Conclusions

Author(s): Julie Ferguson
Publication date: Tuesday 27 September 2005

In the words of plenary speaker Jenny Pearce, ‘there is nothing intrinsically good about civil society’. Its main qualification, the freedom to associate, must be salvaged. This is key to civil society claiming its influence to strengthen the performance and responsiveness of the state. In this concluding section the key questions of the seminar are examined again:

What type of civil society building works under which conditions?
A broad understanding of associational life, supported by an understanding of democracy that embraces non-Western notions is a central condition. Recognition of the legitimacy of competition for values in the public realm – where collective norms are demonstrated and choices are made that are binding for society and guaranteed by the state—is paramount. Civil society evaluations repeatedly illustrate that without influence over power structures, participatory action can only claim limited advances. Donors must acknowledge that they are part of existing unequal power structures, and therefore that they have to show a willingness to change these together with their partners.

It is important to pursue a disaggregated understanding of the levels of the state, shedding light on how power is distributed. And it is crucial to comprehend the way in which identity affects politics and therefore the state and civil society. Ninety five percent of what is written on Africa concentrates on external issues, including stabilisation policies and structural adjustment. Ethnicity, witchcraft and other cultural fundaments of Southern societies and politics are under-researched.

What are the opportunities and which risks do they entail?
Partners need the ‘staying power’ in one space to have impact, requiring flexible funding over time. They need strategic accompaniment, rather than quick technical fixes. The local partner selection process should be re-examined by donors who may show bias towards larger and more capable NGOs, potentially overlooking smaller equally vibrant actors that may be less developed. Time should be invested in comprehending local contexts and needs of countries and prioritising these. There is an implicit assumption that civil society participation enhances citizens’ ability to participate, though the practice tells a different story. Tools must be developed that allow for a better assessment of the intended as well as the un-intended impacts of development interventions.

Social change and transformation are unlikely to occur in countries where NGOs do not benefit from social movements, whose grassroots political and social agenda is fuelled by a pure desire for change. ‘Do we go back to the street or do we engage with government through the halls of power?’, asks a representative of NCEC from Kenya. Here lies a danger of civil society reformers moving into governmental space, while losing its commitment towards civil society interests.

Can we find common processes in countries from different regions?
Though states’ histories and trajectories vary in each country context, eroding institutions raise questions of boundaries, belonging, and identity in every failed state. Nation building hinges on these concepts. Citizenship is a notion that cannot be resolved without securing the associational space. Violence in Guatemala, Iran and Nepal are powerful examples of negative processes in this regard.

Against great odds, women’s organisations have been at the heart of social action in Colombia, Guatemala, Iran, and many other countries where social unrest prevails. External influence by donors has often disrupted and derailed social action by civil society and social movements. Civil society groups are indeed capable of engaging in direct dialogue with governments, avoiding external disturbance of the public space by donors. But it is also very easy to find fundamental differences between social contexts, making generalisations rather problematic.

How can outside organisations improve their support to civil society organisations in engaging the state?
Civil society as an associational space needs to be protected, and further developed. But it can only do so with its own internal dynamics, it cannot be pushed from the outside.  Ownership of interventions will have to be re-examined by international donors when it concerns support to civil society. Moreover, it should be made explicit which political interests motivate international organisations to intervene. An institutionally strong state should also be supported, rather than undercut, by international economic policies.

Finally, if participatory research is considered to be a potential empowering tool for development, external organisations cannot revert to linear forms of learning. Donors are therefore encouraged to pursue a robust and innovative research and policy agenda based on sharing knowledge and sharing lessons between policy makers, academics, researchers and development practitioners.

[back]