Wickramasinghe The Idea of Civil Society in The South Science & Society 69-3-2005

S&S Quarterly, Inc.
Guilford Press
The Idea of Civil Society in the South: Imaginings, Transplants, Designs

Author(s): Nira Wickramasinghe
Source: Science & Society, Vol. 69, No. 3, The Deep Structure of the Present Moment (Jul.,
2005), pp. 458-486
Published by: Guilford Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40404268 .
Accessed: 22/06/2014 00:55
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
S&S Quarterly, Inc. and Guilford Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Science &Society.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Science& Society,
Vol. 69, No. 3,July2005, 458-486
/'
v
The Idea of CivilSociety

in the South:Imaginings,
Transplants,Designs*
NIRA WICKRAMASINGHE
ABSTRACT: The genealogy ofthemostinfluentialunderstanding
oftheterm"civilsociety"canbe tracedtowhathasbeendescribed
as the"Americanization" oftheconceptin thelasttwodecades.
Through theinstrumentalization con-
ofthisneo-Tocquevillian
ceptionof"civilsociety,"a newsocialspaceis beingdesignedin
theglobalSouth.Withthegrowing flowbetweenacademictheo-
riesand knowledge and theworldofaid agencies,policiesand
practical civilsociety
politics, is becominga meansto an end-
democratization,economicgrowth or sustainable
development
- ratherthanan end in itself.
isan experiment
Civilsociety ora longseriesofexperiments,
in thesensethateverything and subject
aboutitis tentative
to revision,
butno one is in chargeof theexperiments.
- Michael Walzer
Thereis as yetno evidenceofa functionally civil
operating
in
society Africa.
- Patrick Chabal
THAN ANY OTHER SIGN, perhaps,civilsocietyhas

surfacedas the Big Idea of the MillennialMoment,"de-
claredJean andJohnL. Comaroffin theirintroductionto
MillennialCapitalism
and theCultureofNeoliberalism,
wheretheyhigh-
lightsignificant
parallelsbetween thefirst
coming theidea of"civil
of
in
society" the late 18thcenturyand itsre-surfacing in the late 20th
* Thispaperwasfirst
presentedattheInternationalCenterforAdvanced NewYork
Studies,
inApril2003.I amverygrateful
University, toall theparticipants
intheseminarfortheir
comments
thoughtful and suggestions.
458

CIVIL SOCIETY IN THE SOUTH 459
(Comaroff, 2001,40). In thisessayI willproposethattherearefunda-

mentaldiscrepancies betweenthefirst and secondcomingsof"civil
and
society," suggest that itis through instrumentalization
the ofa very
specific conceptionof"civilsociety" thata newsocialspaceis being
in
designed many countries of the globalSouth.FromSriLankato
Kenya, these manufactured "civilsocieties" displayfeatures incommon
thattranscend culture, economy, geography, or resource differentials.
So ubiquitous is thephrase"civilsociety," however, thatitis easy
to believethatithas alwaysbeen an existing entity,in thesameway
as thestateor themarket, in an ephemeralbutnevertheless secure
manner.Thisis becauseso manyvoicesspeakaboutit,nameit,give
ita shapeandan auraofcertainty, almostlikeHannahArendt's stray
dog, whose chances of remaining increaseoncenamed.Ifthere
alive
is a word,theremustbe a thing!Thereis,however, no consensuson
whatcivilsociety represents, whenitstarted andwhoinhabits it.This
paper offersno answers in thisrespect, but more urgently attempts
to cullout the ideaofcivilsociety, whichhas had and continuesto
havethemostlastingimpacton thelivesofpeople in somecoun-
triesin theglobalSouth.The purposeof thisessay,then,is notso
muchtodefineanddescribecivilsocietiesas itis toexplorewhathas
beentheuseoftheideain theseregions.
Asa premise, civilsociety isbestseennotso muchas a structured
setofinstitutions, butas a socialspace,largeorconstrained, as shaped
by forces
historical (Bayart, 1986). I will argue thata new social space
is emerging through thetransplant ofa veryspecific idea ofcivilso-
cietywhich,whilesojourningwithotherideas of civilsociety,has
becomehegemonicthrough a numberofpractices enactedbya va-
riety ofactorsboth local and in
global very differentcountries in the
South.Thereis no "visitor in thenight"responsible forcreating this
newspace.Rather, forces and interests combine and connive in a
sometimes obliquemannertoforma "civilsociety" whereglobalin-
stitutions consumelocal initiatives and formations.
To illustratethispoint,itmightbe necessary to lookat theway
thatsucha normative idea ofcivilsociety comes to lifeand is trans-
plantedto theSouththrougha seemingly innocuousinternational
charity. To add clarity tothis, this paperengagesina quickforay into
Britain's imperialpast.
Whenthe Empressof India, Queen Victoria,celebratedher
GoldenJubileein 1875,festivities wereheldall overhervastempire.

460 SCIENCEäf SOCIETY
Civil ServantJohn Ferguson lefta fascinatingaccount of the Jubilee

in the Crown Colony of Ceylon, where he described a sumptuous
militaryreview on Galle Face Green Esplanade. Most interestingly,
he mentioned how a large number of poor people in towns and vil-
lages were fed, each getting a measure of rice and five cents (one
penny) or a piece of calico (Wickramasinghe, 2003, 31).
Today Britannia no longer rules the waves at Heaven's command.
Yet was it a coincidence or a purposeful emulation of an age-old colo-
nial traditionto give to the needy in "less civilized"parts of the world,
that to mark the Golden Jubilee of Her Majesty Queen Elisabeth II,
the Commonwealth Education Fund (CEF) was officiallylaunched
on March 12, 2001 by Chancellor Brown?
In what can be seen as more than simplysignaling the continu-
ities between colonial and post-colonial practices and the shiftfrom
"dominance without hegemony" (Guha, 1997) to a power relation
in which the moment of persuasion and seduction outweighs that of
coercion, the CEF now epitomizes the paradigmatic status the idea
of civil society has reached in the practices of both donors and their
local agents. Even a cursorylook at the policy document of the Com-
monwealth Education Fund designed for a selection of countries -
14 in number - in the global South clearlyplaces civil societyat the
core of its program of action. The aim of this Fund is purportedlyto
help developing Commonwealth countries achieve the Millennium
Development Goals in education so that everychild in the Common-
wealth acquires a primaryeducation by 2015. Indeed, as we are re-
minded, 75 million primaryschool age children in the Commonwealth
do not at present attend school. The Fund, to be managed by leading
charities,Action Aid, Oxfam and Save the Children, describes its ac-
tivitiesthus:
- Strengthening civilsocietyparticipationin the designand implementa-

tion of nationaland local education plans and frameworks. Particularpri-
oritywillbe to
given supporting that
initiatives accelerateprogresstowards
gender equity in education;
- Enablinglocal communitiesto monitorgovernmentspendingon educa-
tion,both at the nationaland local level;
- Supportinginnovativewaysforcivilsocietyto ensure thatall children,

especiallygirlsand themostvulnerableand disadvantaged(includingstreet

CIVIL SOCIETYIN THE SOUTH 461
children,formerchild soldiersand nomadic children) are able to access

qualityeducation. (http://www.commonwealth-educationfund.org)
An initialreadingofthe"orderly fieldofstatements" produced

bytheCEF clearlyspellsout a well-designed universally applicable
recipeforattaining, in all countries alike,thenoblegoal offulllit-
eracy forchildren by 2015. The reportpresumestheexistenceofa
in each ofthe14 countries
civilsociety thatwouldbe supportive of
theCEF aims.In a curiousway,therealaimoftheprojectappearsto
be moretosupportand strengthen a particular moldofcivilsociety
thantoactually improve education. This can be seen bytheconstant
involvement of selectedcivilsocietyactorsin theimplementation
process,through monitoring ofthestate.Improving educationalstan-
dards- surely a necessity in mostofthesecountries - is clearly
not
thepurposeoftheprogram. The thirdaimstatesthatthepurpose
oftheCEF initiative is to "accessqualityeducation,"thefallacious
assumption beingthat"quality education" alreadyexistsinthedevel-
oping worldand does not need any further strengthening orimprove-
ment.1 Thus,the criteria foraction common toall recipientcountries
areprovided at the outset the
by donors, somewhat overlooking the
pressing needsofchildrenforfood,shelter, and transport facilities
as wellas theverydifferent situationof thepublicspherein each
country concerned.
The 14conceptpapersproducedbythelocalcounterparts ofthe
CEF programin each country, as itsresponseto thisinitiative, also
revealthewayinwhichtheidea ofcivilsociety hasbeeninternalized
and instrumentalized bytheintellectuals, socialworkers, academics,
NGO personneland publicservants whohavebeen selectedas the
worthy partners to theCEF. None oftheirresponsesevenbeginsto
question processoftranslating
the theirowndiverse forms, practices
andunderstandings oflifeas a counter toparochial politicalcategories
ofdeeplyEuropeanoriginthathavebeenputbeforethem.Instead,
fromKenyatoIndiatheidea ofcivilsociety, designed,transplanted,
and manufactured, is acceptedas an unproblematic category.
1 The SriLankacase offersan exampleofthemisdirection ofthisinitiative. Indeedwhat

anyeducationistwouldsayin thecase ofSriLankais thattheneedofthehouris an in-
vestmentin better educationforall ratherthanaccessto education.Furthermore
quality
genderdifferencesalthoughtheyexistare notthemostpressing issuein a country
that
hasa femaleliteracy
rateofover90%.

462 SCIENCE äf SOCIETY
Thispaperwillfirst in the
wayscivilsociety
sketchthedifferent
Southhasbeen analyzeduntilnow,beforetracingthegenealogy of
whatseemstobe thedominantideaofcivil in
society theSouthtoday.
Thepaperconcludeswithcomments on thewaytheseideastakeform
materially.
in theSouth:Ideasand Imaginings
1. CivilSociety
Muchofsocialsciencetodayoperateson theassumption ofthe

existenceofalternative on
positions virtually everything. Studiesof
civilsocietyareno different. Whiletheseapproachespermit thesub-
versionofthewest-centric analyses ofthepast,one oftheweaknesses
of postmodernapproachesis to havefailedto recognizethatall
"imaginaries" are notequal. Thereis indeedno "imaginaire" with-
outmateriality: "Vraiou faux,"writes Bayart, des
"le récit vainqueurs
structurera la réalité,mêmesiceluidesvaincusresteopératoire dans
lescreuxde la société"("Trueorfalse,theaccountofthevictors will
structure reality,even ifthatof the vanquished remains operational
in theinterstices ofsociety")(Bayart, 1996,183-184).In itsforaying
intocivilsociety, postmodern/postcolonial scholarship,withitsin-
tellectualleaning towards the
unmasking partly opaque relationship
ofpoweritcalls"difference," hasstrayed awayfromthe"now"when
occurrences ofhegemony are so presentin theglobalaid regime.
The construction of designs,of replicablemodels,is
of affinities,
rarelymentioned, except in works ofa morepolemicalnature.
the
Among many works of scholarship devotedto countries in
theSoutha prevalent tendency todayistoacknowledge theexistence
ofcivilsocieties innon-western countries borneeitheras an outcome
ofcolonialism or as predating colonialism - civilsocietyunderan-
othername.The caseismadequiteforcefully thattheEuropeanlan-
guageofcivilsociety traveledtotheSouthwiththeonsetofmodernity
andthatthisled tothefounding inthecolonialstateofa civilsphere.
Whileobviously notnamedas such,ittooktheformofspaceswhich
thecolonialstatedidnottamper with, orthatwereareasofresistance
tothecolonialpower.Thisforeign languageofcivilsocietyresonated
withinthelocal contextand wasrefashioned as a result.Thus,the
languageofcivilsocietyis understoodas havingbeen bothplural-
izedandglobalized.The imposition ofthestate- withthearrival of
-
Europeancolonialism as an unavoidable partofsociallivingwould

have,inKhilnani's view,led totheemergence ofa conceptthatgives

a collectivedefinition tothespheresthatareoroughttobe outofits
control(Kavirajand Khilnani,2001,4-5). It is also arguedthatin
mostpostcolonial states,traditional socialnormscoexistwithliberal
democratic institutions in an uncertain, ambiguousand oftenpara-
doxicalrelationship. Out ofthishas emergeda specifickindofmo-
dernity thatis stillin themaking, whichsomesocialscientists - who
remaincaptiveto theidea of a singularmodernity havecalled -
alternative modernities (Gaonkar,2001). Morerecentoccurrences
of theglobalization of the languageand idea of civilsocietyhave
however eludedevenKhilnani'ssensitive rendering oftheissue.
Thefollowing questions can be raised: Ifsomething in theSouth
thatcan be likenedto one particular western conceptionofcivilso-
cietyexistsor ifthereis evidence that a small groupofnativeshas
been touchedbymodernideasto createa sphereoutsidethecon-
trolofthestate,howdoes one conceptualize therestofthepopula-
tionthatliesoutsidethedomainofmodern/bourgeois civilsociety?
Is civilsociety in itssecondcoming"especially good think,to sig-
to
nify with,to actupon" (Comaroff & Comaroff, 2001,40)?
ParthaChatterjee answers thisquerywitha certainflamboyance
anddisregard forthemultiple strands thatexistwithin Europeanphi-
losophy, whenhe urgesus "tosendbacktheconceptofcivilsociety to
where... itproperly belongs - the of
provincialismEuropean social
philosophy" (Chatterjee, 1990,120).In thecaseofIndiahe pointsout
that"civil-social" institutions areinshortsupply, beingmostly confined
amongthewell-to-do and thatthelackofmoderncivilassociations in
a society dominated by caste and religious tiesis a key indicator ofthe
post-colonial condition (Chatterjee, 2001,165-178).He proposesthat
theterm"civilsociety" shouldbe retained only"forthosecharacteris-
ticinstitutions ofmodernassociational lifeoriginating inWestern so-
cietiesthatarebasedon equality, autonomy, freedom of entryand exit,
contract, deliberative procedures ofdecision-making, recognized rights
anddutiesofmembers and othersuchprinciples." Socialinstitutions
basedon otherprinciples arebestdescribed bytheconceptofa "po-
liticalsociety" wheredemandscanbe expressed bythe"subjects" and
notjust"citizens" the
using language rights, of even ifrights applyto
collectivitiesratherthanindividuals (Chatterjee, 1998,57-69).
In theAfricancontexttoo it has been pointedout thatmuch
thatis transformative occursoutsideor at theperiphery offormal

464 SCIENCE 6s SOCIETY
organizational life,articulatedbyethnicand kinship groupsthatare

oftendismissedas non-civic activities by recent advocates of "civil
society." in
As Appiah's Asante society, all over Africain the colonial
period new social organizations developed,drawing sometimes on
importedEuropean models, sometimes building on traditionalse-
cretsocieties, and
guilds cults, sometimes creatinghometown societ-
ies and mostoftenorganizations centeredaroundchurchesand
mosques(Appiah,1992,169). Thishas promptedsomescholarsto
see ethnicity as theproperstarting pointforthestudyofAfrican so-
cialmovements andofcivilsociety, rather thanas therupturing force
ofAfrican politics,andtomoveawayfroma preoccupation withrights
and advocacyas keyfeatures ofcivicaction(Maina,1998,137-138).
Another argument propounded bypostcolonial scholarsisthatcivil
societyisused to sustaincoercive methods of rule.Mahmood Mamdani
arguesforinstancethatcivilsociety(citizenship, rights contrac-
and
tualrelations) wasreserved forwhites onlyduringthecolonialperiod.
the
AmongAfricans, Europeans discovered customary, triballawsthat
werethencodifiedand rigidified; unlikecivillaw,customary lawsap-
plied to communities, notindividuals, and werelargely based on
force.In thepostcolonialperiod,thestatewasderacializedbutnot
detribalized as thedifferentiation between"citizens" amongthenew
nationalelitesin thetowns and"subjects" intheruralareasremained.
As Mamdanieloquently asserts,"thetriballogicoverwhelmed the
democratic logicofcivilsociety. . . . Thisis whycivilsocietypolitics
wheretheruralis governed through customary lawis necessarilypat-
rimonial; urban harness
politicians rural-urban constituencies through
patron-client relations"2 (Mamdani,1996,8, 289).
Chatterjee and Mamdani holdon to thesenseof"civilsociety"
used in Hegel and Marxas bourgeoissociety.Froma similarper-
spectivethatsees civilsocietyas a "liberalphenomenon"and con-
sidersthatcivilsocietybothas a historical phenomenonas wellas a
theoretical concept was tied to the riseof liberalism,thequestion
ofthepossibility ofa non-liberal or evennon-pluralist civilsociety
is posed (Gellner,1994;Hall, 1995;Chambers& Kymlicka, 2002,
5). The "defect"of theclassicalconceptis in a senserectified by
revising the definition of civilsociety in order to include within it
and shifts
Cooper'scritiqueofMamdani'sfailureto addressthestruggles
2 See Frederick
thatoccurredbetweenthe1920-30sand thepostcolonial period(Cooper,2002,64).

socialinstitutions basedon otherprinciples. Refuting theclaim-

putforward byGellnerand Hall - thatcivilsocietyis a uniquely
Western achievement, somescholarshavecountered withexamples
fromtheMiddleEastand Africaand lookedbackat formsofcivil-
ityand publicspacesthatexistedin precolonialsocieties.Keane,
forinstance, citesprecolonialinstitutions suchas theTswanakgolta
inAfrica.Similarly thepanchayat system in India,or thegamsabhava
system in ancient Sri Lanka could also be readas precolonialtraces
ofa "civilsociety." The Orientalist contention - thatthedeficien-
ciesofIslamicsociety, itspolitics,economicsand culture,are a re-
sultofabsenceofcivilsocietyalongwiththeweaknessofbourgeois
culture- has been challenged(Turner,1994). Is there,however,
anyrelationbetweentheseinstitutions andspacesand themodern/
dominantidea ofcivilsocietythatprevailstodayin mostcountries
in theSouth?
Academicwriting has resolvedtheissueofcivilsocietyin non-
westernsocieties,eitherbyrestricting the usage of the phraseto
institutionsborne of western modernity or byproposinga morein-
clusiveapproachthatembracesformsofassociation foundedon an
array ofdifferent principles. It is in other forms ofwriting that"civil
society"is most powerfully cast as an instrument of oppression rather
thanas an emancipatory space. The critique emanates from the so-
cialforms thathaveemergedtocontestthenewepochin thehistory
ofcapitalthatisconventionally called"globalization." Activistsmainly
basedin theSouthhavearticulated a critiqueofcivilsocietyas itis
definedandunderstood bydonorsand themainstream media:"civil
societyis activelybannered not necessarily as an antidote topoverty,
corruption or as a vehicle for democratization, but to steer grass-
rootsorganizations awayfromthe radicalinfluenceof political
organizations callingforradicalcomprehensive revolutionary re-
forms"(Choudhry, n.d.). The argumentexpressedin manypam-
phletsis thattheidea ofcivilsocietyas it has been importedfrom
theWestobscurestheprofound classdivision, classexploitation and
classstruggles thatexistintheSouth.Whilesocialscientists havetheo-
rizeda globalization from"below"thatencompasses progressive intel-
lectuals, NGOs and grassroots organizations, activistsand radical
thinkers see a clear-cutdivideand polarizationbetweenpeasant
leaders,urbanactivists and tradeunionists, on theone hand,and
NGO representatives, academicsand reformist politicalleaders,on

