Is social change fundable? NGOs and theories and practices of social change

Abstract

Northern NGOs have come under critical scrutiny since the 1990s, often with negative conclusions as organisations which had supported radical social change in the 1970s and 1980s have since turned themselves into a professionalised and bureaucratic aid sector. The article focuses on the Northern NGOs that purport to fund progressive social change and which encourage beneficiaries to question market and political power, and on the NGOs to which they channel funds in Latin America. After examining various types of critique, the article asks whether it is not only dangerous in practice to fund social change but also misguided in principle, or whether there remain ways to use resources to enhance the capacity of local change agents to make the choices that they deem appropriate. It concludes that much depends on the theory and practice of social change that underpin the resource transfer, particularly in relation to the transformation of power (as opposed to ‘empowerment’), to social activism, and to the robustness of efforts within NGOs to resist or modify bureaucratic imperatives from back-donors.

Le changement social est-il finançable? Les ONG et les théories et les pratiques du changement social

Cet article se concentre sur les ONG de l’hémisphère Nord qui prétendent financer le changement social progressiste et encouragent les bénéficiaires à mettre en question le marché et le pouvoir politique et sur les ONG vers lesquelles elles canalisent des fonds en Amérique latine. Après avoir examiné divers types de critiques des ONG, l’article pose la question de savoir s’il n’est pas seulement dangereux dans la pratique mais aussi peu judicieux en principe de financer le changement social, ou bien s’il reste des manières d’utiliser les moyens disponibles afin d’améliorer la capacité des agents locaux de changement pour qu’ils puissent procéder aux choix qui leur paraissent appropriés. Il conclut que tout dépend de la théorie et de la pratique de changement social qui sous-tend le transfert des ressources, en particulier pour ce qui est de la transformation du pouvoir par opposition à l’«autonomisation» et l’activisme social, et de la robustesse des efforts au sein même des ONG pour résister aux exigences des bailleurs de fonds ou les modifier.

A mudança social é financiável? ONGs e teorias e práticas de mudança social

Este artigo concentra-se nas ONGs do hemisfério norte que visam financiar uma mudança social progressiva e que incentivam os beneficiários a questionar o mercado e o poder político, e nas ONGs para as quais elas canalizam fundos na América Latina. Após examinar vários tipos de críticas de ONGs, o artigo pergunta se não é apenas perigoso na prática financiar mudança social, mas também equivocado em princípio, ou se ainda há maneiras de se utilizar recursos para aumentar a capacidade dos agentes de mudança locais para que façam as escolhas que eles consideram adequadas. O artigo conclui que muito depende da teoria e prática da mudança social que sustenta a transferência de recursos, particularmente em relação à transformação de poder em contraposição a ‘empoderamento’, em relação ao ativismo social e à solidez dos esforços dentro das ONGs para resistir ou modificar exigências burocráticas dos doadores de origem.

¿El cambio social es financiable? Las ONG y las teorías y prácticas del cambio social

Este ensayo examina a las ONG del Norte que financian el cambio social progresista y que promueven entre sus beneficiarios el debate sobre el poder político y el mercado, y analiza también a las ONG que reciben su financiamiento en América Latina. Tras revisar varias críticas a las ONG, la autora se pregunta si, en la práctica, financiar el cambio social es, además de arriesgado, también desaconsejable en principio, o si aún se puede canalizar el financiamiento para incrementar la capacidad de los agentes de cambio locales para tomar las decisiones que estimen convenientes. En conclusión, mucho depende de la teoría y la práctica del cambio social que defienden las agencias, especialmente en relación con la transformación del poder en contraste a ‘empoderamiento’, con el activismo social y con la firmeza de las ONG para resistir o cambiar las engorrosas directrices de sus fuentes de financiamiento.

Keywords:

• Aid
• Civil society
• Latin America and the Caribbean

Acknowledgement

This article draws on the author’s paper presented at the LASA Panel on ‘Funding Social Change: Latin American Movements and International Donor Agencies’, LASA Congress, Montreal, 4–8 September 2007.

Notes

In some cases, international NGOs have always received most of their money from governments. In the UK, however, many raised most of their money from the population, something that began to change in the 1990s.

For example, ‘NGOs foster a new type of cultural and economic colonialism and dependency. Projects are designed, or at least approved, based on the “guidelines” and priorities of the imperial centers and their institutions. They are administered and “sold” to communities. Evaluations are done by and for the imperial institutions. Shifts of funding priorities or bad evaluations result in the dumping of groups, communities, farms, and co-operatives. Everything and everybody is increasingly disciplined to comply with the donors and project evaluators’ demands. The new viceroys supervise and ensure conformity with the goals, values, and ideologies of the donor as well as the proper use of funds. Where “successes” occur they are heavily dependent on continued outside support, without which they could collapse’ (Petras 1997: 13).

In Europe, these would include Novib, Cordaid, Icco and Hivos (Netherlands), Diakonia (Sweden), Oxfam Belgique and 11.11.11 (Belgium), CCFD (France), Intermón (Spain), Christian Aid, Cafod, Oxfam GB(UK), Trocaire (Ireland), Danchurchaid (Denmark), Misereor, EED, and Brot für die Welt (Germany).

The conclusion of recent research into European NGO funding trends in Latin America commissioned by ALOP (The Latin American Association of Private Development Organisations) was that overall funding allocations to Latin America have not been reduced, although the number of partner organisations in South America in particular has fallen since 2000, and aid is channelled to fewer countries. Twelve countries are the focus of European NGO aid: Brazil, Peru, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Bolivia, Colombia, Guatemala, Honduras, Ecuador, and Chile (although agencies have gradually withdrawn from Chile), Haiti, and Cuba (Biekart 2005).

Another critique from a distinct lens is Alvarez 1999.

A failure finally overcome when the FMLN took office in 2009. The interesting question now will be the form in which they govern.

Interestingly, however, in Honduras NGO pursuit of gender equality in the maquila industry has been accompanied by the rejection of labour unions, although these, for all their obvious limitations, do have representational legitimacy on labour rights. Rather than Northern NGOs writing unions out of the script, the issue is to strengthen the labour movement by making it more responsive to female labour (Eade 2004).

Together with the Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, and Learning by Design in the Netherlands in 2005–06.

Personal interview, 23 August 2005.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Jenny Pearce

Jenny Pearce is Professor of Latin American Politics and Director of the International Centre for Participation Studies at the University of Bradford. She has worked in and written extensively on Latin America, and conducted a decade-long study of post-war reconstruction in Huehuetenango, where she helped to set up a research centre.