The rise and rise of NGOs
Peter Hall-Jones, PSI Communications Officer
The NGO sector is now the eighth largest economy in the world — worth over $1 trillion a year globally. It employs nearly 19 million
paid workers, not to mention countless volunteers [1]. NGOs
spend about $US15 billion on development each year, about the same
as the World Bank [2]. But while the NGO movement has been growing
rapidly since the 1980s, the union movement has been in decline. Why,
and what does this mean for unions and public services?
The links between non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and
trade unions run very deep. It was civil society activism, led by
trade unions, which paved the way for the rise of NGOs after WWII.
Many of them were directly established by unions [3]. The two
work together in powerful coalitions (such as the Global Call to
Action against Poverty and the anti-sweatshop movement), and
run joint campaigns against free trade agreements and various
huge companies (think Wal-Mart). It can be a winning combination,
as the anti-apartheid struggle showed ten years ago, and the battle
against water privatisation is showing today. In fact the term
«social movement unionism» was coined to reflect this wider collaborative
approach, which has changed the face of many developing
countries, most recently in Georgia and the Ukraine, and previously
throughout much of Latin America.
NGOs have often acted as proxies for unions in countries where the
labour movement is repressed. Codes of conduct and corporate
responsibility are often won through joint pressure, and NGO staff
tend to be active members within their unions, just as union staff are
often involved with NGO work. Each year the two exchange huge
amounts of money in support of each other’s projects.
Some countries (such as Ireland and South Africa) are even going
beyond tri-partism to include civil society and NGOs as a fourth social
partner. The ILO is currently (and hotly) debating a similar step. The
United Nations has given advocacy groups an international framework
within which to work. Is this an historical opportunity for unions
and NGOs to form the ultimate international alliance?
It is not that simple.
Just what is an NGO?
The NGO movement is a complex mishmash
of alliances and rivalries; charities
and businesses; radicals and conservatives.
Funding comes in from all quarters,
and it goes back out again in every conceivable
direction. The World Bank definition
of NGOs is broad enough to include PSI as
one of the world’s oldest. It also includes
most churches. The WTO definition is
broader still; broad enough to include
industry lobby groups such as the Association
of Swiss Bankers and the International
Chamber of Commerce [4]. The closer
one looks, the more inclined one is to wonder
whether the expression «non-governmental
organisation» has any significant
meaning at all.
The term NGO came into currency at the
end of the Second World War, as the United
Nations sought to differentiate between
inter-governmental specialized agencies
and private organisations. But the movement’s
origins are much older. The first
international NGO was probably the Anti-
Slavery Society, formed in 1839. The antislavery
movement, which reached its
height at the end of the 18th century, was
the catalyst for many organisations that followed.
Other early NGOs grew out of wars,
including the Red Cross in the1850s after
the Franco–Italian war; Save the Children
after World War I; and Oxfam and CARE
after World War II.
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
is now the world’s biggest NGO, with an
endowment of $28.8 billion. Some NGOs
are sophisticated media darlings; others
are waging tireless battles in anonymity at
grass-roots level. Some, such as Amnesty
International, are membership-based,
refusing to accept money from governments
or political parties. Others are huge
profit-making organisations, which exist
purely to lobby on behalf of profit-driven
interests.
Increasingly, NGOs are becoming tied to
governments by way of funding arrangements
and contracts for service. In 2001
CARE International received almost 70%
of its $US420 million budget from government
contributions. A 1998 survey showed
that a quarter of Oxfam’s income came
from the British government and the EU.
World Vision in the United States collected
US$55 million worth of goods from the
US government. In the same year
Médecins Sans Frontières got 46% of its
income from government sources [5]. Earlier,
a six country study of NGO income
found that: «fees for services had
increased by 52%, and revenue from the public sector by 40%. In the meantime philanthropical
income had only increased by
8% [6]».
Perhaps the only thing that can be said
with any certainty about the NGO movement
is that it represents civil society’s
most visible response to globalisation.
Historically speaking, the trade union
movement started to develop at roughly
the same time – in response to the industrial
revolution. But the evolution of unions
has run a very different course. After 175
years the movement has developed into
the world’s largest democratic force.
Reaching from shop floor level in most sectors
of most countries, up through national
federations and on to a series of regional
and global federations, the peak body, the
ICFTU, can justifiably claim to speak for
about 155 million people.