466 SCIENCEäfSOCIETY
the other.3At the Social Forum held in PortoAlegre forinstance,

radicalsstressedthat"manyoftheEuropean and U. S. NGOs present
are paper organizationsand the majorityof third-world NGOers are
membersof small groupsof professionalswithfewifanyorganized
supportersand possess littlepowerof convocation"(Petras,2002).
Criticsargue thatthereis indeed some ground to be suspiciousof
whatis perceivedas "civilsociety"^strongelectiveaffinity withthe
West and its potentialrole as an agent of Westernpowers.This is
especiallyso whenone witnessesthewayin whichcivilsocietyhas been
embracedbytheforcesofcapital.WorldBankdocuments,forinstance,
welcome the opportunityto workwithcivilsociety,while the Asian
DevelopmentBankspeaksoftheneed to"strengthen cooperation"with
civilsociety.Even theWorldTrade Organizationhas declareditssup
portfortheworld'scivilsocietyinstitutions (Keane, 2003, 2). Petras'
argumenthas oftenbeen dismissedas partoftheradicalfringe.It has,
however,themeritofshowingthedifficulties entailedin conceptssuch
frombelow"owingto thecontested
as "civilsociety"and "globalization
natureofthesetermsand thelackofhomogeneity in thesocialforma-
tionsthattheyencompass.He articulateswhatpostcolonialscholars
are reluctantto admit:thatEuropean talkof civilsocietyoriginally
presupposed,and required,the disempowerment or outrightcrush-
in
ing of populationselsewhere the world.Today is the somewhat
it
unproblematic wayinwhichthemodernusage ofcivilsocietyhas been
absorbedbythe intellectualclassesin the South thatneeds to be un-
masked.Thiswouldalso includetheinstrumentalizing ofthe termby
neoliberaltransnational and theadaptationbylocal actors
institutions
in the South to the changingcomplexion of the internationalaid
agenda withoutdevelopingtheirown accountability to a social base
thatcallsforreaction.Unlikepoliticalpartyor tradeunion leadersor
parliamentarians, thesenewactorsdo notserveorrepresent. Sincetheir
legitimacycomes fromglobal acceptance,theydo not need a social
base to function;theystriveto enact an essentiallypedagogical role
upon powerlessrecipients.
Amongthe scholarswho have touchedupon theseissuesa num-
ber of Africanists mustbe singledout.4Chabal, forinstance,refer-
3 See, forexample,ArjunAppadurai'srecentcommentson globalizationfrombelow

(Appadurai,2001).
4 Otherstudieshaveexposedtheemptiness to respecting
ofaid agencies'commitment
indigenousAfricanpoliticaltraditions; andYoung,1994.
see, e.g.,Williams

ringto sub-Saharan Africa, has written aboutthe"illusion"ofcivil

He the
society. critiques supposedcounter-hegemonic roleofcivil
society,oftenseen as a repository ofpoliticalresistance to thecen-
tralizingand totalitarian tendencies of the African state.Chabal casts
doubton thehegemonicnatureofthepostcolonial statein Africa.
Thestate,he argues,didnothavean efficient coerciveapparatus; nor
wasitable to controla sophisticated network ofcommunication in
sub-Saharan Africa. He pointsoutthatthedichotomy betweenstate
andcivilsociety, whichis substantially takenforgrantedin mostcur-
rentinterpretations ofAfrican politics, doesnotreflect reality on the
continent, wherethereis a constant"straddling ofcivilsocietyand
state."Civilsociety, inAfrica, isan ideologythatstemsfromtheinvo-
cationbywestern donorcountries - following theleadoftheWorld
-
Bankand theIMF fora diminished roleofthestate,in thecon-
textofStructural Adjustment Programs. Therehasbeen,as a conse-
quence, a "new emphasis on the putative significance ofcivilsociety"
anda shift ofresources towards localNGOsconceivedbytheWestas
theso-called"representative bodies"ofthatcivilsociety. The impor-
tantfacthighlighted by Chabal is that the proliferationNGOsis a
of
reflection of"a successful adaptation to the conditions laiddownby
foreign donors on the part of local political actorswho seekin this
waytogainaccesstonewresources." Thustheexplosionin thenum-
berofNGOsis nota reflection oftheflowering ofcivilsociety in the
sensein whichthisis usuallyunderstood in theWest.Chabalwarns
against thedangerofhijacking ofgenuinely neededdevelopment aid,
bythesameold andwell-established politicalelites.He readsNGOs
as oftennothing morethannewstructures bywhichAfricans canseek
to establish an instrumentally profitable position within the existing
system ofneo-patrimonialism (Chabaland Daloz, 1999,17-31).
The first sectionofthispaperhas suggestedthatalthoughthe
idea ofcivilsociety is laudedand endorsedbyscholarsin thedevel-
oped and developing world,as wellas bydonorsand NGOs,it has
also spawnedcounter-discourses thatare virulently opposed to a
particular "ritualized, ubiquitous usage" of the term and ofthosewho
use it.In fact,thereis a mounting rageagainst thisterm andwhatit
represents among social groups that feel threatened it.
by Scholars,
whoseconcernhas been thevirtueof "difference" haveremained
blindto thedepthand seriousness ofthisphenomenon, exceptby
payinglip serviceto "grassroots globalization." The factis thatnot

468 SCIENCE àf SOCIETY
everyone whooccupiesa spacebetweenthefamily and thestaterec-

ognizeshim/herself in theidea of society. manywhosevoices
civil For
are muted,civilsociety as an idea and a projectmustbe rejected, as
it constitutesan integralpartoftheneoliberalprogramofrestruc-
turing the statesoftheSouth.The powerless mayoccasionally pro-
test,but attention is paid bythelocal and international mediato
knowledge producers(intellectuals) in countriesin theSouthwho
suggest alternative understandings ofthetermandwhoinfusea new
and complexlifeintothecategory. Thereis,however, a chasm,not
only between elite and vernacular universesofdiscourse butalsobe-
tweenpolitical scientistssteepedintheory scientists'
andsocial critiques
of"development." Invariably,differentconceptualmaps emerge. Each
critique has evolved in a fashion,
parallel rarely or
meeting infusing
each other.
The nextsectionof thispaperwilldocumenthow- through
whathistorical process- theidea ofcivilsocietyas theepitomeof
thereasonofEuropeanbourgeoiscultureshas been madeto look
obvious,farfromitsoriginalstarting point.Itsgenealogyis much
morerecentthanmanypoliticalscientists wouldwishto accept.
and Transplant
2. Genealogy
Although therearemanydifferences in theway"civilsociety" in

theSouthhasbeenconceivedbydifferent transnational actorsaswell
as bystateand non-stateinstitutions and knowledge producers, the
of
genealogy the mostinfluentialunderstanding of the termcan be
-
tracedto whathas been described ratherunfairly becausethere
existsin theUSA a radicalperspective on civilsocietyin thetradi-
tionsofliberalegalitarianismor criticaltheory - as the"American-
ization"of the conceptin the lasttwo decades (Howelland Pearce,
2001).
The secondsectionof thispaperwillprobethegenealogyof
thisparticularidea of "civilsociety."Tocqueville'sbeliefthatthe
strength ofliberaldemocracy
andstability dependson a vibrant and
healthysphereof associationalparticipation is at theheartof the
neo-Tocquevillian led
revival by Robert Putnam andothers, forwhom
"civilsociety"hasacquireda newmeaningandimportance. One cru-
is a
cialelementis theidea thatdemocracy precondition ratherthan
an outcomeofdevelopment. WhileTocquevillemadethisargument

