Examining the Use of Informal Networks by NGOs in Azerbaijan and Georgia

Abstract

To date little is known about the non-governmental organizations' (NGOs) use of informal networks, contacts and connections, as well as about the ‘informalization’ of post-communist civil society in the former Soviet Union. Research on the subject has been mostly restricted to the study of civil society organizations in Central Eastern Europe, the Balkans and Russia, leaving the use and significance of informality among the South Caucasus's NGOs largely ignored. Drawing on qualitative in-depth elite interviews, this study examines the importance of informal networking within the NGO sectors of post-Soviet-rule Azerbaijan and Georgia. The findings of this study document that in Azerbaijan and Georgia the practices of using informal networks of relying on patron–client relations with donors and of individuals using their positions within organizations for profit-making are widespread among the NGOs included in this research.

Key Words:

• Informal networking
• informality
• NGOs
• post-communist
• civil society
• South Caucasus
• clientelism

Notes

1. This study focuses primarily on formal civil society organizations known under the term ‘non-governmental organizations’ (NGOs). NGOs are understood here as independent, legally registered organizations, existing and operating in the public sphere, and different from political organizations, state institutions, and the market.

2. ‘Informal networks’ are the circles of individuals assisting or cooperating with each other for their mutual benefit. Informal networks can be analysed through the lens of a broader concept of social capital, defined by the OECD as ‘networks together with shared norms, values, and understandings that facilitate co-operation within or among groups' (Keeley, 2007, p. 103). However, the concept of social capital covers a variety of groups, associations, and organizational structures, some of which are not necessarily informal, such as grassroots organizations or interest clubs (Putnam, 1993). With that in mind, this study limits its conceptual scope to the concept of ‘informal network’, which allows for a more contextualized analysis of informality within civil society.

3. According to the Caucasus Barometer representative survey conducted in 2011, only 6% of respondents in Azerbaijan and 4% in Georgia participated in the work of civil society organizations.

4. All interviews were conducted in confidence, and the names or organizational affiliations of interviewees are withheld by mutual agreement.

5. The majority of interview participants believed that the actual number of independent and active NGOs, employing at least six full-time staff members, is fewer than 50 in Georgia and fewer than 30 in Azerbaijan. A similar observation has been made by Nodia (2005, p. 20).

6. On average around 200 new NGOs are registered every year in Azerbaijan.

7. The NGO Sustainability Index (a seven-point scale, with 1 for the highest and 7 for the lowest sustainability levels), compiled by USAID (2013), assigned the Azerbaijani and Georgian NGO sectors similar sustainability scores: 4.7 for Azerbaijan and 4.2 for Georgia.

8. One of the largest state-controlled civil youth organizations in Azerbaijan is the pro-regime youth movement ‘Ireli’.

9. Official of a European NGO, interview, Brussels, 9 July 2013.

10. Official at the European Commission, interview, Brussels, 11 July 2013.

11. Official of a European NGO, interview, Brussels, 9 July 2013.

12. According to the Nations in Transit (NIT) project (Walker & Habdank-Kołaczkowska, 2013), since 2003 Georgia's civil society has managed to achieve significant liberalization. 

13. NGO official, interview, Baku, 18 February 2014.

14. NGO official, interview, Tbilisi, 9 September 2013.

15. NGO representative, interview, Tbilisi, 7 September 2013.

16. NGO official, interview, Baku, 7 March 2014.

17. European Union official, interview, Tbilisi, 13 September 2013.

18. NGO official, interview, Tbilisi, 10 September 2013.

19. NGO official, interview, Tbilisi, 3 September 2013.

20. NGO official, interview, Tbilisi, 10 September 2013.

21. NGO representative, interview, Baku, 14 August 2013.

22. NGO representative, interview, Tbilisi, 11 September 2013.

23. NGO official, interview, Tbilisi, 18 September 2013.

24. NGO official, interview, Baku, 5 August 2013.

25. Given that the influence of Western donors on South Caucasian NGOs is very unequal this study focuses primarily on patron–client relations between NGOs and their local donors. While foreign donors continue to play an important part in the financing of Georgian NGOs, a series of stringent NGO laws recently adopted by the Azerbaijani government have limited the role of foreign donors in that republic (Coalson, 2014). Yet even in Georgia the role of informal networks in patron–client relations between local NGOs and their foreign donors is rather limited, because informal networks are normally employed to cement relationships with local actors rather than being used in relations with international funding agencies. Undoubtedly, the availability of grants increases the benefits of ‘grant-hunting’. However, in contrast to local patrons of civil society, international donors do not engage in informal relations with NGOs, and therefore the use of networks in collaboration between local NGOs and foreign funding agencies is insignificant.

26. Official of a European NGO, interview, Brussels, 10 July 2013.

27. Expert from a European think tank, interview, Brussels, 12 July 2013.

28. Official of a European NGO, interview, Brussels, 9 July 2013.

29. Expert from a European think tank, interview, Brussels, 15 July 2013.

30. Official of a European NGO, interview, Brussels, 9 July 2013.

31. NGO official, interview, Tbilisi, 10 September 2013.

32. NGO representative, interview, Baku, 5 March 2014.

33. Ibid.

34. In the South Caucasus, due to the general lack of understanding of the concept of civil society, and owing to the lavish funding that NGOs receive from their foreign donors, civil society work and volunteer work are closely associated with personal gain or profit-making.

35. NGO official, interview, Tbilisi, 12 September 2013.

36. NGO official, interview, Tbilisi, 18 September 2013.

37. NGO representative, interview, Tbilisi, 5 September 2013.

38. NGO representative, interview, Baku, 12 August 2013.

39. NGO official, interview, Tbilisi, 10 September 2013.

40. NGO representative, interview, Tbilisi, 5 September 2013.

41. NGO representative, interview, Baku, 11 August 2013.

42. Expert from a European think tank, interview, Brussels, 15 July 2013.

43. NGO official, interview, Baku, 7 August 2013.

44. NGO official, interview, Baku, 5 August 2013.

45. Official of a European NGO, interview, Brussels, 9 July 2013.