Civil Society
The state, in order to realize its universality, requires the creation through civil society of individual freedoms and the ability to satisfy needs. Yet by this very process of development, civil society is increasingly characterized by chaos and inequality that undermines ethical unity. Such ethical unity is found only in the universal state, which, although it should not abolish civil society, should rule and guide it. Civil society is that set of diverse non-governmental institutions which is strong enough to counterbalance the state and which can prevent the state from dominating and atomizing the rest of society. Action in civil society becomes central to democratic theory and practice (Baker 2002). For attempts to legitimate the state must always proceed after the fact of the state power and dominance while action in civil society can in principle be constituted by citizens themselves for their own purposes. Together with the market and democracy, civil society’ is one of the magic trio of developmental panaceas which emerged in the 1980s and now dominate conventional prescriptions for the ills of the 1990s (Scholte 2002, p.282) The idea of civil society is central to any discussion of democratization since it raises central issues about the role of social forces in defining, controlling and legitimating state power (Burnell & Calvert 2003).
In development debates, it is argued that the growth of civil society, in its modern form at least, can play a crucial political role not merely by undermining authoritarian governments and contributing to the establishment and maintenance of a democratic polity, but also by improving the quality of governance within that polity. There are four ways in which civil society improves the quality of governance. First, a growing civil society can alter the balance of power between state and society in favor of the latter, thereby contributing to the kind of balanced opposition held to be characteristic of established democratic regimes. Second, it is argued a strong civil society can play a disciplinary role in relation to the state by enforcing standards of public morality and performance and improving the accountability of both politicians and administrators. Third, civil society plays a potentially crucial role as an intermediary or transmission-belt between state and society in ways which condition the relationship between individual citizens and the formal political system. In an optimistic scenario, an active civil society can serve to improve the performance of democratic polities by transmitting the demands and articulating the interests of sectors of the population. Fourth, civil society can play a constitutive role by redefining the rules of the political game along democratic lines (De Santa Ana 1994, p.22). The civil society is a group of individuals who share a common idealism and belief. The civil society can be a voluntary civic group or social organizations institutions. It is should not be part of the state and should not be a member of any commercial institution. The civil society can be in the form of church organizations, the academe, cooperatives, charities, trade unions and non governmental organizations. Civil society plays an important in role in guiding the government to make the right decisions and be responsible for their actions. Civil society has played various parts in the affairs in the state, one of which is in terms of development for a developing or emerging country.
Issues faced by developing countries
Although all developing countries differ greatly, a common characteristic of their economic development has been the pursuit by all of them of an outward-looking, export-oriented economic strategy. To varying degrees, all countries have sought to grow by expanding their exports of goods. Such a strategy may be contrasted with an inward-looking, import-substitution policy of the kind that was fashionable in many countries in the earlier years of the post-war period (Grimwade 2000). An inward-looking policy is more concerned with protecting nascent industry from foreign competition by erecting high import barriers and encouraging local production of goods that are substitutes for imports. Economists are divided on how central export expansion was to the success of fully developed economies. At one extreme are those who consider the adoption of export-oriented trade strategies as being the key to the success of these countries. According to this school of thought, the success of countries that have achieved take-off in this way provides a model for other developing countries. At the other extreme are those who deny any linkage between export expansion and economic growth, arguing that the success of these economies should be attributed to other factors. Most developed countries enjoyed fast export growth and this was accompanied by rapid domestic growth (Grimwade 2000).
The emergence of a group of developing countries as major exporters of manufactured goods has been one of the most important changes in the world trading system over the past half-century. Major changes in the world trade environment have combined with more successful development strategies in the developing world to bring about this change. The adoption of outward-looking, export-oriented trade policies has been an important factor, although disagreements exist about how important was the contribution of export expansion to economic growth in developing countries (Weiss 2002). The fact that much of the expansion enjoyed by developing countries has been export-led has had major implications for the western industrialized countries. They have found that a growing proportion of their markets for manufactured goods have been filled by imports from developing countries. The much lower level of costs in these countries has made it often difficult for producers in the developed world to respond to the new competition. Frequently, this has led to demands for import protection. Mostly, this has been based on unsound arguments about the effects that such imports have on employment levels and the wages of low-skilled workers. Insufficient account is taken of the fact that the growth of countries has also enabled the western industrialized countries to export more (Weiss 2002). All countries want to achieve their goal of development. But not all can easily achieve it due to various things like corruption, mismanagement and economic recessions. Among the three economic recessions is forgivable since it is not a local event and its cause was not brought about by a singular action. Corruption and mismanagement are unforgivable because in such cases there are direct actions involved and it can be prevented at the onset. Various means have been devised to stop the onset of corruption and mismanagement. Governments try to determine the best means to stop the barriers against growth.
Civil society and the goal towards development
Developing countries are often sadly lacking in resources required for economic development. Many legitimate developmental demands compete for limited national resources: education, health, the building of infrastructure, some level of reimbursement for land redistribution, and agricultural and industrial investment. Advanced industrial states are better able to forgo absolute, short-term payoffs in favor of potential long-term or conjoint benefits. It is often beyond the capacity of the political leadership of less developed countries to agree to share meager resources with its regional partners and to delay gratification of often desperate economic needs with only the promise of long-range greater benefit (Brown 1994). Developing states need immediate and dramatic gains from integration. Because the benefits of integration are slow in coming, other avenues to economic development may be perceived as more attractive than regional economic cooperation. The temptation for emerging countries is to forsake group developmental strategies and to proceed on their own, and/or to form economically beneficial liaisons with trading partners outside of the region. Since policies are crucial, the nation-state, implicitly or explicitly, is the essential actor in growth and development. The policy framework that influences development is not narrowly economic (Brown 1994).
