What is the World Network of Users and Survivors of Psychiatry?

Introduction

The World Network of Users and Survivors of Psychiatry (WNUSP) is an international organisation representing, and led by what it terms “survivors of psychiatry”. As of 2003, over 70 national organisations were members of WNUSP, based in 30 countries. The network seeks to protect and develop the human rights, disability rights, dignity and self-determination of those labelled ‘mentally ill’.

Activities

WNUSP has special consultative status with the United Nations. It contributed to the development of the UN’s Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. WNUSP has produced a manual to help people use it entitled “Implementation Manual for the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”, edited by Myra Kovary.

WNUSP joined with other organisations to create the International Disability Caucus, which jointly represented organisations of people with disabilities and allies during the CRPD negotiations. WNUSP was part of the steering committee of the IDC, which maintained a principle of respecting the leadership of diverse constituencies on issues affecting them, and also maintained that the convention should be of equal value to all persons with disabilities irrespective of the type of disability or geographical location. Tina Minkowitz, WNUSP’s representative on the IDC steering committee, coordinated the IDC’s work on key articles of the CRPD, including those on legal capacity, liberty, torture and ill-treatment and integrity of the person. Since the adoption and entry into force of the CRPD, WNUSP has worked with other organisations in the International Disability Alliance and its CRPD Forum to guide the interpretation and application of the CRPD on these issues.

In 2007 at a Conference held in Dresden on “Coercive Treatment in Psychiatry: A Comprehensive Review”, the president and other leaders of the World Psychiatric Association met, following a formal request from the World Health Organisation, with several representatives from the user/survivor movement, including Judi Chamberlin (Co-chair of WNUSP), Mary Nettle and Peter Lehmann (Ex-chairs of the European Network of [Ex-] Users and Survivors of Psychiatry), Dorothea Buck (Honorary Chair of the German Federal Organisation of Users and Survivors of Psychiatry, and David Oaks (Director of MindFreedom International).

Salam Gómez and Jolijn Santegoeds are the current Co-Chairpersons of WNUSP.

Current International Representative and former co-chair of WNUSP is Tina Minkowitz, an international advocate and lawyer. She represented WNUSP in the Working Group convened by the UN to produce a draft text of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and contributed to a UN seminar on torture and persons with disabilities that resulted in an important report on the issue by Special Rapporteur on Torture Manfred Nowak in 2008.

Brief History

Since the 1970s, the psychiatric survivors movement has grown from a few scattered self-help groups to a worldwide network engaged in protecting civil rights and facilitation of efforts to provide housing, employment, public education, research, socialisation and advocacy programmes. The term ‘psychiatric survivor’ is used by individuals who identify themselves as having experienced human rights violations in the mental health system. WNUSP was established to further promote this movement and to respond on an international level to the oppression survivors continue to experience.

After initially meeting, in 1991, as the World Federation of Psychiatric Users at the biennial World Federation for Mental Health conference in Mexico, the network’s name was changed to WNUSP in 1997. In 2000, the WNUSP Secretariat was established in Odense, Denmark. In 2001, the network held its First General Assembly in Vancouver, British Columbia, with 34 groups from twelve countries represented, and adopted its governing statutes.

In 2004, the network held its Second General Assembly in Vejle, Denmark with 150 participants from 50 countries attending.

In 2007 WNUSP received ECOSOC special consultative status at the United Nations.

In 2009, WNUSP held its third General Assembly in Kampala, Uganda. It adopted the Kampala Declaration stating its positions on the CRPD, which was later expanded into a longer version adopted by consensus of the board and the participants in the Kampala GA.

ENUSP

The European Network of (Ex-) Users and Survivors of Psychiatry is the most important European NGO of (ex-) users and survivors. Forty-two representatives from 16 European countries met at a conference to found it in the Netherlands in October 1991. Every 2 years, delegates from the ENUSP members in more than 40 European countries meet at a conference where the policies for the coming period are set out. All delegates are (ex-)users and survivors of psychiatry. ENUSP is officially involved in consultations on mental health plans and policies of the European Union, World Health Organisation and other important bodies. Initial funding came from the Dutch government and from the European Commission but has since proved more difficult to secure. ENUSP is involved in commenting and debating declarations, position papers, policy guidelines of the EU, UN, WHO and other important bodies.

