Nongovernmental Organizations Essay

Cheap Custom Writing Service

A nongovernmental organization (NGO) is a specific type of voluntary  organization  characterized  by its involvement  in international relief and development activities. As part of the voluntary sector, NGOs are distinct from government  and commercial organizations and are characterized  by being formal, private, non-profit-distributing, self-governing, and possessing a degree of voluntarism.

It is possible to distinguish between NGOs based in developed countries  (Northern NGOs) and those based in developing countries (Southern NGOs). Northern NGOs  can  be further  divided  according to their  principal  method  of operation:  operational NGOs, which pursue  international development  by working directly with beneficiaries; advocacy NGOs, which seek to facilitate change through  lobbying and awareness-raising  activity; and  fund-raising  NGOs, which gather  resources  that  are subsequently  delivered to beneficiaries through partner organizations.

These methods of operation  are not mutually exclusive. Some NGOs have very broad mission statements; others restrict themselves to specific geographic  areas or types of activity. In a broader sense, NGOs make a distinctive contribution to international development  as a result of their independence.  In particular,  they are credited  with an ability to reach the poorest  and most marginalized groups  while  retaining   the  flexibility to  respond quickly to changing environments.  Conversely, they are criticized for their lack of global impact, as they often focus on community-level  projects, although working  alongside  other  types of organizations  in the international development  community  serves to enable impact at multiple levels.

The Voluntary  Sector

In simple terms, it is possible to divide organizations into  three  categories,  or  sectors: private  (commercial), governmental  (public),  and  voluntary  (third). The scale and importance  of the voluntary sector is vast. In the United Kingdom (UK), 2008 data on civil society showed that the sector had a workforce of 1.3 million people (around  4.5 percent  of the country’s working  population),  comprised  865,000 organizations, and had a combined income of £109 billion.

The boundaries  among  these  sectors  are  becoming progressively blurred, however, with governments funding the voluntary sector to deliver public services and to pursue government  objectives, and businesses entering  relationships   with  voluntary  organizations to demonstrate their  social responsibility. Volvic, for example, is currently  working with World  Vision to develop water and sanitation resources in Africa. In its “1L for 10L” campaign, Volvic, through  World Vision, will provide 10 liters of drinkable water for every one liter  it sells. The project  will take  place in Zambia, Ghana, Malawi, and Mali through the building of wells and associated infrastructure. The UK government provides competitive grants to fund the delivery of a wide range of services, including schemes for urban regeneration; youth projects; and the refurbishment of community facilities through the Big Lottery, the Voluntary Sector Support Unit, and other funding schemes.

Voluntary  Organizations

An NGO is a specific type of voluntary organization, so before focusing on NGOs, it is useful to define voluntary organizations  in general. The voluntary sector is sometimes defined as comprising organizations that are neither commercial nor governmental—a so-called residual approach. By contrast,  structural-operational definitions identify voluntary organizations  according to key characteristics of voluntariness.

One such definition identifies five key features of voluntary organizations.  They must  be formal (with some degree of institutionalization), private (institutionally separate from government), non-profit-distributing (not  returning  profits to owners  or directors), self-governing (equipped  to control  their  own activities), and voluntary (involving some meaningful degree of voluntary participation). Although few people would disagree with the principles behind  these criteria, in practice they do have limitations.

The suggestion that a voluntary organization must exhibit a degree of formality or institutionalization is useful in distinguishing between ad hoc and organized action. In making this distinction, however, informal associations are effectively excluded from the voluntary sector. This exclusion may not be desirable, as the vast majority of voluntary action takes place through small, informal, and ad hoc associations.

A further  concern  is that  research  suggests that as an organization  becomes  more  formal, the  level of voluntary  participation   falls. Consequently,  two of the  defining  features  of voluntary  organizations inherently conflict.