A nation’s capacity to maintain external security is important. The desperate poverty of countries makes it clear that development does not take place when resources are devoted to waging war. Internal security, personal safety and the rule of law is essential if economic activities are to flourish. Good governance, ill-defined though the concept may be, is essential to growth. Social and cultural factors and their reflection in political processes clearly affect development. If these processes were better understood, growth could be accelerated in many countries (Helleiner 2001, p. 249). The issue that emerges out of the ideological debates about development is not whether governments have a role in development, but what sort of role they should play Future insights into development and hence into further policy improvement are more likely to come from more careful empirical work and associated incremental improvements in well-established, mainstream boxes of economic tools, rather than in major outbreaks of theory (Grilli & Salvatore 1994). The government is the primary persons that steer a developing country into its goal of development but without the guidance of the civil society the goals will not be reached. The civil society such as trade unions and cooperatives provides their ideas on how development can be achieved; they give their insight on the factors that they believe will be vital in achieving growth and development. The civil society such as the church or other non governmental organization gives constant reminders to the government whenever they see actions that are different from the goal to achieve development. They engage in lawful actions to remind the government that their policies may not lead to any change in status for the developing country. Lastly the civil society such as the academe encourages citizens to contribute to the growth of the developing economy. The academe creates a call of action for people to contribute to the growing economy.
How NGOs as civil society helps in development
Generalizations about the nature of states are probably unwise, since most states are not monolithic and, at the present time, may be losing power and influence under the processes of globalization. However, most NGOs realize that their impact will be limited unless they form wider links, with one important option being a link with government (Lewis 2001). The management of relationships with the state is an important element of overall strategy for most NGOs. Although there are cases of NGOs avoiding any kind of relationship at all with the state by lying low, or through working with communities in remote localities, NGOs can oppose, complement or reform the state but they cannot ignore it, remains an important insight. Some analysts have made the point that NGOs themselves cannot be effectively understood without reference to the governments which they seek to work with or to struggle against, and the very label ‘non-governmental organization’ may lead people to examine what it is about the state that the NGOs are so keen to disassociate themselves from. There are therefore major challenges for NGOs in developing strategy in relation to government (Lewis 2001).
Many NGOs have an ambivalent attitude to the state, and those organizations which were formed under conditions of political repression may find it difficult to trust or work with government, even when it has changed. On the other hand, NGOs which have their roots in struggles against repressive states may then find that their roles are less clear once a more accountable, democratic government has been installed. NGOs may indeed be perceived by government as a threat or as competitors (Ronit 2000). Even when democracy is in place it may be fragile, and government may still be bureaucratic and inefficient, which can make formal contact hazardous for the NGO. If NGOs decide to work together actively with the state, the risk is that they could themselves become less effective and that the relationships downwards’ to their community level groups will be damaged. For NGOs, the process of setting goals becomes highly politicized by a range of external stakeholder pressures, leading to a frequent confusion between means and ends. It becomes difficult, therefore, to make use of formal rational management planning tools. It also becomes likely that there will be a wide gap between the formal public statements made by the organization about what it is doing, and the unofficial goals which are being pursued on a day-to-day level by people within the organization (Ronit 2000).NGOs function as a civil society helps in producing a developed country. The non governmental organizations concentrate on various aspects of a country like corruption, economy, governance and social policy. They comment or give their ideas on what they think should be changed with regards to corruption, economy, governance and social policy. The NGO’s lead calls to action whenever they believe that the government is not working for the benefit of all. The NGO sets standards of development and whenever the standards are not met they criticize the government and force them to work. Like other civil society the NGO encourage people to participate in activities that will help their country achieve development.
References
Baker, G 2002, Civil society and democratic theory:
Alternative voices, Routledge, London.
Brown, M 1994, Developing countries and regional economic
Cooperation, Praeger Publishers, Westport, CT.
Burnell, P & Calvert, P (eds.) 2003, Civil society in
democratization, Frank Cass, London.
De Santa Ana, J 1994,’The concept of civil society’, The
Ecumenical Review, vol. 46, no.1, pp. 15- 25.
Grilli, E & Salvatore, D (eds.) 1994, Economic development,
Greenwood Press, Westport, CT.
Grimwade, N 2000, International trade: New patterns of
trade, production & investment, Routledge, London.
Helleiner, GK 2001, Markets, ‘Politics, and globalization:
can the global economy be civilized?’, Global Governance,
vol. 7, no. 3, pp.249-251.
Lewis, D 2001, The management of Non-Governmental
development organizations: An introduction, Routledge, New
York.
Ronit, K 2000, Private organizations in global politics,
Routledge, New York.
Scholte, J 2002,’Civil society and democracy in global
governance’, Global Governance, vol. 8, no.3, pp. 281-283.
Weiss, J 2002, Industrialization and globalization: Theory
and evidence from developing countries, Routledge, London.
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment