-
When was the term INGOs first used?
1945
-
INGOs: How many INGOs were there in 1872?
32 organisations
-
INGOs: How many INGOs were there in 1954?
About 1,500
-
INGOs: How many INGOs were there in 1990s?
Over 40,000
-
INGOs: Issues of definition
- What is an "international NGO"
- Pre 1990: fundraising and campaigning HQ in donor countries, offices in aid recipient countries implementing projects sometimes through partners
- 2016 Action Aid - NGO break down imperial project
- BRAC? first NGO initiated in Souther country which went viral
-
INGOs: The emergence and rise of INGOs:
- Term first used in 1945 by UN but charities, voluntary and welfare associations been around since at least mid 19th C
- 1839 - Anti-Slavery International
- 1863: Red Cross
- 1920: League of Nations
- Most present day NGOs were formed post WW2
- Many have roots in religious or missionary organisations
-
INGOs: 1980s: INGOs as heroes
- Distinct and progressive values
- Independent from northern governments
- Circumventing corrupt recipient governments
- Awareness raising about poverty
- Closer to "poor people" - giving them voice
- Effective and efficient service delivery
- Building the capacity of southern NGOs
- Rapid responders in humanitarian events
- Able to influence corporations and donors
-
INGOs: 1990s: Too close for comfort?
- Desire for growth compromised mission and values:
- Relationship with official donors reduced independence
- Representation to raise money from public unethical
- Relationships with business leading to co-optation
- Disasters used to leverage money
- Little evidence of being effective
- Create dependency not social change
- Unrepresentative: Advocacy not representing poor people
- Patronising/imperialist: huge power imbalances in relationships with partners
-
INGOs: Dilemmas: more info
- Poverty vs. rights: What will donors support?
- Critique that official aid not supportive of rights based approaches
- Critiques ignore that:
- Some official donors more progressive than some BINGOs
- Some voluntary funding e.g. from child sponsership more conservative than official aid
-
INGOs: Voices of the poor or unrepresentative elites:
- Critique BINGOs do not represent poor people in global policy spaces
- Critique ignores:
- Recent bottom up efforts to global campaigns such as the Global Campaign for Education
- Staff operating in national policy spaces are local citizens
-
INGOs: Dilemmas: Universalist aspirations vs complexity of local contexts:
- INGOs gain legitimacy in the North by adopting universal standards
- Corporate engagement:
- Some evidence BINGOs have influenced corporate responsibility
- However critiques argues:
- likely to be co-opted through process of relationships
- Critique ignores BINGOs (are) selective about whom they accept money from?
-
INGOs: Conclusion:
- INGO popularity and legitimacy has waxed and waned
- Academic critique justified but a bit simplistic given differences between organisations and challenges
- INGOs face interesting times ahead - will they be able to sustain legitimacy and survive in traditional formss
-
INGOs: Problems with critiques:
- Does not:
- Fully acknowledge BINGOs efforts to respond to challenges
- Differences between BINGOs: histories, countries of origin, cultures, values, funding base, core business
- Differences "battles of knowledge" within:
- Staff from different disciplinary backgrounds in HQ
- Staff from different cultures and backgrounds who staff and increasingly manage country programmes
- Tends to ignore "success" stories e.g.
- Christian Aid's support for:
- Challenging traditional power relations between children and adults and having significant impacts on policy and health in Africa
- Money: Does Size matter?
- Critique fails to explore the complex reasons BINGOs pursue growth:
- Visibility and legitimacy - assumed to increase policy influence
- Belief that better than competitors
- Desire to influence donors through funding relationships
|
|