withregardtoearlyAmerica, manyhavetakenitup as a perspective

through which to the
analyze strength ofliberaldemocracy in the
West,as wellas theprocessesofdemocratization aroundtheworld,
fromthefallofcommunism in theEastand CentralEuropeto the
riseofdemocratic regimes in SouthAmerica, tothechallenges in es-
tablishingliberal democracies in Africa.
Individualthinkers haveimpartedsubtleand distinctive inflex-
ionsto thetheoretical use oftheconcept(Keane,1998;Cohenand
Arato,1992;Kumar,1993;Chandhoke,1995;Hall, 1995).I willnot
attempt tosummarize thehistory oftheconceptthatothershavedealt
withat length.
Whatis important formypurposeis thattheconceptof civil
societywas in fact rediscovered fromthearchives ofpoliticaltheory
as thefoundation for a democratic society in the 1970sand 1980s.
Partlya responseto theroleofcollective agencyin topplingdictato-
rialregimes,thesloganaroseinEasternEuropeas a "cudgeltobatter
thetotalitarianstate"(Seligman, 2002,13). This,itcan be argued,is
partlya reflectionof the retreatfrom thelanguageofclassorrevolu-
tionamongtheleft.Thuswe havea portmanteau conceptof civil
societywhich has been invoked in a wide range ofcontexts.Howell
has identifiedfourmajorinfluences in thedebateon civilsociety,
democracy anddevelopment. Thefirst isthebodyofideasestablished
byAlexisde Tocquevilleinhistwo-volume study Democracy inAmerica,
basedon hisobservations ofdemocracy inNewEngland.Tocqueville
arguedthatfreedom ofassociation couldprevent rather thanencour-
age revolutionary action.He also emphasizedhowa participatory
citizenryactivein a multiplicity ofassociations couldensuredefense
ofthecitizenagainstdespoticgovernment butalso fosteractiveen-
gagement ratherthandisengagement withpolitics.
Thesecondinfluence, according toHowell,emergedinthe1950s
and 1960sinstudiesfocusing on theroleofinterest groupsinAmeri-
cansociety thatdrewselectively fromTocqueville.Itfocusedon how
toavoidthedangersofmobilization and masspoliticalparticipation
as "traditional
societies" becamemodernized. RobertPutnam's1993
bookMaking Democracy Work isseen as the thirdkeyinfluence. Putnam
drawsfromtheliterature on civicculturebutarguesthat,ratherthan
beingan outcomeofdevelopment, civicculture fostersdevelopment.
This perspective is ultimately concernedwith"theconditionsfor
creatingstrong, representative, effective institutions."He exploresthe

informal institutionsand unwritten codesofbehavioras wellas pat-

ternsof trustin whichformalgroupsare embedded.It is in these
informal institutionsofeveryday associational lifethatsocialcapital
is generated, a factthatultimately explainstherelative performance
ofdemocratic politicalsystems. Finally, the fourth influence on the
civilsocietydebateisthegrowing body ofwork the
by JohnsHopkins
CenterforCivilSocietyStudiesand thiscenter'sefforts to putthe
"third sector"on themapas a majorpolitical aswellas economicforce
in theworldtoday.In policytermstheworkoftheJohnsHopkins
Centercontributes totheempirical evidencefortheroleandgrowth
ofthethirdsectorin bothadvancedand lessdevelopedeconomies
and polities.Civilsociety, itisclaimed,viathesocialcapitalornorms
oftrust and reciprocity generated bythesocialnetworks andassocia-
tionsthatcomposeit,has an impacton thepoliticalas wellas eco-
nomicperformance oftheSouth.
The Americanization ofthedebate- whichrelatesto theway
ideasfromthefourdifferent streams mentioned abovecoalesceinto
a regulative discourseand institutional system - has had botha
normative and conservative impacton theunderstanding of civil
society. The anti-statebiasoftheneoliberalagendais strengthened
in thisapproach,as is clearfromtheverydefinition ofcivilsociety as
constitutive of thebroadrangeofinstitutions thatoperateoutside
theconfines ofthemarket and thestate.It equatescivilsociety with
"the
"non-profit," voluntary," the"third" or the "independent" sec-
tor, and includes an array of entitiesthat civil
represent society, such
as hospitals,universities,socialclubs,professional organizations, day
care centers,environmental groups,familycounselingagencies,
sportsclubs,job training centers,humanrightsorganizations, and
many more and
(Howell Pearce, ) 2001 . These variousentitiesare, how-
ever,shownto havecertainfeatures in common.Theyareall organi-
zations:theyhavean institutional presenceand structure. Theyare
not
private, profit and
distributing, self-governing. Finally,theyarevol-
their
untary: membership legally is not and
required they attract some
levelofvoluntary contribution oftimeandmoney(Salamon, etai, 1999,
1-2). Theycanalsobe countedandtheirgrowth monitored; therehas
been a numberofempirical studiesofcivilsociety thatindicatethat
duringthe20thcentury theworldwitnessed something likea 200-fold
increase inthenumber andvariety ofcivilsocietyorganizations (Keane,
2003,4-5).

Thesefourinfluences - de Tocqueville, pluralism-elitism, Put-

nam'sworkand theJohnsHopkinsCenter- deriveessentially from
Americanexperiences,studiesand reflections; yettheyhave still
managedtoshapemuchofthedebateand assumptions aroundcivil
and
society democracy, even in the global South. In this vision,civil
is
society thought of not as identifying a set of human moraland
politicalcapacities,butas a substantive category, embodying a setof
determinate institutions thatexistdistinct from, or in oppositionto,
thestate.
Thereis,however a criticaltheory ofcivilsociety thatchallenges
theneo-Tocquevillian approach,and hassomeinfluence on donors.
Herethenormative is
goal presented as an and
egalitarian democra-
tizedcivilsociety thatcan serveas a siteofprogressive politics.Some
theorists ranging from feminist scholars to scholars in thewakeof
Foucaulthavein factradicalizedtheidea ofdemocracy byre-invok-
ing notions of civilsociety. The radical continental Europeandiscus-
sion of civilsocietychallengestheassumptionthata vibrantcivil
a strong
society, democracy andeconomicprogress anddevelopment
areconceptually or empirically connectedin an unproblematic way.
According to Howell and Pierce, there are three themes that distin-
guishthistrendfromtheAmericanized discussion:an interestin
in
seekinga "commongood," achieving human emancipation, and
in identifying conditions foran inclusive rational-critical publicde-
bate (Howelland Pierce,2001). Thisvisiondrawsfroman arrayof
thinkers fromRousseautoMarx.Gramsci's re-reading ofMarxiden-
tifiedcivilsocietyas an arena where associations of different kinds
couldbothdisseminate theideasthatreinforce capitalism as wellas
dispute them. Many of the social movements and grassroots organi-
zationsthatmushroomed throughout theworldin thelate20thand
early21stcenturies yearned forsomething akintothehumaneeman-
cipationthatMarxproposed,in thattheyaspiredtoactivate people,
nottolimittheirpoliticalengagement totheinstitutionalized spaces
offormaldemocracy.
Another important positionthatdepartsfromtheTocquevillian
understanding ofcivilsociety istheHabermasian ideaofa publicsphere
inwhichcitizens can enterand influence theaffairs ofboththestate
as wellas society as a whole.Habermasrefers to thecolonization of
-
the"lifeworld" theworldofpersonalrelationships and communi-
cativeaction- bythemoneyand thepowerthataccompaniedthe

riseoforganizedcapitalism. Civilsocietyis thelifeworld as itis ex-

pressed in institutions. There is in this approach a belief in the
emancipatory potentialof civilsociety which is lacking in the lib-
eralunderstanding. The idea thatdemocratic deliberation isa non-
coercivemeansofcreating thesocialsolidarity necessary to overcome
a cultureofinequality isperhapsmoresuitabletotheSouththanare
neo-Tocquevillian ideas. However,wouldthistransplant be more
legitimate thantheneo-Tocquevillian graft?
The mostpowerful discourseon civilsocietytoday,sometimes
dubbedtheAmerican discourse, is,as seenabove,nota neutral, value-
freeapproach.It ultimately viewsthetaskof civil as
society system
maintenance- in otherwords,creationor strengthening of the
democratic institutions thatprotect theruleoflaw,legitimate peaceful
oppositionand theexpression ofdissentin acceptableways.In this
vision,politicalstability is as important as politicalfreedom. Protec-
tionfromthestateis moreimportant thanpositiveconceptualiza-
tions,debate, and action around how best to developthecommon
interests ofa society.In theothercontinental tradition, ofradical
reflection, theorists struggle withthewaysocialand economicin-
equalitiesimpingeon theexerciseofmeaningful citizenship.Civil
society is seen as the social basis of a democratic publicsphere
throughwhicha cultureof inequalitycan be dismantled(Cham-
bersandKymlicka, 2002). Liberalegalitarians suchas MichaelWalzer
includecivilsociety groupsbasedon race,religionand gender.The
question, then, is:How do thosewhoaremarginalized, excludedand
exploited in the of
process development themselves participate in
thosespaces?and:Whatwouldhappenifand whentheydo?
Thusthereis no singleor simpleWestern conceptto studyand
emulateforpeople in theSouth.One tendsalso to disagreewith
Khilnaniwhenhe writes that"theidea ofcivilsociety passedintothe
politicalliterature ofEuropeancoloniesin thenineteenth century"
and that"itiswrongtothinkofthisconcernas beingexpressed only
inrelatively recenttimes"(KavirajandKhilnani, 2001,4). In fact,the
conceptofcivilsociety intheSouthwasnon-existent bothintheworks
ofintellectuals andinthelanguageandvocabulary ofnon-state actors.
It wassimilarly moribundin theWestuntilthemodelsofstate-led
modernization thatdominated bothliberaland Marxist conceptions
ofdevelopment collapsed,exceptperhapsin Chinaand EastAsia.

