Corner
CIVICUS WorldNovember/December 1998
Since the end of World War II, a network of global and regional multilateral institutions has come to dominate much of the international development and financial agenda. The United Nations system and the World Bank are the best known and arguably the most powerful of these institutions, but they are not alone. Others include the International Monetary Fund; development banks in Latin America, Asia and Africa; regional organizations like the Organization of American States, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the European Union and the Organization of African Unity; and trade regimes like the World Trade Organization.
Over the past 50 years, the relationship between these organizations and civil society has changed beyond all recognition. In a recent report to the UN, Secretary General Kofi Annan offered this perspective: "Back then, the governments of UN Member States were virtually the sole actors in the international process; nongovernmental organizations were seen as supporters, allies, and mobilizers of public opinion in favor of the goals and values of the UN Charter." Today, the Secretary General notes, "NGOs are often on the ground before the international community gives the UN a mandate to act. They are indispensable operators in areas ranging from demining to human rights, from health care to refugees. And they are seen not only as disseminators of public information or providers of services, but as shapers of public policy."
At the World Bank, President James Wolfensohn, credited by many for his program to open up the Bank to NGOs and other nongovernmental actors, is on record that "unless the Bank believes that [civil society] participation is an essential element of its projects, they will not be as successful."
In this issue of CIVICUS World we examine the relationship of civil society and its organizations (particularly NGOs) to the United Nations system and the World Bank. Our focus is two-fold:
what are the issues, the debates and the reforms most important to CSOs and to strengthening civil society worldwide?; and
how can CSOs and NGOs participate most effectively with these institutions - to affect policy, impact decision-making, ensure better project design and outcomes and gain access to the extraordinary financial, intellectual and informational resources controlled by the multilaterals? Civil Society's Essential Role
The new spirit of openness and partnership that UN and Bank officials herald today is the result of more than 15 years of intense pressure, lobbying and campaigning on the part of CSOs and NGOs. As author David Korten has noted, "The 1980s saw a growing rejection of the myth that government is the sole legitimate agent for development decision-making and the management of development resources. It is now widely accepted that civil society has an essential, if not central, role in both."
Many factors contributed to this shift in perspective. Among the earliest efforts, international environmental organizations in the early 1980s challenged the World Bank on the environmental impact of its programs, particularly the building of large dams. Other NGOs confronted the Bank on questions of third world debt, loans to repressive regimes, the human cost of structural adjustment programs and the large-scale, involuntary resettlement of indigenous peoples due to Bank infrastructure projects. Beginning in 1994 at the time of the 50th anniversary of the Bretton Woods institutions (the World Bank and the IMF) and continuing to this day, the NGO 50 Years is Enough Campaign has focused attention on the Bank's fundamental development paradigm, arguing that its economic growth policies exacerbate rather than reduce income gaps between rich and poor. According to Jonathan A. Fox and David L. Brown in their recent study of the World Bank and NGOs, The Struggle for Accountability, "These campaigns have had an impact, most notably by pressuring donor governments to encourage the World Bank to adopt more rigorous environmental and social policies. Controversial projects that the World Bank would probably have funded a decade ago are today much more likely to be vetoed or modified in the design phase. Although its practice continues to lag behind policy promises, the World Bank's reform policies are important because they create benchmark standards that public interest groups can use to hold the institution accountable."
While pressure was mounting on the Bank, other NGOs and CSOs pushed for and won expanded participation in a series of large international UN-sponsored conferences on environment and development (Rio de Janeiro), women (Beijing), population (Cairo) and social development (Copenhagen). The fallout from the active involvement of thousands of NGOs in these summits was felt back at UN headquarters in New York. After the Earth Summit, in particular, many NGOs sought access not only to UN conferences, but also to the UN itself in order to monitor implementation of the declarations, final reports and platforms for action signed by governments at these global gatherings. Pressure from these groups and sympathetic governments caused the UN to reassess its policies toward NGO involvement. A new era of open-ness and transparency was initiated. In June of this year, at the UN's Special Session on the "Earth Summit +5," NGOs were allowed unprecedented access, including the delivery by 12 speakers representing civil society of formal statements from the podium to the General Assembly. The GA's President, Ambassador Razali Ismail, has called this "a milestone," that for the first time brought the "nongovernmental sector right into the plenary of the General Assembly."
A Transformed Working Relationship
This past decade has seen significant change -- even transformation -- in the working relationship between civil society and the multilateral giants. For CSOs and NGOs, this has meant greatly expanded participation in international conferences, more consultations with governments and UN and Bank staff, greater access to once tightly held information and increased involvement in project development and implementation. In many cases, CSOs and NGOs are now, in effect, operational partners with multilateral agencies in their projects and programs.
A few statistics help to demonstrate this shift:
At the United Nations, from the 41 NGOs granted consultative status by the Economic and Social Council in 1948, and 377 in 1968, the number of NGOs in consultative status has now expanded to over 1,550. Approximately 1,800 representatives of 637 organizations from 61 countries attended last year's UN Department of Public Information/NGO Conference. At the World Bank, in 1990, NGOs were involved in just 12 percent of Bank projects being implemented. By the Bank's Fiscal Year '97, 47 percent of all approved projects involved NGOs to some degree.
Beyond the statistics, the Bank and UN have also made some important strides in changing their internal policies and mechanisms to encourage greater civil society participation. In recent years, for example, virtually all UN system departments, agencies, programs and funds have been engaged in fundamental reviews of their relations with organizations of civil society. This has taken many forms. Guidelines for working with NGOs have been updated and developed. More enabling and pro-active approaches to cooperating with local and regional NGOs are being developed for regional and country offices.
