Challenges to the Institutionalisation of Environmental NGOs in Kazakhstan’s Corporatist Policy Arena

Abstract

Using the perspective of political opportunity structure, this qualitative survey of primary sources attempts to determine whether environmental NGOs (ENGOs) in Kazakhstan are achieving institutionalisation from the standpoint of representative democracy, or are being co-opted by a corporatist national government. Are ENGOs the harbingers of the democratisation of the country that many observers hope to see? Given increases in the nation’s budgets for the environment and easing of NGO/ENGO legislation, the institutionalising project would seem to have some prospects for success. Concomitantly, the participation of civic groups in the policy arena has contributed to better governance through experiments in new forms of state-society partnership. However, these partnerships have under-performed. Local governments face conflicting demands, while the insufficient administrative and technical capacity of state agencies highlights the need for capacity building. On the political level, authentic ENGOs must compete for policy inclusion with co-opted “front” organisations selectively favoured by the national government, at the same time that the government’s ambiguity towards ENGOs retards the latter’s institutionalisation. The immediate future of environmental civic society is uncertain.

Key Words:

• Kazakhstan
• NGOs
• environment
• institutionalisation
• participation

Notes

¹ In Kazakhstani law NGOs come under the rubric of non-commercial organisations (NCOs), which usually include inwardly-focused groups, such as producer and consumer groups, sports and cultural clubs, housing services communes, and religious communities. NGOs are conventionally understood as having more outwardly-orientated social and advocacy purposes. By 2009 Kazakhstan had about 25,000 NCOs, of which 8,000 to 13,000 were NGOs.

² ENGOs were followed by child and youth organisations – 13.6%; women’s – 13.3%; medical – 13.1%; culture, art, science, education – 12.5%; human rights – 7.6%; social security – 6.8%; support of civic initiatives – 6%; multi-profile – 4.7%; invalids’ associations – 4.4%; and rehabilitation of child invalids – 3% (e.gov.Kazakhstan, n.d.).