Civil Society Mapping and
Recommendations for EU + Future
Engagement
FINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION
WORKSHOP
Dhaka – 22 January 2014
A project supported by the
European Union
ECO
in cooperation with:
STEM - VCR
The objective and the context




To contribute to the preparation of a roadmap, with a view
to “strengthen democratic processes and accountability
system and achieving better development outcomes”
To provide recommendations to the EU+ group how to
better engage CS in policy dialogue and cooperation
The recognition of CS as a key actor in development and
the adoption of the policy document “The Roots of
Democracy” (2012) as overall policy framework on CSO
A wide experience in providing support to CSOs and in
funding CSO activities by the EU in Bangladesh
The main features: categories

A wide concept of CSOs – not only NGOs;

Focus on CSOs rather than on NSA

A tiered vision of CSOs: from grassroots to national
platforms

Dynamic view of CSOs structures and processes;

An operational concept of governance;

An operational concept of capacities.
The main features: methodology

Documentary review: capitalisation of existing knowledge

individual interviews with NGOs, Platforms, INGO, donors,
Local authorities, key informants (50 people met)

Workshops in Saidpur, Khulna, Chittagong (40
participants)

Questionnaires to CSOs on policy dialogue/governance
engagement (60 Questionnaires collected)
The stakes of CSO engagement
in governance and policy

Making politics work (influencing the democratic
mechanism, not participating in politics)
 Fostering actual implementation of public policies
 Fostering decentralization and linking LA to communities
 Integrating new emerging actors and supporting social
innovation
 Conflict management, particularly at local level
 Supporting innovation
A differential analysis - First level CSOs







A diffused, multifaceted and little known phenomenon
Dependency and lack of recognition: beneficiary rather than
an actor
Lack of resources and dependency from NGOs
Vertical integration with NGOs rather than horizontal
integration
Risk of being locked within local patron-client dynamics, but
also a potential for influencing public authorities
Multiple experiences in effective engagement for
advocating and solving issues at local level, and a large
space for developing local governance mechanisms
A space for issue based informal platforms and for new
actors emergency
A differential analysis - Second level CSOs (1)






Few large well known NGOs, based in Dhaka, and a large
number of relatively unknown medium-small local NGOs
A widely diffused focus on service delivery: a risk situation
for organisations engaging in governance; a tendency to
consider grassroots organisations as beneficiaries/tools
Project based, service delivery or Micro-Credit activities
prevails: timing and a legitimacy issues for engaging in
governance
Dependency upon donors or/and from government for
accessing funds
Dependency upon old leaders and lack of generational
change
Political divides and alignment to parties are common:
organisations are vulnerable to politics
A differential analysis - Second level CSOs (2)

Vertical integration among CSOs (small ones working as
sub-contractors)
 Centralisation of decision making, policy setting and project
formulation
 Accountability and transparency are debated (and NGOs
are the subject of stereotypes concerning these issues)
 NGOs are recognised as implementing agencies and as
policy experts rather than a policy actor
 Legal framework limits the possibilities for critical
engagement, and such space is further shrinking
 Multiple experiences in effective engagement in
governance: spaces exist and can be developed
A differential analysis - Third level CSOs

Thematic and issue based platforms are the main actors at
this level
 Local permanent platforms are weak or not active, even
when they exist
 Local informal platforms emerge issue based
 Thematic and issue based platform often depend upon a
leading organisation
 Evidences exist about thematic and issue platforms
potential for governance and policy dialogue
 New organisations mainly focusing on funding have been
established recently by donors: these organisations can
support policy /governance engagement, but have little
legitimacy to play an active role in policy governance
A differential analysis - Fourth level CSOs

2 national platforms are the main actors at this level
 Little voice emerge from these platforms
 A legitimacy mechanism in front of other actors rather than
a vehicle for engaging in governance?
 Engagement on the setting of a self-regulating mechanism
 A dialogue process is in progress, but mainly at the summit
 Both platforms lack recognition as legitimate voice
 Both platforms are weak when local CSOs and single CSOs
need support
 Vulnerability to politics is a key issue
Some common challenges







Changing environment
CS mirroring politics
Conflicting interests in engaging in governance
A risk situation: some spaces are shrinking
Weak engagement in some areas
Weak recognition
Limited visibility of engagement in governance at
decentralised level
Entrance points for CSOs engagement in
governance and policy dialogue





Influence on sector policies/government “invited spaces”
Local and Service governance mechanisms set at project
level
Widening rights enforcement through legal actions and local
actors strengthening
Monitoring policies and rights enforcement and voice
functions
Campaigning and networking through platforms
Lessons learnt

Maintaining diversity in support modalities
 Coupling “grants” with other support measures
 Overcoming/Challenging “traditional” CSO support/capacity
building structures
 Strengthening networks from below
 Mantaining flexibility and updating strategies in changing
contexts
 Focusing periphery and avoiding the occupation of
periphery by central actors
 Fostering partnership rather than just sub-contracting
among CSOs
 Working at different scales, rather than just at one
Preliminary suggestions concerning the
strategy options for the future “Roadmap”

Developing a supportive environment: recovering the
legitimacy of CSOs as policy actors

Structuring the space for engagement in governance and
policy dialogue: strengthening existing spaces and
supporting the opening of new spaces

Developing capacities for engagement in governance and
policy dialogue: fostering decentralisation and change
within CSO community
1. Options for “Developing a supportive
environment”





Recognition and visibility of CS engagement in governance:
challenging stereotypes and constructing new
representations
Fostering the opening of legal framework: legal reforms and
dialogue for reducing “control” and increasing transparency
Fostering the construction of policy dialogue spaces at
local/district level: fostering local strategic planning
Fostering resilience to “shrinking spaces” : political and
diplomatic support to CSOs under stress
Increasing visibility of support: making CSOs a visible policy
partner (including through media actions)
2. Options for “Structuring the space for
engagement in governance and policy dialogue”




Strengthening action/actors at local and district level:
prioritising locally based actions by locally based actors
Supporting networks, horizontal linkages and bridging:
linking together CSOs and projects, linking CSOs with LA
Supporting research and “evidence based advocacy”:
embedding research and evidence finding in projects and
programmes
Opening spaces of multilateral governance in available
opportunities: introducing participatory monitoring and
planning in projects and development/service delivery
initiatives; fostering the participation of CSOs in the dialogue
and coordination spaces between donors and government
3. Options for “Developing capacities for
engagement in governance and policy dialogue”






Support the re-thinking of CSOs roles and agendas and the
development of common visions/voices: strategy setting at
organisation and platform level; local and national CS
conferences; bridging between national and local level
Fostering decentralization in CSOs: local presence and local
partnerships in project formulation
Supporting change within CSOs: prioritising actions for
knowledge management and for the emergence of new leaders
Fostering local networks: support to local networking actions
Building the capacities of locally emerging CSOs: embedding
institutional development in projects
Fostering the visibility and inclusion of new actors within CSO
structures: research, communication and social innovation
initiatives at local level
Thank you
The floor is yours