Many agencies now hold periodic consultations with NGOs on substantive issues, policy questions and program strategies. The governing body of at least one agency, UNAIDS, has five seats for NGO representatives. A number of other agencies cooperate with standing NGO committees which have been established explicitly as permanent fora for ongoing policy dialogue between NGOs and the agency concerned. An important recent advance was the 1997 establishment of the NGO Working Group on the Security Council, through which a 30-member consultation group meets regularly with government delegations sitting on the Council. (See pages x-y for more information about United Nations NGO-related programs, as well as for information on civil society organizations working for further UN reforms.)
For its part, the World Bank has instituted a number of mechanisms and changes as a result of the restructuring begun in 1993 shortly after President Wolfensohn took office. An NGO Unit has been established and a civil society initiative and social capital program launched. Civil society "experts" have been stationed in each country office -- virtually all hired locally -- to teach staff how to work with NGOs and civil society. An NGO-World Bank Committee made up of Bank staff and leaders of NGOs from every region serves as a forum for input on major issues such as structural adjustment and transparency. Another NGO group advises and monitors the World Bank's microenterprise lending initiative. In July 1997 the Bank and a network of NGOs jointly launched the Structural Adjustment Participatory Review Initiative (SAPRI) which is assessing the impact of the Bank's often controversial economic adjustment measures in eight countries. (See pages x-y for information about these initiatives, as well as various NGO and CSO efforts to continue to bring change to the World Bank.)
If the United Nations system and the World Bank have opened themselves up to new levels of partnership with civil society, still much remains to be done and many important issues resolved. Summing up the current state of the relationship between NGOs and CSOs and the multilateral development and financial institutions, James Paul, Executive Director of the Global Policy Forum, says, "They have few formal powers but growing influence."
Doubts Persist About the World Bank
Still, for many civil society organizations participating with the network of multilateral development and financial giants -- particularly the World Bank -- remains a two-edged sword. On the one hand, these institutions represent powerful forces that can make a difference in efforts to fight poverty and improve the quality of life, build democracy and ensure human rights, foster sustainable development and protect the environment. They also are vehicles for transferring financial resources to CSOs and NGOs through grants and contracts; indeed grants and loans to governments, which then sub-contract with NGOs, are a major source of funding for civil society worldwide. Multilaterals also provide programs and technical assistance that help strengthen civil society's institutions; they are repositories for vital data collection and intellectual thought; and they offer fora in which civil society can meet with governments to help shape national and global policy debates.
On the other hand, many observers question the economic and social impact the multilaterals are having on countries of the South. This is particularly true in the case of the World Bank. Despite many reforms at the Bank, some NGOs remain deeply skeptical of the Bank's environmental and poverty eradication efforts, and indeed of the institution's underlying economic philosophy. The Bank's strongest critics, such as the NGOs participating in the 50 Years is Enough Campaign, argue that the institution is so fundamentally biased toward the interests of northern states, multinational corporations and wealthy national elites that reform is hardly possible. The campaign urges governments to cease funding the Bank and reallocate the money to more socially and environmentally responsible development agencies.
Even some NGOs, such as the Bank Information Center (BIC) and Development Gap, that are formally involved with World Bank initiatives, such as SAPRI, are ambivalent. Kay Treakle of BIC comments that "NGOs have needed to build and maintain political pressure from outside to force the Bank to create the space for dialogue. Even then, dialogue is not the best way to describe it, because real dialogue rarely occurs. The 'dialogues' that often occur around these processes tend to be constructed by the Bank, so they are undertaken on their terms." The potential for co-optation, she believes, is great; as a result, "many NGOs do not want to legitimize a process they feel is illegitimate." Nevertheless, she says, "I would never recommend not engaging the Bank. If you can engage them, pressure them, and in some cases even win over some of the more progressive staff, then progress is possible."
At the UN, the Issue Is Access
At the United Nations, access to the UN's deliberative and decision-making bodies and processes continues to be at the top of the NGO/CSO agenda. Despite the advances of recent years, there are remain many important negotiations taking place at the UN which NGOs are not allowed to observe or attend. This is particularly true with high level General Assembly working groups.
The World Federalists believe that "The exclusion of citizens groups is unacceptable, particularly since these groups are making decisions on many of the proposals in the action plans adopted at the recent UN world conferences and summits. This exclusion is difficult to justify given that many of the most creative and thoughtful proposals for UN reform have come from civil society, from NGOs."
Another contentious issue is the fact that the UN's main decision-making body, the General Assembly, does not offer formal access to NGOs. Establishing a formal consultative mechanism through which the representatives of civil society can submit reports, make statements and lobby for their agenda is a high priority for NGOs and CSOs. Still another concern, worries James Paul of the Global Policy Forum, is that some governments are trying to roll-back the hard-won advances of recent years and initiate new restrictions on NGO participation at the UN. Some countries, he says, "don't want NGOs sticking their noses into global issues like disarmament."
The vital role of civil society in addressing global concerns is now widely understood among most governments and within the halls of the UN and the World Bank. How the partnership between the third sector, the multilaterals and governments will evolve remains the subject of intense debate. CSOs and NGOs have been instrumental in opening the door and letting fresh air into the once dark and restricted corners of multilateral financial and development institutions. Civil society has already gained much from this sometimes difficult process. But so too have the multilaterals. As Kofi Annan reported to the General Assembly this summer, "The advantages of this increased NGO participation cannot be overestimated. NGOs have introduced additional knowledge and information into the decision-making process; they have raised new issues and concerns which were subsequently addressed by the United Nations; they have provided expert advice in areas where they were the main actors; and they have contributed greatly to a broad consensus-building process in many areas which ensured commitment by all actors to a global agenda.
(*)Selected pieces from a 20 page resource kit on Civil Society, the U.N. and the World Bank.
More Information on NGOs and the Bretton Woods Institutions