This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article < https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Network_of_Users_and_Survivors_of_Psychiatry >; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA.

What is the World Federation for Mental Health?

Introduction

The World Federation for Mental Health (WFMH) is an international, multi-professional non-governmental organisation (NGO), including citizen volunteers and former patients. It was founded in 1948 in the same era as the United Nations (UN) and the World Health Organisation (WHO).

Outline

The goal of this international organisation includes;

  • The prevention of mental and emotional disorders;
  • The proper treatment and care of those with such disorders; and
  • And the promotion of mental health.

The Federation, through its members and contacts in more than 94 countries on six continents, has responded to international mental health crises through its role as the only worldwide grassroots advocacy and public education organisation in the mental health field. Its organisational and individual membership includes mental health workers of all disciplines, consumers of mental health services, family members, and concerned citizens. At its very outset the WFMH was concerned with educating both the public and influential professionals, and with human relations, with a view both to the health of individuals and that of groups and nations. The WFMH founding document, “Mental Health and World Citizenship”, understood “world citizenship” in terms of a “common humanity” respecting individual and cultural differences, and declared that “the ultimate goal of mental health is to help [people] live with their fellows in one world.

Members include mental health service providers and service users. In 2009, the World Fellowship for Schizophrenia and Allied Disorders, an international network of families of people with serious mental illness, merged with the World Federation. The World Federation has close ties with the World Health Organization. For many years after its founding, the WFMH was the only NGO of its kind with a close working relationship with UN agencies, particularly the WHO. In recent decades, though, a number of international mental health organisations, often limited to members of particular professions, have developed. In varying degree they have filled needs formerly addressed mainly by WFMH. The WFMH envisions a world in which mental health is a priority for all people. Public policies and programs reflect the crucial importance of mental health in the lives of individuals. The first Director General of the WHO, G. Brock Chisholm, who was a psychiatrist, was one of the leaders in forming the federation with the goal of creating a representative organisation that could consult with the UN on mental health issues.

The mission of the World Federation for Mental Health is to promote the advancement of mental health awareness, prevention of mental disorders, advocacy, and best practice recovery focused interventions worldwide. Mental health day is celebrated at the initiative of the World Federation of Mental Health and WHO supports this initiative through raising awareness on mental health issues using its strong relationships with the Ministries of health and civil society organisations across the globe. Mental Illness Awareness Week (MIAW) is an annual national public education campaign designed to help open the eyes of Canadians to the reality of mental illness. The week was established in 1992 by the Canadian Psychiatric Association, and is now coordinated by the Canadian Alliance on Mental Illness and Mental Health (CAMIMH) in cooperation with all its member organisations and many other supporters across Canada.

This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article < https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Federation_for_Mental_Health >; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA.

An Overview of Non-Governmental Organisations

Introduction

A non-governmental organisation (NGO) is an organisation that generally is formed independent from government.

They are typically non-profit entities, and many of them are active in humanitarianism or the social sciences; they can also include clubs and associations that provide services to their members and others. Surveys indicate that NGOs have a high degree of public trust, which can make them a useful proxy for the concerns of society and stakeholders. However, NGOs can also be lobby groups for corporations, such as the World Economic Forum. NGOs are distinguished from international and intergovernmental organisations (IOs) in that the latter are more directly involved with sovereign states and their governments.

The term as it is used today was first introduced in Article 71 of the newly-formed United Nations’ Charter in 1945. While there is no fixed or formal definition for what NGOs are, they are generally defined as non-profit entities that are independent of governmental influence—although they may receive government funding. According to the UN Department of Global Communications, an NGO is “a not-for profit, voluntary citizen’s group that is organized on a local, national or international level to address issues in support of the public good”. The term NGO is used inconsistently, and is sometimes used synonymously with civil society organisation (CSO), which is any association founded by citizens. In some countries, NGOs are known as non-profit organisations, and political parties and trade unions are sometimes considered NGOs as well.