The thirdsectionofthispaperwilladdresstheflowthatlinksaca-
demictheories and knowledge totheworldofagencies,policiesand
practicalpolitics.It is indeednota pureacademicconceitthatkey
ideasaredevelopedandtestedbytheorists inacademiabeforegradu-
allydiffusingoutward intovarious
realworld Thereis
applications.
muchevidencethatacademictheoryis notirrelevant outsidethe
classroom(Ferguson,1997,150).
in theSouth
CivilSocieties
3. Designing
oftheglobalSouth,theideaofcivilsociety
In countries a
inhabits
sharedwithothernormative
socialsetting such
concepts, as governance
and partnership,forming a sortofmatrixmadeofinstitutions and
individual advocates
and collective within
a material infrastructure.
GoodGovernance, The focuson civilso-
Partnership.
Participation,
cietybydevelopment thinkersand practitioners ofthelast15 years
is bestunderstood in thecontextoftheshift fromwhatis knownas
theWashington Consensus.Thisconsensusemergedrapidlyin the
early1980sinstarkcontrast totheprevious approachtodevelopment
during what is known as theMcNamara era,and eventually gaveway
toa post-Washington Consensus - a moveawayfromneoliberalism
towardmorestate-friendly and interventionist policies.In simple
terms,thepost-Washington Consensuscan be read as a reaction
toWashington's lax stances,due to theapparentfailure(and cata-
strophic socialoutcomes)ofStructural Adjustment Policiesrecom-
mendedbytheWorldBankand the IMF to thepoorercountries in
theSouth.The current fashionforcivilsocietyamongU. S. politi-
cians,donorsand scholarshas to be linkedto theemergenceover
thepastdecadesofa "new"Keynesian economics(Fine,1999,1-19).
The paradigmatic placeoftheidea ofcivilsociety wasprepared
bytheentry -
oftheidea ofgovernance oftenmarriedtotheadjec-
tivegoodin a mannerreminiscent of"goodsociety" - bothin pub-
lic and academicdiscourse.The term"governance" etymologically
derivesfromtheGreekverbkybernan andnounkybernetas, whichmean
Unlike"democracy,"
tosteerand pilot,respectively. whichconnotes
popularparticipation, governance hasan apoliticaltechnicalconso-
nancethatcomesfromitsmodeofentry intosocialsciencejargon.
The firstcontemporary publicappearanceof thenotionof "good

governance" emergedin a WorldBankreporton Sub-Saharan Af-

rica,whicharguedthat"underlying thelitanyofAfrica's development
problemis a crisisofgovernance" (Leftwich, 1993,610-611).
In 1992,theseviews werefurther elaborated ina report dedicated
togovernance, wheretheproblemofgovernance wassaidtoinvolve
fourdistinct issues:poorpublicservice management, lackofaccount-
absenceofa legalframework
ability, fordevelopment, andproblems
arisingfromlackofinformation and transparency. The underlying
assumption of the World Bank's view of governance wasthatitwas
possible to have a technical solution to of
problems governance in-
dependentof theformof politicalrepresentation. Although civil
society was not mentioned, governance implied more and morea
certain depoliticization that was in consonance withthe later emphasis
on a redesigned civilsociety and themarket as mainactorsin imple-
mentinggood governance.
Withthereturnofthestateas an actorin development, devel-
opmentalists advocated that governance would be best implemented
through a "partnership" betweenthestate,theprivate sectorandcivil
society enmeshedin a webofrelations. In manywayspartnership as
a discoursestemsfromtheidea ofparticipation and participatory
development, the buzz-words of development theoryin the 1990s.
Indigenousknowledge, bottom-up planning,culturaldiversity of
societies,and thepernicious effectsofmodernization wereacknowl-
in
edged participatory development. One ofthe most important fea-
turesofparticipation as an ideology, unlikethatofpartnership, was
itsdistrust ofthestate.Non-governmental or
organizations private
voluntary organizations wereconsideredmoreefficient thanstate
bodiesand alreadyembodying virtuesofparticipation 1994,
(Stirrat,
67-92). One of the of
genealogies participation can be tracedto the
18thcentury, whenparticipation wasclaimedas a universal principle
and civilright. Another is theProtestant Church'srequirement fora
good Christian to inthe in
"participate" liturgy,governing the Church,
and in readingtheScriptures. Participatory approachesto develop-
mentweremeansthrough whichpeopleweretrainedand equipped
to becomepartof themodernworld.People wereencouragedto
participate in theirown"embroilment in thatworld"(Stirratand
Henkel,1996).
Partnership camewiththepost-Washington rehabilitation ofthe
state.The termbelongsto thelanguageofbusiness, sportsand lei-

sure,whereconflict is non-violent and is normally accommodated

through the existence of rules (or codes) and clearlydefinedbonds.
The conceptof"partnership in development" can be tracedbackto
theLoméConvention of 1975.Undera seriesofagreements known
collectivelyas the Lomé Convention, negotiated between 1975 and
all
1989,practically productsoriginating in 69 African, Caribbean,
and Pacific(ACP) countries receivedtariff-free accessto theEuro-
pean Unionmarket. The idea wasto fostera newcooperative rela-
tionship between the EU and the developing world. The Swedish
International Development Authority (SIDA),whichplansandimple-
mentstheSwedishdevelopment cooperationprograms, laysclaim
to beingthefirst to use theconceptofpartnership in theworldof
aid,referring toitspolicypaperentitled PartnershipAfrica.ForSIDA,
development is conceived as "a joint responsibility" (SIDA, 1996;
communication withTolvardAkkeson, Chargéd'Affaires, SIDA,Sri
Lanka) .
Thuspartnership wasinitially conceivedas a newformofcoop-
erationbetweendonorand receiver, foundedon mutualresponsi-
A fundamental
bility. slippageoccurred whendonorsbegantoadvise
on buildingpartnerships in society, ratherthansimply forging part-
nerships betweenthemselves and receiving communities. Fromthen
on,donorsacquireda deusexmachina pullingthestrings
quality, and
forging an ideal worldbased on theirownvalues.The conceptof
partnership acquireda moresubtlemeaningas itmovedfarbeyond
a concernforhumanizing development cooperation, andwasincreas-
inglyinvokedbymultilateral donoragenciesthat harbored holistic
visionsofsociety whichthereceivers ofaidwereencouragedtoemu-
late.In thisidealvisionharmonious relations existbetweenthestate,
theprivate sectorand civilsociety, all engagedin "developing" their
societyintoa liberaldemocratic one under the watchful eye the
of
donor.
In manywaysdonoragenciescreatedcivilsocietiesin theSouth
as reflections of themselves. Threefeaturesare striking in thisre-
exportofthenotionofcivilsociety: depoliticization,sacralization and
bureaucratization (Jenkins, 2001, 268). Depoliticization is effected
through a processofdefining civilsocietythateitherincludesonly
NGOs,or thatflattens differences betweenassociations bydealing
withan imaginedunidimensional civilsociety. The criticaledge of
civilsocietyis therefore clearlyblunted.Sacralization is effected by

476 SCIENCE& SOCIETY
elevatingcivilsocietyto thehighestmoralgroundabove thestateand

above the marketas the privilegedpartneron the road to creatinga
"good society"based on democraticvalues. Bureaucratizationis ef-
fectedthroughthecreationofinstitutions/ associationswherebya civil
societyin consonance withthe globaldesignsofdonorsdoes notexist.
NGOs are generallyviewedas a key,and indeed natural,component
of any civilsociety,so much so thatwhere theyare absent theyare
purelyand simplycreated.
The processofredesigningcivilsocietystartedwiththeredesign-
ing the institutions
of thatweremeantto implementand spreadthis
new idea. In mostdevelopmentinstitutions, donorsbegan to set up
specializeddepartmentsand units,changed the names of outdated
sections,appointed people withapparentexpertisein the fieldand
devisedstrategiesand programsforcreating,supportingand strength-
ening civilsociety.All these attemptsreflectthe underlyinginstru-
mentalizationof civilsociety,whichbecomes a means to an end -
democratization,economic growthor sustainabledevelopment-
ratherthan an end in itself.The purpose is not to empowercivil
societybut to use civilsocietyas a means.
TherearemanyCivilSocietyUnitsalongwithGovernanceand Civil
SocietyDepartmentsthatseekto promoteworkingwithcivilsocietyin
variouspartsof donor organizations(Howell and Pearce, 2001, 91).
The examplesof USAID and theWorldBank are particularly telling.
In 1994,USAID setup a newCenterforDemocracyand Governance,
whichincludedthedevelopmentofa "politically activecivilsociety"as
one of itsfourstrategicobjectives.USAID assignedresponsibility for
the developmentof civilsocietyto a specializedofficer in each of its
largeoverseasresidentmissions.The end oftheCold Warand cutsin
aid budgetsled to a rethinking ofobjectives.NGOs and privatesector
organizations were used as to implementaid policies.In
alternatives
1995,USAID establisheda NewPartnership aimedat empow-
Initiative
ering NGOs, creating small business and
partnerships fostering demo-
craticlocalgovernance(Howelland Pearce,2001,96) . The WorldBank
establishedan NGO unitas earlyas 1989,ostensibly withthe goal of
providingsupportto NGOs but also as a public relationsexerciseto
dampen criticism in lightof the disastrous
of itspolicies,particularly
StructuralAdjustmentPrograms.By the mid-1990sthe discourse
began to shiftfromNGOs to civilsocietyand was reflectedin the re-
namingof NGO Liaison Officersas CivilSocietySpecialistsin 1995.