Although the requirement to be institutionally separate from government  is sound, it can be difficult to achieve in practice. Since the late 1980s, a gradual shift toward a contract culture has occurred, with voluntary organizations entering into contracts with governments to undertake  specific projects or to provide particular services. Governments often attach strict planning and reporting requirements to their funding, with the result that some voluntary organizations end up operating in a manner similar to public-sector bodies. Overreliance on funding of this kind can have an adverse effect on the image of the voluntary organization, as well as on its freedom and operational  efficiency. Data from the United Kingdom indicate that  the proportion of voluntary-sector income being received from the public sector continues to increase.

Several definitions  include  the  requirement that voluntary organizations should not distribute profits, but different perspectives exist on what this requirement means in practice. One view is that an organization should not distribute  net earnings to anyone who exercises control of it. The reference to net profits suggests that  it is acceptable  to pay staff. Some observers question  this practice  on the basis that  it can be difficult to determine  the point at which fair compensation becomes profit distribution.

The issue of self-governance is inextricably linked to the concept of an organization. For an organization to be recognized as an entity, it must be in a position to influence its own actions. It is widely acknowledged, however, that voluntary organizations  have complex stakeholder groups. The emphasis placed on accountability to stakeholders suggests that it may be difficult for voluntary organizations  to truly determine  their own actions.

The issue of voluntary participation  is also problematic in the sense that no reference is made to the level at which the volunteers  should work. In some larger voluntary organizations,  volunteers  are active in fund-raising,  whereas decision  making is undertaken by paid professionals. This arrangement raises the question of whether such volunteers have a suitably significant role to justify calling the organization a voluntary one.

Despite the problems  with structural-operational definitions, they are nevertheless more positive than the  residual  approach  outlined  earlier, in that  they provide criteria for inclusion in the voluntary sector. NGOs are a specific type of voluntary organization that meet this structural-operational definition.

Terms

Any consideration of the  voluntary  sector  and  the organizations that reside within it invariably becomes engaged in a debate about terminology. There appears to be a lack of consensus on the use of specific terms and the meanings associated with them. The result is that it can be difficult to interpret  research studies, as it is not always clear what type of organization is being examined. Therefore, no treatment of this subject area would be complete without considering some of the terms that are in use and the ways in which they may be interpreted.

In addition  to nonprofit, terms  that  are in widespread use include charity, nongovernmental organization (NGO), private voluntary organization (PVO), not-for-profit, nonprofit, and third-sector organizations. Similarly, these  organizations  are  collectively labeled as the  third  sector; the  nonprofit sector; the voluntary  sector;  and,  more  recently,  civil  society. What might these terms mean, and are they really just different labels for the same type of organization?

Charity is the easiest term to define as a result of its legal standing.  In the United Kingdom, a charity is a legally recognized entity. To become a registered charity,  an organization  must  have aims consistent with  the  current  interpretation of the  principle  of charitable purposes, which sets out acceptable types of activity. After being awarded charitable status, an organization  must  fulfill strict  criteria  that  dictate how and for what purpose it operates.

Registered charities are strictly regulated by Charity Law, and the Charity Commission  has a range of powers to intervene if this law is contravened. One of the challenges with this approach, however, is that the definition  of acceptable  activity changes  over time. Consequently, some registered charities would not be given charitable status under the current  interpretation of the criteria.

At first sight, the terms nonprofit and not-for-profit (NFP) appear  to be very similar, implying that  they may be interchangeable.  Indeed, there is no discernible difference in the way these terms are used by the literature. It is possible, however, to make a subtle but important distinction between nonprofit and not-for-profit organizations.  It can be argued that  although not-for-profit organizations  do not have the generation and distribution  of profits as a primary goal, they may still make profits without jeopardizing their status. By contrast, it may be argued that nonprofit organizations must not make a profit, whether or not it is their intention  to do so.

The term third-sector organization differs from the others in that it doesn’t describe organizations themselves. Instead,  it is a generic term  used to refer to the set of organizations that have been placed within the third sector. Therefore, the definition of this term relies on the definition of the third sector and perhaps on the structural-operational definition outlined earlier. It seems that these two terms are simply alternative inert labels adopted by some to avoid using terms that have the potential to carry deeper meanings.

The term nongovernmental organization is meaningless  if  taken  literally;  after  all,  businesses  are also  nongovernmental.  The  term  is in  widespread use, however, and was officially recognized  in 1950 through  a United Nations resolution.  It has gained a meaningful definition through  historical association, being traditionally used to describe voluntary organizations that are specifically involved in international relief and development  activities. Thus, general support  exists for the suggestion that  NGOs represent a specific type of voluntary organization  defined by principal purpose.

Some literature  uses the  term  private  voluntary organization to refer to organizations engaged in this kind of activity. There is some debate as to whether the terms  NGO and PVO are interchangeable,  although recent use exhibits convergence of the terms. The only apparent  difference seems to be that these organizations tend to be called NGOs in Europe and PVOs in North America—a distinction  echoed by some intergovernmental bodies.

Methods Of Operation

One  problem  that  does  arise  is the  current   trend toward using the term NGO to refer to organizations that carry out development  work in their own countries (so-called grassroots or indigenous NGOs). This use is inconsistent  with  the  idea that  NGOs  carry out international development work, and it would be logical to  argue  that  organizations  operating  solely in their own countries  are really examples of voluntary organizations.  The term  is used this way, however, which leads to an initial categorization of NGOs that distinguishes between those based in developed countries  and  those  based in developing countries. These are often referred  to as Northern NGOs and Southern  NGOs, respectively. The use of the terms Northern and Southern reflects prevailing terminology, which refers to the developed world as the global North and the developing world as the global South.

Northern NGOs can be divided according to their principal method of operation, distinguishing among operational,  advocacy, and fund-raising. Operational NGOs  make  a distinctive  contribution to  international development, providing practical help, support, and expertise to host communities. They are credited with an ability to work at the level of individual communities and to reach the poorest, most marginalized groups. These NGOs may be involved in campaigning and fund-raising too, but their focus is on delivering resources  directly, taking  a practical  and  hands-on approach to international development.

Debate exists about  the continued  role of operational NGOs as Southern NGOs grow in number and power. The role of operational  NGOs perhaps  grew out of the traditional  view of international development  as being  based  on  technology  transfer  from developed to developing countries.  Over time, however, this  view has changed,  and  an  argument  has been  made  that  Northern NGOs  should  focus  on advocacy and fund-raising, leaving operational  work to their Southern counterparts.

Advocacy NGOs make their contribution to international development by raising awareness of specific issues at individual and governmental  levels. It has been  argued  that  advocacy in developed  countries is an alternative approach  to NGO operation,  which reflects a focus on  the  root  causes of poverty  and inequity. Indeed, some NGOs focus entirely on this approach and consequently have no overseas activity. In this way, international development  is pursued by raising awareness of issues to mobilize public support and to lobby governments  to take action to address development and humanitarian issues.

Advocacy as an approach  is argued to be beneficial, as many of the causes of poverty can be linked to inequities  in political and economic  structures,  and as such, these issues cannot  be addressed effectively by  simply  providing  resources  to  local  communities. Instead, it is argued that it is necessary to pursue changes at political and economic levels to enable developing countries  to help themselves out of poverty. Such approaches are consistent with the criticism of NGO activity for being too small-scale and failing to recognize the wider structures  within which their work takes place. Advocacy can be achieved through direct lobbying of key individuals, collaborative work, research and publication, attendance  at conferences, and participation  of NGOs in working groups.

Although all NGOs arguably engage in fund-raising to finance their activity, for some, fund-raising is their principal purpose. Fund-raising NGOs focus on raising money and other material resources for distribution to organizations  in developing countries.  Many smaller NGOs operate in this way and may combine fund-raising with advocacy work. NGOs of this type tend to work in partnership with one or more Southern NGOs to distribute the resources to beneficiaries, viewing this practice  as a more  sustainable  method of development, as it enables developing countries to build their own support mechanisms and make use of local resources and expertise.

Activities

In addition to the method  of operation, it is possible to identify NGOs according to their type and location of activity. International development can be pursued through  various types of activity, including projects relating  to  children  and  education,  HIV/AIDS and other  health  issues, water  and  sanitation,  community and personal development, advocacy and human rights, natural resources and agriculture, business and economic development, and emergency relief.