NGOs are classified by (1) orientation—the type of activities an NGO undertakes, such as activities involving human rights, consumer protection, environmentalism, health, or development; and (2) level of operation, which indicates the scale at which an organisation works: local, regional, national, or international.

Russia had about 277,000 NGOs in 2008. India is estimated to have had about 2 million NGOs in 2009 (approximately one per 600 Indians), many more than the number of the country’s primary schools and health centres. The United States, by comparison, has approximately 1.5 million NGOs.

Brief History

International NGOs date back to at least the late 18th century, and there were an estimated 1,083 NGOs by 1914. International NGOs were important to the anti-slavery and women’s suffrage movements, and peaked at the time of the 1932–1934 World Disarmament Conference.

The term became popular with the 1945 founding of the United Nations in 1945; Article 71 in Chapter X of its charter stipulated consultative status for organisations which are neither governments nor member states. An international NGO was first defined in resolution 288 (X) of the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) on 27 February 1950, as “any international organization that is not founded by an international treaty”. The role of NGOs and other “major groups” in sustainable development was recognized in Chapter 27 of Agenda 21. The rise and fall of international NGOs matches contemporary events, waxing in periods of growth and waning in times of crisis. The United Nations gave NGOs observer status at its assemblies and some meetings. According to the UN, an NGO is a private, not-for-profit organisation which is independent of government control and is not merely an opposition political party.

The rapid development of the non-governmental sector occurred in Western countries as a result of the restructuring of the welfare state. Globalisation of that process occurred after the fall of the communist system, and was an important part of the Washington Consensus.

Twentieth-century globalisation increased the importance of NGOs. International treaties and organizations, such as the World Trade Organisation, focused on capitalist interests. To counterbalance this trend, NGOs emphasize humanitarian issues, development aid, and sustainable development. An example is the World Social Forum, a rival convention of the World Economic Forum held each January in Davos, Switzerland. The fifth World Social Forum, in Porto Alegre, Brazil in January 2005, was attended by representatives of over 1,000 NGOs. The 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, attended by about 2,400 representatives, was the first to demonstrate the power of international NGOs in environmental issues and sustainable development. Transnational NGO networking has become extensive.

Other Terms/Acronyms

Similar terms include third-sector organisation (TSO), non-profit organization (NPO), voluntary organisation (VO), civil society organisation (CSO), grassroots organisation (GO), social movement organisation (SMO), private voluntary organisation (PVO), self-help organisation (SHO), and non-state actors (NSAs).

Numerous variations exist for the NGO acronym, either due to language, region, or specificity.

Some Romance languages use the synonymous abbreviation ONG; for example:

  • French: organisation non gouvernementale
  • Italian: organizzazione non governativa
  • Portuguese: organização não governmental
  • Spanish: organización no gubernamental
  • Romanian: organizație neguvernamentală

Other acronyms that are typically used to describe non-governmental organisations include:

  • BINGO: Business-friendly international NGO or Big international NGO
  • CSO: Civil society organisation
  • ENGO: Environmental NGO — organisations that advocate for the environment, such as Greenpeace and the WWF.
  • DONGO: Donor-organised NGO
  • GONGO: Government-organised non-governmental organisation — often used derogatorily, these are government-backed NGOs that are set up to advocate on behalf of a repressive regime on the international stage.
  • GSO: Grassroots Support Organisation
  • INGO: International NGO
  • MANGO: Market advocacy NGO
  • NGDO: Non-governmental development organisation
  • NNGO: Northern (UK) NGO
  • PANGO: Party NGO — addressing political matters
  • PVDO: Private voluntary development organisation — the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) refers to NGOs as “private voluntary organisations”.
  • Quango: Quasi-autonomous NGO — often used derogatorily, these organisations rely on public funding. They are prevalent in the UK (where there are more than 1,200), Ireland, and the Commonwealth.
  • SBO: Social benefit organisation — a goal-oriented designation
  • SCO: Social change organisation
  • SNGO: Southern (UK) NGO
  • TANGO: Technical assistance NGO
  • TNGO: Transnational NGO — coined during the 1970s due to the increase of environmental and economic issues in the global community. TNGOs exist in two (or more) countries.
  • YOUNGO: Youth NGOs – advocating for youth rights.

