Introduction - Factors Affecting Civil Society Organizations
Civil society organisations (CSOs) were formed to address issues and advocate for causes that are not being addressed by government or the private sector. These organisations often focus on areas such as human rights, environmental protection, economic development, and social justice (Daniel and Neubert, 2019). They provide a platform for citizens to come together and work towards common goals, and can serve as a check on government power and influence. Additionally, CSOs can play an important role in promoting transparency and accountability in government and other institutions. They are formed by individuals or groups of individuals who believe in a particular cause and want to work towards a solution.
The following report will discuss how civil society organisations gained power as well as faced declination in recent times. It will focus on different regional factors are responsible for the declination of CSOs. Lastly, how CSOs have gained resurgence across the world.
Grab The Best Academic Assistance In Just One Click
Explanation of the Rise of the Power of Civil Society in Recent Times
According to Rutzen (2015), almost twenty years back the world witnessed associational revolution. Civil Society Organisation (CSO) was formed in the 80s with the aim of providing human rights to the common people. CSOs acted as a bridge between the public and the government. Moreover, there is a gap between government bodies and private organisations. CSO’s activities also involve mending this gap whenever and wherever needed.
The ascent of the power of CSOs in recent times can be put down to a combination of factors, including advances in technology, increased access to information, and changes in political and economic systems. The extensive use of the internet and media platforms has made it easier for individuals and groups to organise and share information, allowing civil society organisations to become more effective in advocating for their causes. Additionally, changes in political systems, such as the end of authoritarian regimes and the emergence of democracy, have created more space for civil society to operate. Economic factors, such as globalisation and increased wealth, have also played a role by providing resources for civil society organisations to grow and expand.
As per Rutzen (2015), CSOs gained positive response from the international community. They contributed for the well-being of the common people. With their involvement people receive several benefits in different segments such as education, economic development, health, culture, and many other objectives that positively impacted human life. Political theorists stated that CSOs are directly linked with social justice and they exemplified several incidents like anti-apartheid campaign in South Africa, civil rights movements in the U.S., and Central European dissident movements.
Explanation of the Decline of the Power of Civil Society in Recent Times
The decline of the power of civil society in recent times can be explained by a number of factors, including government crackdowns on civil society organisations, the erosion of democratic institutions, and the rise of authoritarianism and populism (Schäfer, 2019).
In some countries, governments have passed laws or taken other actions to limit the ability of civil society organisations to operate, such as restricting their funding or limiting their ability to advocate for certain issues.
As per Rutzen (2015), after the attack of 9/11 there was a shift in global outlook. With the increasing terrorists attacks the focus drifted away from the need of human rights and CSO’s positive impact. Back then the president of U.S. George Bush declared war against terrorism and his immediate target was the CSOs. According to Anheier, Lang and Toepler (2019), Governments of many countries started restricting international funds to the CSOs. This can make it difficult for these organisations to effectively promote their causes and engage with communities.
The erosion of democratic institutions and the rise of authoritarianism and populism can also lead to a decline in the power of civil society. When democratic checks and balances are weakened, it can be easier for government leaders to ignore or suppress the voices of civil society organisations. Similarly, when populist leaders come to power, they may be less inclined to listen to the concerns of civil society organisations, and instead prioritise their own agenda. World leaders’ concern regarding CSOs increased with the colour revolutions. In 2003 Rose revolution started in Georgia, Russia followed by Orange revolution in Ukraine in 2004. This led Belarus president put ban on any kind of colour revolution (Mazepus et al. 2021). At the same time Zimbabwe parliament as well passed law to restrict CSOs.
From 2004 to 2010 over fifty countries took strict step in order to restrict CSOs all around the world. The main reason behind these restrictions is to stop terrorism as CSOs are linked with both the freedom agenda and terrorism groups.
Fig 1: Between 2004 to 2010 Number of Countries Restricting CSOs
Moreover, economic factors and the political climate might also contribute to the decline of civil society. Economic downturns can limit resources available to civil society organisations. Political polarisation can also discourage people from participating in civil society activities.
Regional Variations in the Overall Trend of Declining Influence of Civil Society
There may be regional variations in the declining influence of civil society due to factors such as political and economic systems, cultural norms, and historical contexts. As per Repucci and Slipowitz (2022), in some authoritarian countries, civil society may have less influence due to strict government controls and repression of dissenting voices.