The UnitedNationsalso definescivilsociety as "NGOs,thebusiness

community and others" and stresses the importance ofworking in
partnership withthesesectorson issuesofglobalconcern(http://
www.un.org/partners/civiLsociety/home.htm).
By1998almosthalfofall projectsapprovedbytheBoardofDi-
rectorsoftheWorldBankinvolvedNGOs,and ofthesemostwere
localNGOs (Howelland Pearce,2001,96). In hissurvey oftheatti-
tudesof523WorldBankprofessionals toward civilsociety,SaidEddin
Ibrahimfoundthatwhilethecommitment to civilsocietywasstrong
at thetop of the itwas
hierarchy, "disjointed, lukewarm and fickleat
middleand lowerlevels"(Eddin,1998).
In universities and researchcentersfromtheLondonSchoolof
EconomicstoJohnsHopkins,newcoursesweredesigned,tackling
suchideasas civilsocietyand globalcivilsocietyand thenincorpo-
ratingthemintothecurriculum, usuallyin prideof place.As the
of
production knowledge began to increase,publishers soughtworks
explaining these old the
new/ concepts; proliferation ofworks on civil
and globalcivilsociety, whichoftensimplymimickedeach other,
bearstestimony tothespreadandfashionoftheconceptin (butnot
exclusiveto) intellectual spheres(Kaldor,2003;Keane,2003,Hal-
perin and Laxer,2003) .
The supportto civilsociety is notonlyrhetoric. It translatesinto
transfersofconsiderable amounts ofmoney, through fundsandgrants
thatarehowever difficult toestimate. One problemis thatprograms
aimedexplicitly at strengthening civilsocietyemergedonlyin the
1990s.Anotheris thatcivilsocietyis notoftenusedas a category in
thestatisticsofaid agencies.Mostimportant, supportforcivilsociety
organizations provided only specificcivilsociety-strength-
is not in
eningprojectsthatformpartoflargerdemocracy and governance
projects,butalsoinothersectors suchas health,environment, water,
gender and education.
Officially,aid donationspecifically tocivilsocietyremainssmall.
The Development Assistance Committee datafor1995,forexample,
revealsthatsupportto civilsociety projectsamountedto U. S. $391
million, whichaccountedforonly0.84% ofaid and only9% ofex-
penditureon governance(Van Rooyand Robinson,1998,58-59).
In generalbudgetary terms, thefigures remainsmall,partly because
unlikelarge-scale engineering works,civilsocietyprojectsdo not
of
requirehugeinputs capital.

478 SCIENCEäfSOCIETY
Byfarthelargestproviderofcivilsocietyassistanceis the United

States,whichin 1995 accountedfor85% ofall civilsocietyassistance,
sponsoring335 out of440 civilsocietyprojects(Van Rooyand Robin-
son, 1998,60). This assistanceis channeled througha rangeof U. S.
governmentalorganizations,such as USAID, the U. S. Information
Agency,the quasi-governmental National EndowmentforDemoc-
racy,and non-profit organizationssuch as the InternationalRepub-
lican Instituteand the CarterCenter,along withfoundationssuch as
the Asia Foundation. Support is directedmainlytowardsadvocacy
groups in the fieldsof human rights,women's rights,the environ-
ment,and electoralreformor development.However,civilsociety
supportis not confinedto theUnitedStatesalone. Multilateralagen-
cies such as the UnitedNationsDevelopmentProgram(UNDP) and
the European Union, bilateraldonors such as the governmentsof
the UK, Nordic countriesand the Netherlands,internationalfinan-
cial institutionssuch as the WorldBank as well as GermanFounda-
tionssuch as the Friedrich-Ebert Stiftung,have all takenon board
the language of civilsociety(Howell and Pearce, 2001, 92).
DesignThrough A seriesof policiesand choicesaimed at
Practices.
supporting particulartypesofresearchand developmental workunder-
takenby organizationshave led to the emergenceof a new sphere
called "civilsociety"in countriesin the South.The last20 yearshave
seen a rapid growthof indigenousNGOs and an explosionof inter-
eston the partof donorsin thissector.At a timewhenthe orthodox
models lie in tatters,NGOs are seen as dynamic,privatizedalterna-
tivesto bloated statebureaucraciesand envisionedas starvehiclesof
development,democracyand empowerment. In SriLanka,as in many
otherSoutherncountries,not onlybilateraland multilateral donors
but also northernNGOs have found these southernNGOs increas-
inglyattractive. Thus internationaldevelopmentNGOs thatoperate
in the country,as well as NGOs thatdo not,supportthe activitiesof
thelocal NGOs. Whilein theWorldBankdevelopmentprojectsthere
is an implicitequation betweencivilsocietyand NGOs, otherdonors
adopt a morenuancedperspective: The DepartmentforInternational
Development(DFID), forexample,is morewillingto takeon board
the voices of traditionallyradicalorganizations,whileUNDP givesa
broad definitionofcivilsocietyto includeorganizationssuchas trade
unions,communitygroups or even academic institutions. All these
donoragencies,however,tendto definecivilsocietyin termsofa long

or shortlistof organizations. This has effectively technicizedand

"sanitized" thearenaofassociation.Furthermore, thedifferential
relationsofpoweramongcivilsocietyorganizations as wellas the
diversevoicesandinterests aredisguised the
by unifying termofcivil
society.
In a country suchas Guatemalathereweretworoutesthrough
whichtheglobalrevitalization ofinterest in civilsocietytookplace.
It was,on theone hand,theexpression ofthepopularand civilian
identityofactivist groupsseekingto open publicspacesforpolitical
discussion afterdecades ofconflict; on theotherhand,itrepresented
thedriveofinternational anddevelopment institutions,
through the
incorporation of "civilsocietystrengthening programs," to contrib-
utetoa sustainable peaceprocess.The conceptdidnotreachGuate-
malathrough anytheoretical literaturebutwasformulated bya variety
ofGuatemalan oppositiongroups. Some of these groups wereclose
to theguerrilla movements, whileothershad movedawayfromleft
leadership and stillothersshareda Mayanculturalidentity. Civilso-
cietyoffered a conceptualtoolforradicalvoicesthatweremoving
away from traditional parties.In 1994,a CivilSocietyAssembly was
setup,undertheauspicesoftheframework agreement for thepeace
talks,withthesupportofEuropeanAidAgencies.Thisassembly con-
stituted a frontfortheorganizedand radicalsectorsofGuatemala
butfailedto reallyshape theaccords.It remainsinteresting as an
example of an umbrella civilsocietyorganization created through
external intervention in theformofprivate aid (Howelland Pearce,
2001,147-176).
Unlikein Guatemala, wherepoliticalactivists gaveto civilsoci-
ety a radical meaning related to theirspecificconditions, in other
countries is
wheretheconcept totally new the spread of a new tech-
nicallanguagecontributes to creationofa "civilsociety sphere"that
conforms tothenormative idea ofcivilsociety promoted byinterna-
tionaldonors.WachiraMainamakesthecrucialpointthatAfrican
civilsocietyhas no languageofitsown.The languageof political
reform in Africais a languagegeneratedbydonors.Termssuchas
"empowerment aid re-engineering" are widespread, as theirusage
increasesamonggroupsand communities thatare targets ofaid in,
forexample,ruralKenya(Maina,1998).
The domainof"civilsociety" is oftencircumscribed through the
ofa
strengthening particular and chosen section of In
peoples. Kenya,

a study ofthreekeybilateral donors- USAID,DanishInternational

Aid (DANIDA) and SIDA - overa three-year periodshowedthat
whenfunding the
civilsociety largestrecipients are thosewhoadvo-
categenderequalityor issues."Capacity building" forcivilorganiza-
tionstakesup to 16.3%,whilelawand humanrightsactivism also
receivesimportant resources(Maina,1998,157).
In Kenya,it is clearthatdonorslimittheirsupportto English-
speaking, urban-based middle-class groups,thereby playing a partin
the
marginalizing popular sectors of civilsociety,especiallyrural
economicgroupsand community-based organizations. Homosapiens
are consideredmoreworthy thanhomo f aber.Donors tend to privi-
lege conservative, pro-status quo groupsand elitistNGOs thatare
moreeasilyseducedbythetrappings ofglobalconnections. In the
literatureand in practicecivilsociety is dichotomized as "good"civil
society, populatedbyprofessional groups,theChurchand human
rightslobbies,and "bad"civilsociety, madeup ofethnically inspired
andarticulate people. Much ofthe funding of the five largest democ-
racy and governance donors in Kenya, for instance (SIDA, USAID,
DANIDA,theFordFoundationand NORAD),goesto a feworgani-
zationssuchas theKenyaHumanRightsCommission (KHRC),the
CenterforGovernance andDevelopment (CGD),ResearchandCivic
Awareness Program(RECAP) and theInternational Federationof
WomenLawyers. Fundingforpro-democracy advocacygroupsis at
thecoreofdonors'interest in civilsociety.Andsometimes thereare
undesirable consequences. Take the of
example Major Pierre Buyoya,
whoreceived$145,000overthreeyearsfromUSAID's "democracy
and governance" budget,the fundsbeingchanneledto Buyoya' s
FoundationforUnity, Peace and Democracy. The moneywasalleg-
to
edlyspent organize seminars and consultations amongNGOs to
promotedemocracy and human rights.Buyoya ousted thecivilian
regimeinplaceandputinplacea military junta(Jenkins, 2€01,256).
-
Scholarsremaindividedon whatAfricaneeds liberalpoliticslo-
catedin civilsociety or politicsfoundedon Africa's age-oldcommu-
-
nities thuscreating a "theoretical impasse between modernists and
communitarians, Eurocentrists andAfricanists" (Mamdani,1996,3).
Thereareconsiderable differences between aid-dependent coun-
triessuchas Bangladesh orMozambique, anda country suchas China
wheremultilateral and bilateralagenciesand foreignNGOs playa
minimalrole.Mostdonorsmaintain thatChinadoesnothavea civil

