engagement of a variety of civil society organizations, including women’s organizations and other marginalized groups, NGO’s have already helped in minimizing the issues of equal gender balance and losing out on voicing the minority rights under the national/international limelight. In this light of participatory development, one can prove that dealing with information, material help, and educational progress may be furthered. NGOs are often able to reach segments of rural populations that governments neglect or do not target as a priority, while engaging civil society to: Promote public consensus and local ownership for reforms and for national poverty reduction and development strategies by creating knowledge-sharing networks, building common ground for understanding, encouraging public-private cooperation, and sometimes even diffusing tensions; Give voice to the concerns of primary and secondary stakeholders, particularly poor and marginalized populations, and help ensure that their views are factored into policy and program decisions; Strengthen and leverage impact of development programs by providing local knowledge, identifying potential risks, targeting assistance, and expanding reach, particularly at the community level; Bring innovative ideas and solutions to development challenges at both the local and global levels; Provide professional expertise and increase capacity for effective service delivery, especially in environments with weak public sector capacity or in post-conflict situations; Improve public transparency and accountability of development activities, contributing to the enabling environment for good governance. Thus engaging at the grassroot level not only help to rouse public conscience, but also help in creating a good society out of civilians (both marginalized and empowered). Participatory methodologies: Participatory methodologies are helpful in identifying various sources of demand and community priorities, and thus participation is a major requirement for keeping the civil society functioning and not just being formed out of information exchange resulting in a greater transparency of political body. Given these distinct features and advantages, NGOs are valued as players in the fight against rural poverty and hunger. Indeed, the opportunities for collaborative action to substantially reduce the vulnerability of the poor are there; these opportunities must be exploited. The empowerment of the rural poor and community mobilization are the keys to sustainability, and these processes can take extensive periods of time to be accomplished. This in itself is a reason for forging partnerships with NGOs: such organizations often have a history of working in the areas involved. Their relationships with local communities are broad and deep; and a strong sense of mutual trust and respect has already been established. Interestingly, many of these participatory tools and methodologies have gone on to be adopted by official development agencies and, increasingly, by governments. Hence NGO’s support the empowerment of citizens to have greater ownership of development processes, thereby making these processes more inclusive and equitable. Crucial ingredients for empowerment of vulnerable groups include: access to information, access to organizational links outside the local domain, capacity to influence the public arena and to negotiate with local and national authorities, the existence of trustful national and local institutions, and the presence of enabling policy and legal frameworks for civic engagement. Civil society organizations perform a valuable role in engaging their fellow citizens in the fight against poverty and exclusion. Thus, the intended beneficiaries of such NGO initiated programs are civil society organizations, engaged in initiatives aiming at empowering groups and individuals that have been marginalized and excluded from the public realm, thus leading up to the global quest for Human Rights. Relational action: What makes the dynamics of the CSO and a NGO optimistic is that, while a NGO is outside the bounds of governmental control, the civil society or the people in it are controlled (manipulated sometimes) and institutionally (or socially, economically, culturally and historically) conditioned to think inside their respective ideology. NGO’s challenge that status quo. Thus support to civil society requires a long-term perspective in programme planning, particularly when civil society is weak or dormant. In times of conflict, it is instrumental to build local capacity for future long-term development. Not all civil society organizations have the ability to positively influence a conflict-prone or conflict-affected situation. Any decision by external actors to engage with a civil organization is then based on a careful assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and its ability to make a positive change. Support to civil society is coordinated with overarching national or donor plans where these exist. Multilateral institutions such as the UN and World Bank are often central in coordinating support. Any support to civil society is dealt with a conflict-sensitive approach, by reducing risks with continued assessments, sustainability and feasibility studies. Again, some traditional groups may be elitist and oppressive; and here NGOs or other local groups may become important instruments of contending factions. These alternative or supplementary peace-building agents should be subject to the same scrutiny that governmental institutions typically receives, since they too are latent agents of such governmental practices and it’s political objectives. Civil society’s role as a watchdog and service deliverer may lead to contradictory expectations in such situations, since it may become just another exploitative agent and serving it’s own ends (like local interest groups etc). In such cases, since NGOs possess extensive knowledge of local conditions, the answer to such negative civil society is a sober consideration of the normal needs of small enterprises (which is what the economic operations of the rural poor principally are) and serious attention to how these needs may be served. In this regard, NGOs with long-term experience in the target area can help provide baseline date and information on the local economy and infrastructure, the existence (or absence) of self-help organizations and the major obstacles to development. Many NGOs, with their generally flexible organizational structure and characteristics — organizational independence, participatory structures and willingness to spend time on dialogue and learning — are able to experiment on new institutional mechanisms and on different approaches that add value to projects. Conclusion: NGOs should not be contrasted with social movements, because NGOs are essential components of social movements. A social movement thus consists of a range of organizations that collaborate for some common purpose that is sufficiently compelling to generate a sense of collective identity, along with all the people, within and outside the organizations, who identify with the common goals and the collective identity. Thus, a social movement is more than a coalition of NGOs and less than society as a whole. It is in this agenda the civil society fits. Despite the various problems, civil society is a useful way of going beyond the traditional organizational bounds of NGO’s and referring to all the ways in which diverse non-governmental actors are mobilized and remain functional. For the last 50 years, the state has been the only entity the people could seek support from. Hence they had to compromise and establish relationships convenient to the State and its agents. Civil Society will be able to act as an additional window for people to service their development needs, because plurality with it brings in decentralization of resources, power and values like transparency and accountability. From the point of view of the people it is important that they experience alternative approach to development. Civil society with its advantages of continuous relationships with the village community, with the principles that drive them and with localized efforts, to help people build capabilities to manage their development affairs. Network building becomes a key to reinforcing, sustaining and replicating peace-building initiatives and to strengthening civil society capacity. It can also help protect civil society from hostile groups and individuals. Thus extending the role of NGO’s towards developing a civil society suggests a dynamic and political role for NGOs, one that encompasses both the provision of services and also advocacy for change. NGO’s are not just actors in the periphery of democratic processes, but also get a chance to become architects, the shapers and the custodians of those realms – the areas of public and private discourse and action. Clearly, the ability of civil residents to advance their interests depends substantially on their success in sustaining local organizations beyond the immediate tasks that precipitated them. Works Cited 1. Tandon, R. (1989). NGO-Government Relations: A Source of Life or a Kiss of Death? New Delhi, Publisher: Society, for Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA) 2. Salamon, L., & Anheier, H. (1998). Social Origins of Civil Society. Volume 9, Number 3 September, 1998. Capacity Building, Springer Netherlands. Pg. 17-46. 3. Florini, Ann, ed. 2001. The Third Force: The Rise of Transnational Civil Society. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and Japan Center for International Exchange (CEIP/JCIE Publications). Read More