Legal Status

Although NGOs are subject to national laws and practices, four main groups may be found worldwide:

  • Unincorporated and voluntary association
  • Trusts, charities, and foundations
  • Not-for-profit companies and co-operatives
  • Entities formed (or registered) under special NGO or non-profit laws

The Council of Europe drafted the European Convention on the Recognition of the Legal Personality of International Non-Governmental Organisations in Strasbourg in 1986, creating a common legal basis for European NGOs. Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights protects the right to associate, which is fundamental for NGOs.

Types

NGOs further the social goals of their members (or founders): improving the natural environment, encouraging the observance of human rights, improving the welfare of the disadvantaged, or representing a corporate agenda. Their goals cover a wide range of issues. They may fund local NGOs, institutions and projects, and implement projects.

NGOs are classified by their:

  1. Orientation, i.e. the type of activities an NGO undertakes, such as activities involving human rights, consumer protection, environmentalism, health, or development.
  2. Level of operation, which indicates the scale at which an organisation works: local, regional, national, or international.

Orientation

  • Charity: Often a top-down effort, with little participation or input from beneficiaries. They include NGOs directed at meeting the needs of disadvantaged people and groups.
  • Service: Includes NGOs that provide healthcare (including family planning) and education.
  • Participatory: Self-help projects with local involvement in the form of money, tools, land, materials, or labour.
  • Empowerment: Aim to help poor people to understand the social, political, and economic factors affecting their lives, and to increase awareness of their power to control their lives. With maximum involvement by the beneficiaries, the NGOs are facilitators.

Level of Operation

  • Community-based organisations (CBOs): Popular initiatives which can raise the consciousness of the urban poor, helping them understand their right to services, and providing such services.
  • City-wide organisations: Include chambers of commerce and industry, coalitions of business, ethnic or educational groups, and community organisations.
  • State NGOs: Include state-level organisations, associations, and groups. Some state NGOs are guided by national and international NGOs.
  • National NGOs: An NGO that exists in only one country; they are rare. These include national organisations such as YMCAs and YWCAs, professional associations, and similar groups. Some have state or city branches, and assist local NGOs.
  • International NGOs (INGOs): Range from secular agencies, such as Save the Children, to religious groups. They may fund local NGOs, institutions and projects, and implement projects.

Activities

NGOs play a vital role in improving the lives of people who have been affected by natural disasters or are facing other challenges. NGOs can act as implementers, catalysts, and partners to provide essential goods and services to those in need. They work to mobilise resources, both financial and human, to ensure that aid is delivered in a timely and effective manner.

NGOs also play a critical role in driving change by advocating for policies and practices that benefit disadvantaged communities. They often work in partnership with other organisations, including government agencies, to address complex challenges that require a collaborative approach.

One of the key strengths of NGOs is their ability to work at the grassroots level and to connect with communities directly. This allows them to gain a deep understanding of the issues facing people and to tailor their services to meet the specific needs of each community.

NGOs vary by method; some are primarily advocacy groups, and others conduct programs and activities. Oxfam, concerned with poverty alleviation, may provide needy people with the equipment and skills to obtain food and drinking water; the Forum for Fact-finding Documentation and Advocacy (FFDA) helps provide legal assistance to victims of human-rights abuses. The Afghanistan Information Management Services provide specialised technical products and services to support development activities implemented on the ground by other organizations. Management techniques are crucial to project success.

The World Bank classifies NGO activity into two general categories:

  • Operational NGOs, whose primary function is the design and implementation of development-related projects
  • Advocacy NGOs, whose primary function is to defend or promote a particular cause and who seek to influence the policies and practices of International governmental organisations (IGOs).

NGOs may also conduct both activities: operational NGOs will use campaigning techniques if they face issues in the field, which could be remedied by policy change, and campaigning NGOs (e.g. human-rights organisations) often have programmes which assist individual victims for whom they are trying to advocate.