society.Fromthe late 1980s,however,the Ford Foundation,the

Friedrich NaumannStiftung and theInternational RepublicanIn-
in
stitutehavebeen engaged promoting research and organizing
trainingprograms in areas such as legal reform governance and civil
societyin China. There is in an indirect way a focus on strengthen-
ingcivilsociety, through forinstancethesupportgivento thedevel-
opmentofnon-state women'sorganizations beforetheFourthWorld
Conference on Women.The largestsupporter of civilsocietypro-
grams, namely USAID, does not operate in China (Howell andPearce,
2001,144-145).
Creating institutions ofcivilsociety isa mechanism through which
a normative civilsocietyis beingmoldedin countries in theSouth.
USAID appearsforinstanceto havetriedto rationalize SriLanka's
diffuseassociational spherethrough creation of "representative" in-
thatcancollaborate
stitutions withlocalandcentralgovernment, and
selectionof"leadersofthecommunity." In theRekawaseasiderural
community in Hambantota, in theabsenceofa singleNGO repre-
sentingthecommunity, RekawaFishermen's
the Cooperative Soci-
etywasencouraged byUSAIDtobringthewiderangeofCommunity
BasedOrganizations (CBOs) together intoa singleregistered NGO.
ThustheRekawaDevelopment Foundation wascreated, tobe respon-
sibleforrepresenting thecommunity innatural resources management
andotherdecision-making processes. The sametookplaceinRitigala
in theNorth-Central Province, wheretheTanthirimala Gramodaya
Mandalaya was identified as the most capableindigenous institution
tofacilitatethe formation of a "representative" NGO to managethe
RitigalaCommunity BasedResources Management project. Thus,the
Base
RitigalaCommunity Development and Environment Founda-
tion(RITICOE) wasestablished in 1995and until1997headedby
twoyoungwomen,"leadersfromthecommunity" (USAID,1997,95-
99). Whatis significant in thesetwoprojectsis theinstitution-build-
ingprocess. Indeed, in both casesnewinstitutions emergedwiththe
help ofthe funding But
agency. creating NGOs from theoutsidedoes
notensurethatthesegroupswill have a democratic content, or that
theywillaspiretobeingvehiclesofsocialandpoliticalchangeoreven
gainlegitimacy in local contexts(Wickramasinghe, 2001,96).
Furthermore, NGOs that do not have networking abilitiesare
boundto disintegrate. In Guatemala, in thewakeofthereconstruc-
tionprocessinternational financialand development institutions

482 SCIENCE äf SOCIETY
beganin the1990sto incorporate "civilsocietystrengthening" into

theirportfolios ina systematicway. External civil
society buildingand
discourses fromaboveled to a marginalization ofaspirations from
below.MostNGOsinSriLankatooaresmallgrassroots organizations
involvedin poverty alleviation
schemes, ruraldevelopment andrural
credit.Manyoftheirprograms seemtobe operating inisolationfrom
therestoftheeconomy, fromotheragencies and programs the
in
samefield,fromgovernment policy,and fromestablished networks
ofproduction andspecialization andsometimes evenfromthesocio-
economicmilieuofthecommunity in whichtheyare located.
In thisvastnetwork oforganizations and consultants devotedto
thecauseofdevelopment, partnership isoftentradedforpatronage,
politicalmanipulation powergames.Ata locallevel,individuals
and
withpoliticalaspirations frequentlyestablishtheirownNGOsanduse
theresources theyhaveaccesstoandthecontacts theymakeas means
ofadvancing theirinterests.The paradoxis thatcivilsociety organi-
zationsthataresupposedto be markedbythefeatures of"indepen-
dence"end up sacrificing thisautonomy tovariousdegreesthrough
theirrelianceon donorfunding.
To conclude,itappearsthata newly designedsocialspacenamed
"civilsociety," one thathas littleto do withthecivilsocietyof the
Enlightenment thinkers, hasemergedinmanycountries oftheSouth
through a partnership ofglobaland localactors.A numberofcom-
monalities can be discernedin theseverydifferent countries:there
is an ongoingprocessofmarginalization or evendestruction ofcer-
tainsectors- tradeunions,farmers and fishermen's associations,
vernacular, ethnic,religious or casteassociations - thatdo notcon-
formto thedesign.Thereis a newnon-merit-based intellectualbu-
reaucracy -
emerging taking over therole of critic
playedbyorganic
intellectualsandadoptinga non-confrontational attitude the
vis-à-vis
globalforcesshapingsociety.Thereis a moveawayfromissuesof
socialinequity and a focuson issuesofrights and advocacythatpre-
cludesocialchangeofa significant naturetakingplace.Thereis in
somecountries a reactionagainstthemutingofcertainvoicesand
privilegesgivento others,thattakestheformofanti-foreigner, anti-
global (from UN to multilateraldonors),anti-conditionality, even
anti-Christian expressions, whichhavemanifested themselves in spo-
radicand oftenunconnected violentacts.

CIVIL SOCIETYIN THE SOUTH 483
Thesenewly designedcivilsocieties oftheSouthhavehadinsome

instances a positive the
impact: emergence ofa publicpoliticalspace
thatactsas a watchdogto thestate. Their politicalimagination is,
however, limitedto a particulartypeofactionand a particular type
ofcriticalintervention. Certainissuesare notchallengedbythere-
constituted publicsphere;theseincludestructural adjustment, dis-
mantling ofthewelfare state,and thebreakdown ofcritical thinking
in a Souththatis confined toa limitedrolein theglobalproduction
process.
Civilsociety- ifone agreestousethistermtodescribethesocial
and politicalspacesthatexpressthedesireforemancipationand
betterment ofcommunities - doesnotlenditself toexternal manu-
facturing. It cannot be created via blueprints from officesin Wash-
in
ingtonor London.It is theirattempt to wed and
theory practice
thatdonorshaveeffectively stripped thenotionofcivilsociety ofany
substantive The
meaning. question ishow tofulfill
the legitimateneed
fora spaceinwhichitisrecognized thatallindividuals, through their
diverseassociations and organizations, havetheright to contribute
todiscussions abouthowtoorganizetheirsociety, dealwithitsprob-
lemsand ultimately definewhatkindoffuturetheydesire.
DepartmentofHistory Relations
and International
ofColombo
University
ReidAvenue
Colombo3, SriLanka
nira@slt.lk
REFERENCES
Arjun,ed. 2001.Globalization.
Appadurai, Duke
Durham,NorthCarolina/London:
Press.
University
ofCul-
Appiah,KwameAnthony.1992. In MyFather'sHouse:Africain thePhilosophy
ture.NewYork:OxfordUniversity Press.
Bayart,
Jean-Francois. Pp. 109-125inPatrick
inAfrica."
1986."CivilSociety Chabal,
on theLimitsofPower.Cambridge,
ed., PoliticalDominationin Africa.Reflections
England:Cambridge UniversityPress.
1996.L'Illusion
Jean-Francois.
Bayart, Paris:Fayard.
Identitaire.
andJean-Pascal
Chabal,Patrick, Works.
Daloz. 1999.Africa Disorder In-
as Political
London:International
strument. African in association
Institute, withOxford:
J.Currey/Bloomington,Indiana:IndianaUniversity Press.