The waning need for CS support in countries that had witnessed political transformations in the 1980s and 1990s was the cause of the shift. Years had passed, and neither of these governments thought themselves to be “in transition”. Rather, they had progressed as far as they could and were now concentrating on combining governmental institutions and state power. This was especially true in “semi-authoritarian” or “hybrid” regimes that held elections but were unconcerned about the human rights, other aspects of pluralistic democracy, and rule of law.
In contrast, in countries with more democratic systems, civil society may have more opportunities to participate in policy-making and hold government accountable.
Several recent studies examining international funding constraints and the political environments in which they were formed back up the UNSR’s assertions. According to one study, most of countries where political opposition is unhampered and voting is “free and fair” do not impose international funding restrictions on CSOs. Governments in countries where election exploitation occurs, on the other hand, tend to limit CSO access to foreign assistance, suspecting that well-funded CSOs will play a part to their election loss. In order to weaken the opposition, vulnerable regimes that want to keep power sometimes restrict international funding.
Additionally, economic factors such as poverty and lack of resources can also affect the ability of civil society to organise and advocate for change.
Conditions behind the Resurgence of Civil Society Influence
If the global associational revolution began in 1994, the global associational revolutionary movement started in 2004. Conditions for resurgence of CS can vary depending on the context. Some possible factors include a shift towards more democratic and open political systems that can provide greater space for CS to organise as well as support for change. As per Blattman and Annan (2016), there has been economic growth and development that can provide resources and opportunities for civil society groups to operate and mobilise. There is greater public awareness and support for civil society, which can help to mobilise people and resources towards social and political change. Conditions also involve a strong and independent legal system that can protect the rights and freedoms of civil society groups and citizens.
When the Berlin Wall fell, many countries understood the significance of saving CSOs (Monticelli, 2020). However, still several countries are refusing to fund CSOs today. Government that feels intimidated by such organisations put restrictions on them under a range of different meaningless excuses. These governments are able to do so in part because the fundamental concepts of CSO are being evolved, argued, and at times, violently contested. The output of this debate will navigate CSOs’ destiny in near future.
A vibrant media that can provide a platform for civil society groups to disseminate information and mobilise public opinion. It is worth to notice that, in some cases, the decline of civil society could be a consequence of the lack of participation and engagement from citizens, the civil society itself should work on their own revitalization to regain its influence.
Conclusion
Restrictions on CSOs are often imposed by governments to maintain control over their citizens and limit opposition to their policies and actions. The report concludes that several countries put restrictions in the fear of increasing terrorism. They thought if they restrict the international funding terrorist will not have enough resources to continue their activities. But after the fall of Berlin wall and several other incidents countries realised the importance of CSOs. It's important to note that not all restrictions on civil society organisations are unjustified and can be necessary in some cases, such as those that are imposed to protect the safety and well-being of citizens, or to prevent illegal activities. However, in many cases, these restrictions are used to stifle dissent and limit the ability of citizens to organise and advocate for their rights and interests.
References
Anheier, H.K., Lang, M. and Toepler, S., 2019. Civil society in times of change: shrinking, changing and expanding spaces and the need for new regulatory approaches. Economics, 13(1).
Blattman, C. and Annan, J., 2016. Can employment reduce lawlessness and rebellion? A field experiment with high-risk men in a fragile state. American Political Science Review, 110(1), pp.1-17.
Daniel, A. and Neubert, D., 2019. Civil society and social movements: conceptual insights and challenges in African contexts. Critical African Studies, 11(2), pp.176-192.
Mazepus, H., Dimitrova, A., Frear, M., Chulitskaya, T., Keudel, O., Onopriychuk, N. and Rabava, N., 2021. Civil society and external actors: how linkages with the EU and Russia interact with socio-political orders in Belarus and Ukraine. East European Politics, 37(1), pp.43-64.
Monticelli, D., 2020. Thinking the new after the fall of the Berlin Wall: Juri Lotman’s dialogism of history. Rethinking History, 24(2), pp.184-208.
Repucci, S. and Slipowitz, A., 2022. The Global Expansion of Authoritarian Rule. Freedom House.
Rutzen, D., 2015. Authoritarianism goes global (II): Civil society under assault. Journal of Democracy, 26(4), pp.28-39.
Schäfer, S., 2019. Democratic Decline in Indonesia: The Role of Religious Authorities. Pacific Affairs, 92(2), pp.235-255.