Operational

Operational NGOs seek to “achieve small-scale change directly through projects”, mobilising financial resources, materials, and volunteers to create local programmes. They hold large-scale fundraising events and may apply to governments and organizations for grants or contracts to raise money for projects. Operational NGOs often have a hierarchical structure; their headquarters are staffed by professionals who plan projects, create budgets, keep accounts, and report to and communicate with operational fieldworkers on projects. They are most often associated with the delivery of services or environmental issues, emergency relief, and public welfare. Operational NGOs may be subdivided into relief or development organisations, service-delivery or participatory, religious or secular, and public or private. Although operational NGOs may be community-based, many are national or international. The defining activity of an operational NGO is the implementation of projects.

Advocacy

Advocacy NGOs or campaigning NGOs seek to “achieve large-scale change promoted indirectly through the influence of the political system”. They require an active, efficient group of professional members who can keep supporters informed and motivated. Campaigning NGOs must plan and host demonstrations and events which will attract media, their defining activity.

Campaigning NGOs often deal with issues related to human rights, women’s rights, and children’s rights, and their primary purpose is to defend (or promote) a specific cause.

Public Relations

Non-governmental organisations need healthy public relations in order to meet their goals, and use sophisticated public-relations campaigns to raise funds and deal with governments. Interest groups may be politically important, influencing social and political outcomes. A code of ethics was established in 2002 by the World Association of Non-Governmental Organisations.

Structure

Staffing

Some NGOs rely on paid staff; others are based on volunteers. Although many NGOs use international staff in developing countries, others rely on local employees or volunteers. Foreign staff may satisfy a donor who wants to see the supported project managed by a person from an industrialised country. The expertise of these employees (or volunteers) may be counterbalanced by several factors: the cost of foreigners is typically higher, they have no grassroots connections in the country, and local expertise may be undervalued. By the end of 1995, Concern Worldwide (an international anti-poverty NGO) employed 174 foreigners and just over 5,000 local staff in Haiti and ten developing countries in Africa and Asia.

On average, employees in NGOs earn 11-12% less compared to employees of for-profit organisations and government workers with the same number of qualifications. However, in many cases NGOs employees receive more fringe benefits.

Funding

NGOs are usually funded by donations, but some avoid formal funding and are run by volunteers. NGOs may have charitable status, or may be tax-exempt in recognition of their social purposes. Others may be fronts for political, religious, or other interests. Since the end of World War II, NGOs have had an increased role in international development, particularly in the fields of humanitarian assistance and poverty alleviation.

Funding sources include membership dues, the sale of goods and services, grants from international institutions or national governments, CSR Funds and private donations. Although the term non-governmental organisation implies independence from governments, many NGOs depend on government funding; one-fourth of Oxfam’s US$162 million 1998 income was donated by the British government and the EU, and World Vision United States collected $55 million worth of goods in 1998 from the American government. Several EU grants provide funds accessible to NGOs.

Government funding of NGOs is controversial, since:

“the whole point of humanitarian intervention was precise that NGOs and civil society had both a right and an obligation to respond with acts of aid and solidarity to people in need or being subjected to repression or want by the forces that controlled them, whatever the governments concerned might think about the matter.”

Some NGOs, such as Greenpeace, do not accept funding from governments or intergovernmental organisations. The 1999 budget of the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) was over $540 million.

Overhead

Overhead is the amount of money spent on running an NGO, rather than on projects. It includes office expenses, salaries, and banking and bookkeeping costs. An NGO’s percentage of its overall budget spent on overhead is often used to judge it; less than 4% is considered good. According to the World Association of Non-Governmental Organisations, more than 86% should be spent on programmes (less than 20%). The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria has guidelines of 5-7% overhead to receive funding; the World Bank typically allows 37%. A high percentage of overhead relative to total expenditures can make it more difficult to generate funds. High overhead costs may generate public criticism.