Large international NGOs such as Oxfam, Save the Children, and Christian Aid have broad mission statements. Consequently, they operate in several countries and are involved in a wide range of project types. Some large  NGOs,  such  as  WaterAid  and  FARM-Africa, focus on specific types of activity; many smaller NGOs, such as Pumpaid, Book Aid International, and Children in Crisis, have a similar focus. Also, numerous  small NGOs focus on specific countries or regions, including the Bihar Foundation, India Development Group, and Friends of Northern Uganda.

Contributions to International Development NGOs make a distinctive contribution to international development.  Governments  are often  criticized  for focusing on economic development, commercial benefit, and the creation of export opportunities for their own firms yet being ineffective at the grassroots level. Intergovernmental bodies such as the  International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank are similarly criticized for emphasizing economic development.

Although economic inequity is undoubtedly  a root cause of poverty, some argue that changes at this level alone are ineffective in improving  people’s lives at a grassroots  level. By contrast,  it is argued that  NGOs should pay more attention  to the lives of individuals, families, and communities  by focusing on social, economic, and environmental welfare. This argument  is consistent with the view that NGOs are proponents of community-based (participative) approaches  to international development. As such, NGOs are considered to be particularly effective in reaching the poorest and most marginalized communities. Their size and agility enable them to act quickly, and their closeness to communities  allows them to readily identify and respond to local needs. NGOs attempt to use local skills, expertise, and resources as much as possible, which serves to empower communities  and is consistent with the goal of achieving sustainable development.

It has been argued that NGOs are more efficient and  effective than  governmental   organizations  in tackling poverty as they are less bureaucratic.  Further,  it  is  frequently  suggested  that  beneficiaries trust NGOs as a result of their perceived impartiality. This trust is especially important, as an increasing number of humanitarian crises are linked to conflict, which makes it difficult for governmental organizations  to  become  involved. These qualities characterize  the  distinctive  contribution of NGOs to international development.

Criticisms

Concurrently,  however, NGOs  are criticized  for the lack of global impact that their small-scale projects are able to achieve. Thus, NGOs and governmental organizations appear to have complementary strengths, suggesting that a development community in which these types of organizations work together would be effective at both micro and macro levels. Indeed, this appears to be happening,  with increased  cooperation  among NGOs, intergovernmental bodies, and governmental agencies. Cooperation  has been noted by several UN agencies, including the United Nations  Development Programme  and the United Nations Children’s Fund, as well as the UK government’s Department for International Development.

Such cooperation  has resource benefits for NGOs, enabling them  to reach more beneficiaries than  they otherwise would. It also presents  potential  problems, as official donors have specific reporting requirements. Additionally,  acting  as a subcontractor can  have an impact on the very modus operandi that makes NGOs so important to international development.  The relationship with official donors, therefore, is an important one that can affect the way in which NGOs work.

The International Development Community

 The international development  community  is large and complex. The guiding principle of international development—working toward global equity in areas such as health, education, and opportunity—naturally attracts a range of organizations. Large humanitarian operations such as those in the Great Lakes region of Africa in the mid-1990s and the Balkans in the late 1990s, for example, are reported  to have involved up to 300 organizations of various types.

Different models of the flow of aid exist, illustrating the movement of resources and the range of organizations that are involved in this process. The basic model consists of three major components: the constituency from which resources enter the system, intermediaries through  which resources are channeled, and beneficiaries that  receive the resources.  NGOs are one type of intermediary  facilitating the movement of aid resources from developed to developing countries.

Movement Of Resources

Resources  enter  the  system  principally,  although not  exclusively, from  developed  countries.   These resources  ultimately  derive from  a combination  of private  donations  and  taxation.  Private  donations are  made  to  Northern NGOs,  whether  advocacy, fund-raising,  or  operational.  Advocacy NGOs  use these  donations   to  finance  their   lobbying  work. Fund-raising NGOs act as a conduit  through  which the  donations  will be channeled.  They may direct the donations through Northern operational NGOs, through  Southern  NGOs,  or through  community based organizations in developing countries.