There may be a huge area of common
interest between the two movements, but
industrialisation and globalisation are two
very different revolutions. The respective
forms which have evolved (and the resulting
cultural differences) often lead to difficulties
and tensions. As one union leader
put it recently, «The NGO movement may
be a great force for change, but it cannot
say what that change should be.»
Paradoxically, this lack of a unified
political voice may explain the dramatic
growth of NGOs since the 1980s. As the
World Bank and IMF forced cuts in public
services, NGOs were encouraged to move
in to fill the gaps. They were considered: «the preferred channel for service provision,
in deliberate substitution for the
state». «The World Bank not only encourages
member governments to work with
NGOs on development projects, but also
directly funds the NGO projects. It is
reported that, from 1973 to 1988, NGOs
were involved in about 15 (World) Bank
projects a year. By 1990 that number had
jumped to 89, or 40% of all new projects
approved [7].»
There is no particular logic behind this
transition; it seems to serve an ideological
purpose rather than an economic one.
There is no evidence to show that NGO service
provision is cheaper than public provision.
In fact: «…in the United States,
where NGOs have a highly developed role
in the provision of services under government
contract, they have come under criticism
precisely because they inflate program
costs, as well as creating new
bureaucratic problems of accountability.»
[8]
This much is becoming clear: there is no
simple formula to explain or develop the
relationship between unions and NGOs.
Many are natural allies; others are working
in complementary areas; but some are
almost competitors, thriving on problems
which unions are trying to prevent. The
best rule of thumb is probably this: don’t
even try to make generalisations about
NGOs; it will only lead to delusions.
Some tips
PSI has worked with NGOs all over the
world, at both national and international
levels. We played a major role in last year’s
Global Call to Action against Poverty, and
have been heavily involved in the Our World
is Not for Sale network, among others.
Deputy General Secretary Alan Leather
recently co-edited a book on the relationship
between NGOs and unions [9], in which
he concludes: «there are issues of such significance
to civil society, including workers
and their organisations, that the only way to
tackle them is through the broadest possible
coalitions». In this increasingly global environment,
NGOs are often the shock troops of
civil society. Unions, perhaps, are the
nascent alternative.
If the NGO movement can be compared
with any other phenomenon, it is probably the networked chaos of the worldwide web.
This comparison suggests some pointers on
engagement. As with worldwide web pages:
- Don’t put too much stock in first impressions.
- Develop a ranking over time by going back more often to ones that work, and less often to those that don’t.
- Be open to new ideas – the search process often improves the question.
- Develop mutual links rather than trying to establish shared structures.
As the union movement continues to evolve in the face of globalisation, unions may have more to learn from NGOs than from any other player. As we saw during the unprecedented global actions against poverty in 2005, the best NGOs don’t just meet your expectations, they change them.
[1] From The 21st Century NGO: In the Market
for Change, an annual survey of the
NGO movementundertaken by Sustain-
Ability in partnership with the United
Nations and several other organizations
and corporations. This study reveals that
many NGOs are now shifting from their traditional
confrontational roles to more collaborative
interactions with governments
and businesses. See:
http://www.sustainability.com/insight/research-article.asp?id=51
[2] From Caritas Australia’s website. See http://www.ozspirit.info/2003/47bg.html
[3] For an interesting contemporary example
of this see http://www.globalworkplace.org/
[4] From The rise and role of NGOs in sustainable
development, by BSDglobal. See http://www.bsdglobal.com/ngo/roles.asp
[5] See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nongovernmental_organisation
[6] From The 21st Century NGO: In the Market for Change (see footnote 1).
[7] In 1997, approved World Bank projects
in Third World countries involving NGOs
were: 84% in South Asia, 61% in Africa, and
60% in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Journal of Third World Studies, Spring
2002, by Makoba, J Wagona. See
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3821/is_200204/ai_n9071891
[8] Development NGOs, the State and Neo-Liberalism: Competition, Partnership or
Co-conspiracy by John C. Cross, Ph.D.,
Department of Sociology, The American
University in Cairo (published in Proceedings
of the Fourth Annual AUC Research
Conference. Office of Graduate Studies
and Research, American University in
Cairo. July 1997). See
http://www.openair.org/cross/NGOS.htm
[9] Development NGOs and Labor Unions:
Terms of Engagement Ed. Deborah Eade
and Alan Leather, Kumarian Press 2005
© 2006 UN Special |