A sole focus on overhead, however, can be counterproductive. Research published by the Urban Institute and Stanford University’s Centre for Social Innovation have shown that rating agencies create incentives for NGOs to lower (and hide) overhead costs, which may reduce organisational effectiveness by starving organisations of infrastructure to deliver services. An alternative rating system would provide, in addition to financial data, a qualitative evaluation of an organisation’s transparency and governance:

  • An assessment of program effectiveness
  • Evaluation of feedback mechanisms for donors and beneficiaries
  • Allowing a rated organisation to respond to an evaluation by a rating agency

Monitoring and Control

In a March 2000 report on United Nations reform priorities, former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan favoured international humanitarian intervention as the responsibility to protect citizens from ethnic cleansing, genocide, and crimes against humanity. After that report, the Canadian government launched its Responsibility to Protect (R2P) project outlining the issue of humanitarian intervention. The R2P project has wide applications, and among its more controversial has been the Canadian government’s use of R2P to justify its intervention in the coup in Haiti.

Large corporations have increased their corporate social responsibility departments to pre-empt NGO campaigns against corporate practices. Collaboration between corporations and NGOs risks co-option of the weaker partner, typically the NGO.

In December 2007, Assistant Secretary of Defence for Health Affairs S. Ward Casscells established an International Health Division of Force Health Protection & Readiness. Part of International Health’s mission is to communicate with NGOs about areas of mutual interest. Department of Defence Directive 3000.05, in 2005, required the US Defence Department to regard stability-enhancing activities as equally important as combat. In compliance with international law, the department has developed a capacity to improve essential services in areas of conflict (such as Iraq) where customary lead agencies like the State Department and USAID have difficulty operating. International Health cultivates collaborative, arm’s-length relationships with NGOs, recognising their independence, expertise, and honest-broker status.

Economic Theory

The question whether a public project should be owned by an NGO or by the government has been studied in economics using the tools of the incomplete contracting theory. According to this theory, not every detail of a relationship between decision makers can be contractually specified. Hence, in the future the parties will bargain with each other to adapt their relationship to changing circumstances. Ownership matters because it determines the parties’ willingness to make non-contractible investments. In the context of private firms, Hart (1995) has shown that the party with the more important investment task should be owner. Yet, Besley and Ghatak (2001) have argued that in the context of public projects the investment technology does not matter. Specifically, even when the government is the key investor, ownership by an NGO is optimal if and only if the NGO has a larger valuation of the project than the government. However, the general validity of this argument has been questioned by follow-up research. In particular, ownership by the party with the larger valuation need not be optimal when the public good is partially excludable (Francesconi and Muthoo, 2011), when both NGO and government may be indispensable (Halonen-Akatwijuka, 2012), or when the NGO and the government have different bargaining powers (Schmitz, 2013). Moreover, the investment technology can matter for the optimal ownership structure when there are bargaining frictions (Schmitz, 2015), when the parties interact repeatedly (Halonen-Akatwijuka and Pafilis, 2020), or when the parties are asymmetrically informed (Schmitz, 2021).

Influence on World Affairs

Service-delivery NGOs provide public goods and services which governments of developing countries are unable to provide due to a lack of resources. They may be contractors or collaborate with government agencies to reduce the cost of public goods. Capacity-building NGOs affect “culture, structure, projects and daily operations”. Advocacy and public-education NGOs aim to modify behaviour and ideas through communication, crafting messages to promote social, political, or environmental changes (and as news organisations have cut foreign bureaux, many NGOs have begun to expand into news reporting). Movement NGOs mobilise the public and coordinate large-scale collective activities to advance an activist agenda.

Since the end of the Cold War, more NGOs in developed countries have pursued international outreach; involved in local and national social resistance, they have influenced domestic policy change in the developing world. Specialised NGOs have forged partnerships, built networks, and found policy niches.

Diplomacy

In the context of NGOs, diplomacy refers to the practice of building and maintaining partnerships with other organizations, stakeholders, and governments to achieve common objectives related to social or environmental issues.

NGOs often work in complex environments, where multiple stakeholders have different interests and goals. Diplomacy allows NGOs to navigate these complex environments and engage in constructive dialogue with different actors to promote understanding, build consensus, and facilitate cooperation.

Effective NGO diplomacy involves building trust, fostering dialogue, and promoting transparency and accountability. NGOs may engage in diplomacy through various means, including advocacy, lobbying, partnerships, and negotiations. By working collaboratively with other organisations and stakeholders, NGOs can achieve greater impact and reach their goals more effectively.

