Perceptions of Non-governmental Organizations and Socio-economic Progress: The Case of Four Latin American Countries
This article identifies multiple roles and functions of non-governmental organizations as perceived by various stakeholders. The primary purpose of the study on which this article is based was to test the theory of community capacity that states that social capital, human capital, and organizational resources available to the community are predictors of its collective ability. The methodology for this article included secondary data analysis from a survey and qualitative study conducted to assess the effectiveness of Adventist Development and Relief Agency (ADRA) Internationals’ food security programs. The four Latin American countries in which the study was done are Peru, Bolivia, Nicaragua, and Honduras. The study relied on a survey that was administered to approximately 1,200 heads of household, 300 from each of the four countries. It also relied on a qualitative component that drew from eight focus group discussions and eight in-depth interviews. The experimental and comparison groups were each composed of approximately 150 subjects per country; the experimental group participated in the food security programs of ADRA International while the comparison group had not received any food security services. Many study participants reported the perception that non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are more effective and efficient than the agencies of their respective governments in responding to disasters and poverty. Most study participants also shared the perception that they have progressed economically as a result of the development services they received from ADRA international. They expressed strong support for International NGOs in these four Latin American countries. This study provides a base level empirical model for testing theses with respect to the neo-liberal perspective on non-governmental organizations. However, the researchers believe that a test of the neoliberal economic model calls for a larger and diverse sample of International Non-Governmental organizations located in randomly selected developing countries.
Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOS)
As defined by the World Bank NGOs refers to not-for-profit organizations that pursue activities to relieve suffering, promote the interests of the poor, protect the environment, provide basic social services, or undertake community development. These organisations are not a part of the governement, have a legal status and they are registered the specific Act under which they have to be registered. The term NGO in India denotes wide spectrum of organisations which may be nongovernmental, quasi or semi governmental, voluntary or non-voluntary etc.
Democratic constraint and embrace: Implications for progressive non-government advocacy organisations in Australia
The advocacy work of non-government organisations can be either constrained or embraced by government attitudes and practices. Although it is widely accepted that NGOs are an essential component of a healthy and robust democracy, serving as essential intermediaries between community and government, and providing a voice for marginalised groups to make claims on governments between elections, the current dominance of the public choice paradigm in public administration has seen the legitimacy of NGOs come under attack. Questions have been raised about the representativeness of NGOs and the legitimacy of their standing as policy advocates. As a result of this shift many disadvantaged groups that had taken years to organise themselves sufficiently to have a voice have found themselves increasingly constrained and excluded from the policy-making process. The threats that many NGOs are now facing have the effect of reducing government accountability, sustaining existing inequities and, ultimately, diminishing the quality of Australian democracy. 1This article is developed from the discussion paper Silencing Dissent: non-government organisations and Australian democracy, by Maddison, S., R. Denniss, and C. Hamilton, published by The Australia Institute in June 2004. The authors wish to thank the anonymous reviewers at the Australian Journal of Political Science for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this article.