|
Editorial, volume 6, number 3
Strengthening 'civil society' is now much trumpeted as a development aim, though analysis of its contemporary meaning has lagged behind its adoption. Indeed, it is keenly promoted by the very institutions which see the market as the mechanism for distributing goods and services (including social welfare); and which would thus reduce the role of the State in regulating and providing for the public good. For 'civil society' has re-emerged in an age when both governments and diversity are under threat. The same fizzy drinks, software, or cigarettes dominate the markets of Beijing and Bogotà alike; around the world, children base even their make-believe on the same bland cartoon characters. Liberalisation and pluralism may, in reality, have heralded global uniformity.
Against such trends, the role of development assistance and the various agencies that administer it may seem insignificant. Their scope for influencing the terms of the debate -- much less the terms of international trade -- is slight. Their energies may indeed be better spent on 'getting on with the job' and leaving the concepts to be defined by others. Yet to overlook their function in how ideologies are translated into practice would be a grave mistake. Within the development community, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in particular have championed 'civil society' -- sometimes appearing to believe that it would not even exist without them. Yet with often only a tenuous grasp of the political responsibility they assume in embracing it, NGOs may unwittingly serve those who are clear about 'civil society', and how the various social actors fit (or must be made to fit) into it. The need for political clarity is taken up in this issue by both Alan Whaites and Christopher Collier.
This issue offers perspectives on the relationships between such actors, focusing on links between grassroots organisations and communities, local government, and indigenous or international NGOs. Jonathan Goodhand and Peter Chamberlain examine NGOs in Afghanistan, most of these to some extent compromised -- whether by their genesis, or in order to survive war while working without a State framework. They ask whether these pragmatic choices were (or are) justified, and what the legacy may be in terms of the NGOs' moral and political legitimacy, and their organisational experience. Thomas Fisher, Vijay Mahajan, and Tsering Topgyal describe their work with the Tibetan government-in-exile and refugee community, whose aims were to prepare for more open systems of government, while also preserving their unique social and cultural identity. Peter Strachan assesses Oxfam's mixed experience of handing over project-management control to its Sudanese counterpart.
Much NGO discussion on 'civil society' has been either uncritical or self-regarding, while academic accounts often seem concerned to generate idealised typologies to show who does, or does not, belong to which particular sub-category within it. In analysing the complexities of dealing on a day-to-day basis with multiple social actors, and the dilemmas faced in synthesising their diverse agendas, our contributors clarify many of the wider concepts by grounding these in practical experience.
Deborah Eade
Oxfam (UK and Ireland)
May 1996
 Previous
|
Next Abstract 
|
