SOCIETY: Work With Business, Report Urges NGOs

By Jim Lobe Reprint | | Print |

Jim Lobe

Washington, Jun 26 2003 (IPS) - Civil society should continue along its current path as a globalisation reformer rather than take the route of anti-globalisation force if it wants to remain effective, says a new report by global business, NGO and government bodies.

The document’s release Thursday comes just as international and U.S. non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are under attack from right-wing forces in Washington for opposing the administration’s agenda.

The study, released at the World Bank by the United Nations and SustainAbility, a consultancy firm that has followed the evolution of NGOs for some 15 years, concludes that northern-based NGOs, such as Oxfam International, Greenpeace and World Wildlife Fund, have become much more appreciative of market-based solutions to global problems and that corporations are likewise more interested in working with NGOs.

This trend is reflected in part by a greater appreciation on the part NGOs for globalisation, it continues. Instead of casting themselves as “anti-globalisation,” many NGOs are now “beginning to reposition themselves as promoting alternative forms of globalisation,” according to the report.

“Paradoxically perhaps, many NGOs now argue for more globalisation, not less,” the report states. “However, they stress that it needs to be focused on ‘globalising’ human rights, justice and accountability for those that abuse those rights.”

The study, which was based in part on interviews with more than 200 NGO leaders primarily in North America and Europe, was supported by contributions from several multinational companies, including DuPont, the World Bank’s private-sector affiliate, the International Finance Corporation (IFC), several NGOs, including Oxfam, Transparency International and WWF. It was co-sponsored by the U.N. Environment Programme (UNEP) and the U.N. Global Compact, a three-year-old project designed to encourage business, labour and civil-society organisations (CSOs) to enter into joint partnerships to promote common goals.

Last month, the head of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), Andrew Natsios, harshly criticised U.S. humanitarian and development NGOs that USAID has routinely worked with for failing to give sufficient credit to the U.S. government as the source of the aid. NGOs, he warned, should make it clear that they are “an arm of the U.S. government” when implementing projects.

He also threatened to “personally tear up their contracts and find new partners” if they failed to achieve measurable results, according to NGO officials who were present.

At the same time, USAID has moved to use more private contractors instead of NGOs for work in Iraq and other countries, and to impose new rules that require all NGOs working on USAID projects to clear all press contacts with the agency in advance.

These steps were followed by the launch earlier this month by two right-wing think tanks with unusually close ties to the administration – the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies – of a new website, NGOWatch.org, to disclose the funding sources, alleged political agendas, staffing and salaries of more than 100 NGOs “with the most influence in international affairs”.

According to the two groups, which receive most of their funding from corporations or their foundations, NGOs are pursuing a “liberal” agenda at the global level that threatens both U.S. sovereignty and free-market capitalism.

“This is inherently a project that is tilted to the left,” said Cornell University government professor Jeremy Rabkin who argued that NGOs are using the multilateral system, including the World Bank, to regulate the behaviour of corporations and governments.

Such charges “seem almost quaint … as many civil society organisations (CSOs) go mainstream,” according to the SustainAbility report which, however, sees NGOs and CSOs as playing key roles in “holding big business (and big government) in check”.

But it also sees a growing and “striking convergence between the values of those in the NGO or CSO sectors and those (particularly younger people) working in mainstream institutions. “This is one of the factors now driving the growing interest, on all sides, in partnerships,” the report notes.

The NGO sector itself is becoming “so large that almost by definition it is ‘mainstream’,” it adds, estimating the sector’s combined annual budget at over one trillion U.S. dollars, with a payroll covering some 19 million employees.

“It’s an extraordinary fact that the sector could now rank as the world’s eight largest economy,” the report says.

At the same time, NGOs face major challenges in coming years, it emphasises.

“The good news for NGOs is that they are emerging as vital ingredients in the health and vitality of markets,” said John Elkington, the chair of SustainAbility in a statement. “They are also highly trusted, far more so than business or governments.”

“The bad news is that unless they recognise and address growing financial, competitive and accountability pressures, their impact will be significantly reduced.”

In particular, NGOs must ensure greater transparency and disclosure regarding their funding, management, and effectiveness. “Despite being key advocates of corporate accountability, few NGOs have adopted the same rules as their business counterparts, maintaining it compromises their flexibility,” the report adds.

It also argues that NGOs must promote and market themselves through “branding” and other practices to establish themselves as “good investments” rather than rely “on funding fuelled by public anger and guilt.” This will be essential to combat financial pressures driven by declines in the stock market and increased competition from growing numbers of organisations that tout their ability to solve social and environmental problems, including “socially responsible” businesses.

The report also calls for NGOs to develop greater understanding of the business world so they can work more effectively with business and government to develop market-based solutions to problems.

“For those that respond intelligently and in time (to these challenges), according to Elkington, “the prize is to be amongst the most influential institutions of the 21st century”.

The shift in strategy could create one problem, says the report: “more positive, constructive work tends to attract fewer headlines”, which themselves can help to attract and retain members and to sustain funding. But the report notes that alternative sources of funding are likely to emerge through relationships with governments, companies and ”social entrepreneurs”.