484 SCIENCEàf SOCIETY
eds. 2002.Alternative
Chambers,Simone,and WillKymlicka, ofCivil
Conceptions
Princeton,
Society. Princeton
NewJersey: Press.
University
Chandhoke,Neera. 1995. Stateand CivilSociety:
Explorations New
in PoliticalTheory.
Delhi,India/Thousand Oaks,California/London: Sage.
Partha.1990."AResponseto Taylor's'ModesofCivilSociety'."
Chatterjee, Public
Culture,3:1 (Fall), 120-121.
. 1998."BeyondtheNationor Within." SocialText,16:3 (Fall),57-69.
. 2001. "On Civiland PoliticalSocietyin Post-ColonialDemocracies."
Pp. 165-178in SudiptaKavirajand SunilKhilnani,eds., CivilSociety: History
andPossibilities.
Cambridge, England:Cambridge University Press.
Choudhry,Aziz.n.d."AllThis'CivilSociety'TalkTakesUs Nowhere." http://global
research.ca.articles/AZ^OlA.html.
Cohen,Jean,andAndrew andPolitical
Arato.1992.CivilSociety Theory.London:Verso.
and thePoliticalImaginationin
,John L. and Jean, eds. 1999. CivilSociety
Comaroff
Africa:Critical Chicago,Illinois/London:
Perspectives. University of Chicago
Press.
Jean,andJohnComaroff,
Comaroff, eds.2001.Millennial CapitalismandtheCulture
Durham,NorthCarolina/
ofNeoliberalism. London:Duke University Press.
Cooper,Frederick.2002."Decolonizing Situations.The Rise,Fall and RiseofColo-
nialStudies1951-2001."French Culture
Politics, andSociety,
20 (Summer), 47-76.
Eddin,IbrahimSaid. 1998.1998."Nurturing CivilSocietyat theWorldBank:An
Assessment of StaffAttitudes TowardsCivilSociety."Social Development
Papers,No. 24 (September).Washington, D.C.: WorldBank.
Ferguson,James. 1997. "Anthropology and Its EvilTwin:'Development'in the
Constitution Pp. 150-175inFredCooperandRandallPackard,
ofa Discipline."
eds., International and theSocial Sciences.Essayson theHistoryand
Development
Politics Angeles,California:
Berkeley/Los
ofKnowledge. ofCalifor-
University
nia Press.
StateIs Dead - LongLiveSocialCapital."
Fine,Ben. 1999."TheDevelopmental
and Change,30:1, 1-19.
Development
DilipParameshwar,
Gaonkar, Modernities.
ed. 2001.Alternative NorthCaro-
Durham,
Press.
lina/London:Duke University
Gellner,Ernst.1994. Conditions andItsRivals.London: Hamish
CivilSociety
ofLiberty:
Hamilton.
Guha, Ranajit. 1997. DominanceWithout and Powerin ColonialIn-
History
Hegemony.
dia.Cambridge,
Massachusetts/London: Press.
HarvardUniversity
Historyand Comparison.
Hall, John A., ed. 1995. Civil Society:Theory, Cambridge,
England:PolityPress.
andItsLimits.
Halperin,Sandra,and GordonLaxer,eds. 2003. GlobalCivilSociety
London:Palgrave/Macmillan.
Hann,Christopher,and ElisabethDunn,eds. 1996.CivilSociety: West-
Challenging
ernModels.
London:Routledge.
Howell,Jude,and JennyPearce. 2001. CivilSociety A Critical
and Development: Explo-
Boulder,Colorado:LynneRienner.
ration.
Rob.
Jenkins, 2001."Mistaking'Governance' for'Polities':Foreign
Aid,Democracy,
andtheConstruction Pp.250-268inSudiptaKaviraj
ofCivilSociety." andSunil

Khilnani,eds., CivilSociety: History and Possibilities.

Cambridge,England: Cam-
bridge University Press.
Kaldor,Mary.2003. GlobalCivilSociety: AnAnswer toWar.Cambridge,England:Polity
Press.
Kaviraj,Sudipta,and Sunil Khilnani,eds. 2001. CivilSociety: History and Possibilities.
Cambridge,England: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Keane,John. 1998. CivilSociety: Old Images,NewVisions.Cambridge,England: Pol-
ity Press.
. 2003. GlobalCivilSociety?Cambridge,England: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Kumar,Krishnan.1993. "CivilSociety:An Inquiryinto the Usefulnessof an His-
toricalTerm." British JournalofSociology, 44:3 (September), 375-395.
Leftwich,Adrian. 1993. "Governance,Democracyand Developmentin the Third
World." ThirdWorldQuarterly, 14:3, 605-624.
Maina, Wachira. 1998. "Kenya:The State,Donors and the Politicsof Démocrati-
sation."Pp. 134-167 in AlisonVan Rooy,ed., CivilSociety and theAid Industry:
ThePoliticsand Promise. London: Earthscan.
Mamdani,Mahmood. 1996. Citizenand Subject:Contemporary Africaand theLegacyof
Late Colonialism.Princeton,NewJersey:PrincetonUniversity Press.
Norton,RichardAugustus,ed. 1995. CivilSociety in theMiddle-East. 2 Vols. Leiden,
Amsterdam:BrillAcademic Publishers.
Petras,James.2002. "Tale ofTwo Forums17/2/2002";"PortoAlegre,a Tale of Two
Forums." http://www.Rebellion.org/petras/English/twoforumsl70202.htm
Salamon, LesterM., etal 1999. GlobalCivilSociety: Dimensions oftheNonprofit Sector.
Baltimore,Maryland: The JohnsHopkins Center for Civil SocietyStudies.
Seligman,Adam B. 2002. "CivilSocietyas Idea and Ideal. Pp. 13-33 in Simone
Chambersand WillKymlicka, eds.,Alternative
Conceptions ofCivilSociety.
Princeton,
NewJersey:PrincetonUniversity Press.
. 1992. "Trustand the Meaning of CivilSociety."International JournalofPoli-
tics,Cultureand Society,6:1, 5-21.
SIDA. SwedishInternational DevelopmentAgency.1996.Partnership Stockholm,
Africa.
Sweden:SIDA.
Stirrat,R. L. 1994. "The New Orthodoxyand Old Truths:Participation,Empower-
ment and Other Buzz Words." Pp. 67-92 in Sunil and Nicola Bastían, eds.,
Assessing A DebatefromSouthAsia. New Delhi, India: Konark.
Participation.
R. L., and H. Henkel.1996."Participation
Stirrat, as SpiritualDuty:The ReligiousRoots
of the New DevelopmentOrthodoxy."Unpublishedpaper presentedin Edin-
burgh,UnitedKingdomat "Boundariesand IdentitiesConference"(October).
Taylor,Charles. 1995. Philosophical Arguments. Cambridge,Massachusetts:Harvard
University Press.
Turner,BryanS. 1994. Orientalism. Postmodernism and Globalism. London/NewYork:
Routledge.
USAID. 1997. NewPartnership Guide.A Strategic
Initiative.(NPI) Resource Approachto
Development Vols. I- II. Washington,D.C.: USAID.
Partnering.
Van Rooy,Alison, ed. 1998. CivilSociety and theAid Industry.
London: Earthscan.
Van Rooy,Alison,and Marc Robinson. 1998. "Out of the IvoryTower: CivilSociety
and the Aid System."Pp. 31-70 in AlisonVan Rooy,ed.

Nira.2001. CivilSociety
Wickramasinghe, inSriLanka.NewCircles
ofPower.
NewDelhi,
Oaks,London:Saere.
India/Thousand
. 2003. DressingtheColonised
Body:Politics,Clothing in ColonialSri
and Identity
Lanka.NewDelhi,India:OrientLongman.
theWorldBankand Liberal
David,andTomYoung.1994."Governance,
Williams,
Theory."Political 42, 84-100.
Studies,


Wickramasinghe The Idea of Civil Society in The South Science & Society 69-3-2005

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Wickramasinghe The Idea of Civil Society in The South Science & Society 69-3-2005

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

S&S Quarterly, Inc.

The Idea of Civil Society in the South: Imaginings, Transplants, Designs

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

The Idea of CivilSociety

THAN ANY OTHER SIGN, perhaps,civilsocietyhas

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

(Comaroff, 2001,40). In thisessayI willproposethattherearefunda-

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

Civil ServantJohn Ferguson lefta fascinatingaccount of the Jubilee

- Strengthening civilsocietyparticipationin the designand implementa-

- Supportinginnovativewaysforcivilsocietyto ensure thatall children,

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

children,formerchild soldiersand nomadic children) are able to access

An initialreadingofthe"orderly fieldofstatements" produced

1 The SriLankacase offersan exampleofthemisdirection ofthisinitiative. Indeedwhat

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

Muchofsocialsciencetodayoperateson theassumption ofthe

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

have,inKhilnani's view,led totheemergence ofa conceptthatgives

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

organizational life,articulatedbyethnicand kinship groupsthatare

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

socialinstitutions basedon otherprinciples. Refuting theclaim-

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

the other.3At the Social Forum held in PortoAlegre forinstance,

3 See, forexample,ArjunAppadurai'srecentcommentson globalizationfrombelow

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

ringto sub-Saharan Africa, has written aboutthe"illusion"ofcivil

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

everyone whooccupiesa spacebetweenthefamily and thestaterec-

Although therearemanydifferences in theway"civilsociety" in

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

withregardtoearlyAmerica, manyhavetakenitup as a perspective

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

informal institutionsand unwritten codesofbehavioras wellas pat-

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

Thesefourinfluences - de Tocqueville, pluralism-elitism, Put-

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

riseoforganizedcapitalism. Civilsocietyis thelifeworld as itis ex-

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

governance" emergedin a WorldBankreporton Sub-Saharan Af-

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

sure,whereconflict is non-violent and is normally accommodated

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

elevatingcivilsocietyto thehighestmoralgroundabove thestateand

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

The UnitedNationsalso definescivilsociety as "NGOs,thebusiness

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

Byfarthelargestproviderofcivilsocietyassistanceis the United

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

or shortlistof organizations. This has effectively technicizedand

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

a study ofthreekeybilateral donors- USAID,DanishInternational

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

society.Fromthe late 1980s,however,the Ford Foundation,the

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

beganin the1990sto incorporate "civilsocietystrengthening" into

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

Thesenewly designedcivilsocieties oftheSouthhavehadinsome

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.48 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:55:20 AM

Khilnani,eds., CivilSociety: History and Possibilities.