Operational  NGOs  by definition  use  donations to directly finance their  work with beneficiaries in developing countries.  Simultaneously, governments in developed countries  receive income through  taxation,  which enables governments  to finance their contribution to  the  international community.  This contribution is made in several ways. Many governments operate their own development programs through  dedicated departments that enable them to give direct  support  to beneficiaries. Such activities are invariably connected with the pursuit of the Millennium  Development  Goals, which were initiated through  the United Nations in 2000 to guide development  action.  The UK government’s Department for International Development  (DfID), for example, is active in pursuing these goals, which include eradicating extreme  poverty and hunger, achieving universal primary education,  promoting  gender equality and the empowerment of women, reducing child mortality, improving maternal health, combating HIV/AIDS and other diseases, ensuring environmental  sustainability, and developing a global partnership for development.

Resources  can  also be  directed  to  beneficiaries through the governments  of developing countries in what is referred to as bilateral aid. Another approach is for resources to be directed through  intergovernmental bodies such as the UN or World Bank in what can be labeled multilateral  aid. In addition,  Northern governments channel development resources through Northern operational NGOs to benefit from the distinctive characteristics  that NGOs can offer.

Oxfam

Oxfam is a well-known example of an international NGO.   Oxfam   receives  its   income   from   several sources, including private donations, trading through its retail operations, and government  and other public authorities. Oxfam has a broad mission statement that commits to tackling poverty and suffering. Such a broad purpose requires a range of approaches. Consequently, Oxfam seeks to tackle poverty and suffering through  initiatives relating to education, health, debt and aid, climate change, HIV/AIDS, gender equality, and trade and livelihoods.

As well as performing  operational  work, Oxfam carries out research to support its lobbying and advocacy. It operates in more than 70 countries and engages in both emergency relief and long-term development activities.

Bibliography:  

  1. Henry   Chesbrough,   Shane   Ahern, Megan Finn, and Stephanie Guerraz, “Business Models for Technology  in the  Developing World:  The Role of NonGovernmental  Organizations,” California Management Review (v.48/3, 2006);
  2. Luis de Sousa, Peter Larmour, and Barry Hindess, Governments, NGOs and Anti-Corruption: The New  Integrity  Warriors  (Routledge,  2008);
  3. Michael Edwards and David Hulme, eds., Making a Difference: NGOs and Development in a Changing World (Earthscan, 1997);
  4. Michael Edwards and David Hulme, eds., Non-Governmental Organisations: Performance and  Accountability (Earthscan,  1998);
  5. Alan Fowler, Striking a Balance: A Guide to Enhancing the Effectiveness of Non-Governmental Organisations in  International  Development  (Earthscan, 1997);
  6. Volker Heins,  Nongovernmental  Organizations in International Society: Struggles Over Recognition (Palgrave Macmillan, 2008);
  7. Dirk-Jan Koch, Aid From International NGOS: Blind Spots on the Aid Allocation Map (Routledge, 2009);
  8. Natalia Negrea and Balogh Marton,  “The Involvement of the Business Sector in Corporate  Social Responsibility (SCR) Projects,” Transylvanian  Review of Administrative Sciences (22E, February 2008);
  9. Debora L. Spar and Lane T. LaMure, “The Power of Activism: Assessing the Impact of NGOs on Global Business,” California Management Review (v.45/3, 2003);
  10. Anna Vakil, “Confronting the Classification  Problem:  Toward  a Taxonomy  of NGOs,” World  Development  (v.25/12, 1997);
  11. Yongian Zheng and Joseph Fewsmith, China’s Opening Society: The Non-State Sector and Governance (Routledge, 2008).

This example Nongovernmental Organizations Essay is published for educational and informational purposes only. If you need a custom essay or research paper on this topic please use our writing services. EssayEmpire.com offers reliable custom essay writing services that can help you to receive high grades and impress your professors with the quality of each essay or research paper you hand in.

See also:

ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER


Always on-time

Plagiarism-Free

100% Confidentiality

Special offer!

GET 10% OFF WITH 24START DISCOUNT CODE