Asset and liability of NGOs

The non-government organizations (NGOs)  came to aid world development and to establish outlooks and attitudes that laid the foundation for a modern development perspective. According to Alegre (1996) NGOs have emerged as a new catalyzing, social organization and as a significant player in development. They are increasingly significant actors in global governance and in international development.

Clarke (1994) provides the following explanation why NGOs play a prominent role in contemporary social movements, as follows: (1) Their access to significant source of funds from abroad; (2) Their capacity to generate the mass leaders needed to sustain social movements; (3) Their use of their direct experience in providing services to beneficiaries as a platform from which to engage in more political activity.

The role of NGOs, says Clarke, has resulted in two specific consequences: (1) A history of effective service delivery gives NGOs significant “legitimacy” in the eyes of other political actors; and (2) NGO political activity is informed by direct experience and is therefore more clearly based on practical experience.

Clark (1990) has vividly described the critical role NGOs have to play: Because of their international structure and linkages they have the potential to construct global networks of citizens pressure. Because they command a unique vantage point they are ideally placed to study and describe how contemporary crises affect the poor. Because of their size and flexibility they are able to experiment with new approaches to the crises and so, through demonstration, serve as pioneers or catalysts for government action. Because of their access to the media they are well placed to reach out with their message. And because they do not stand to make personal profit the public trusts them at large.

The critical role of NGOs is both an asset and liability.  More often than not, they are confronted with ambivalence. While their size and flexibility make it easily for them to adjust to changing circumstances and conditions in the implementation of programs and projects, they have a weak capacity to absorb bigger undertakings. Although aware of such limitations, NGOs are still hesitant to increase their size, fearing that their flexibility and dynamism may be sacrificed in the process.

Because they frequently pioneer new approaches and challenge development orthodoxy, NGOs are vulnerable to groups with vested interests. Consequently, the NGOs face the problem of either co-optation or reprisal from the government and other traditional power holders that want to maintain the status quo. Moreover, they have to deal with the proliferation of pseudo NGOs that undermine the sector’s credibility. A number of these pseudo NGOs set up not for any other purpose than to take advantage of funding sources for dubious or narrow purposes, according to Abad (1990).

This issue has been  highlighted by  the current pork barrel controversy in the Philippines  involving the Napoles  network of fake NGOs. But this is not the first controversy. I doubt if it will be the last.

_______________________

This article is part of the series of posts on NGOs. Admittedly, the current pork barrel controversy in the Philippines  involving the Napoles  network of fake NGOs has besmirched the noble aim and name of  non-government organizations (NGOs). However, we consider the crisis an opportunity to bring to the public consciousness the role of NGOs in nation building. Previous posts tackle the rationale of this series, heterogeneity of NGOs, their history, and classification.

Heterogeneous nature of NGOs

NGOs emerged to respond to needs, which were not readily met by the government due to systemic limitations. With elite and/or traditional politicians at the helm of leadership, the government, most often, cannot initiate major reforms. This is a situation where NGOs take active role as catalysts for change. Providing stimuli for the various sectors of society to organize them, NGOs equip the poor with the important skills, knowledge and resource necessary in their struggle towards a better life and a more humane society (Aldaba ,1993).

Image credit: lingofeeds.com: 

However, the term NGOs itself elicits discussion or debate. It is not consistently used which results to various definitions/classifications. According to records, one of the earliest mentions of the term "NGO" was in 1945, when the United Nations (UN) was created. Being an inter-governmental organization, the UN opens its  door to  international non-state agencies - or non-governmental organizations which are awarded observer status at its assemblies and some of its meetings. Thereafter, the term  was widely used to  refer to nonprofit entities independent of governmental influence.

In a broad sense, NGOs are simply agencies or groups which are different from government bodies. Quizon, as cited in Racellis (1998), defines NGOs: as private, voluntary organizations; social development agencies; or professional support; or cause oriented groups that are non-profit –oriented and legal, which are committed to the task of development and established primarily for socio-economic services, civic, religious, charitable and/or social welfare purposes.

This definition covers the heterogeneous nature of NGOs. As such, various acronyms were  as used to describe  them. Wikipedia and Nonprofit Expert  have released the following classifications: BINGO is short for Business-oriented International NGO. TANGO means Technical Assistance NGO  while RINGO is an abbreviation of Religious International NGO.  ENGO refers to  environmental NGO while GONGOs are Government-Operated NGOs, which may have been set up by governments to look like NGOs in order to qualify for outside aid. DONGO means Donor Organized NGO while QUANGOs are quasi-autonomous non-governmental organizations. There  is also  PANGO which is a Party NGO set up by parties and disguised as NGOs to serve their political matters and  MANGO which refers to  Market Advocacy NGO.

Image credit: transmissionsmedia.com

On the other hand, Karina David has  the following classifications of NGOs: DJANGOs  for Development, justice and advocacy NGOs. Commonly called as Development NGOs, they  perform  a mixture of direct and support service function with and for GUAPOs (genuine, autonomous people’s organization.) Primary form of intervention is community and sectoral organizing, developments in recent years have spawned organizations that provide support services (legal, medical, research, etc.)

Next, the TANGOs  (Traditional NGOs ) representing the charitable, welfare, and relief organization, TANGOs perform valuable services for the poor. While they intersect with the POs and DJANGOs their primary focus remains on marginalized individuals and families. There is also the  FUNDANGOs  (Funding agency NGOs). These foundations and grant-giving are linked to grassroots organizations primarily through providing financial and other forms of support.

Of course, there are also MUNGOs  (Mutant NGOs),  according to David. Theses are extensions of the state (because they are GRINGOs government-run NGOs) or personal interests. Another is the  BONGOs, business organized NGOs which refer to those that are created primarily as tax dodges, vehicles for quelling labor unrest, or means to project a benevolent company image. Finally, the  COME N’GOs. These are NGO entrepreneurs with  fly-by-night organizations that package proposals and promptly disappear with the funds and/or work the funding game by hiring themselves out to large donor organizations.

I don’t know if the controversial network of  fake NGOs created by Napoles will ever classify to any of the categories or there is a need for amendments to the aforementioned classifications.

_______________________

This article is part of the series of posts on NGOs. Admittedly, the current pork barrel controversy in the Philippines  involving the Napoles  network of fake NGOs has besmirched the noble aim and name of  non-government organizations (NGOs). However, we consider the crisis an opportunity to bring to the public consciousness the role of NGOs in nation building.  A phenomenal movement which came to aid world development and to establish outlooks and attitudes that laid the foundation for a modern development perspective, genuine NGOs  have emerged as a new catalyzing, social organization and as a significant player in development  (Alegre,1996).