Track II Diplomacy

Track II diplomacy (or dialogue) is transnational coordination by non-official members of the government, including epistemic communities and former policymakers or analysts. It aims to help policymakers and policy analysts reach a common solution through unofficial discussions. Unlike official diplomacy, conducted by government officials, diplomats, and elected leaders, Track II diplomacy involves experts, scientists, professors and other figures who are not part of government affairs.

World NGO Day

World NGO Day, observed annually on 27 February, was recognised on 17 April 2010 by 12 countries of the IX Baltic Sea NGO Forum at the eighth Summit of the Baltic Sea States in Vilnius, Lithuania. It was internationally recognised on 28 February 2014 in Helsinki, Finland by United Nations Development Programme administrator and former Prime Minister of New Zealand Helen Clark.

Criticism

Tanzanian author and academic Issa G. Shivji has criticised NGOs in two essays: “Silences in NGO discourse: The role and future of NGOs in Africa” and “Reflections on NGOs in Tanzania: What we are, what we are not and what we ought to be”. Shivji writes that despite the good intentions of NGO leaders and activists, he is critical of the “objective effects of actions, regardless of their intentions”. According to Shivji, the rise of NGOs is part of a neoliberal paradigm and not motivated purely by altruism; NGOs want to change the world without understanding it, continuing an imperial relationship.

In his study of NGO involvement in Mozambique, James Pfeiffer addresses their negative effects on the country’s health. According to Pfeiffer, NGOs in Mozambique have “fragmented the local health system, undermined local control of health programs, and contributed to growing local social inequality”. They can be uncoordinated, creating parallel projects which divert health-service workers from their normal duties to instead serve the NGOs. This undermines local primary-healthcare efforts, and removes the government’s ability to maintain agency over its health sector. Pfeiffer suggested a collaborative model of the NGO and the DPS (the Mozambique Provincial Health Directorate); the NGO should be “formally held to standard and adherence within the host country”, reduce “showcase” projects and unsustainable parallel programmes.

In her 1997 Foreign Affairs article, Jessica Mathews wrote: “For all their strengths, NGOs are special interests. The best of them … often suffer from tunnel vision, judging every public act by how it affects their particular interest”. NGOs are unencumbered by policy trade-offs.

According to Vijay Prashad, since the 1970s “the World Bank, under Robert McNamara, championed the NGO as an alternative to the state, leaving intact global and regional relations of power and production.” NGOs have been accused of preserving imperialism (sometimes operating in a racialised manner in Third World countries), with a function similar to that of the clergy during the colonial era. Political philosopher Peter Hallward has called them an aristocratic form of politics, noting that ActionAid and Christian Aid “effectively condoned the [2004 US-backed] coup” against an elected government in Haiti and are the “humanitarian face of imperialism”. Movements in the Global South (such as South Africa’s Western Cape Anti-Eviction Campaign) have refused to work with NGOs, concerned that doing so would compromise their autonomy. NGOs have been accused of weakening people by allowing their funders to prioritise stability over social justice.

They have been accused of being designed by, and used as extensions of, the foreign-policy instruments of some Western countries and groups of countries. Russian president Vladimir Putin made that accusation at the 43rd Munich Security Conference in 2007, saying that NGOs “are formally independent but they are purposefully financed and therefore under control”. According to Michael Bond, “Most large NGOs, such as Oxfam, the Red Cross, Cafod and ActionAid, are striving to make their aid provision more sustainable. But some, mostly in the US, are still exporting the ideologies of their backers.”

NGOs have been accused of using misinformation in their campaigns out of self-interest. According to Doug Parr of Greenpeace, there had been “a tendency among our critics to say that science is the only decision-making tool … but political and commercial interests are using science as a cover for getting their way.” Former policy-maker for the German branch of Friends of the Earth Jens Katjek said, “If NGOs want the best for the environment, they have to learn to compromise.”

They have been questioned as “too much of a good thing”. Eric Werker and Faisal Ahmed made three critiques of NGOs in developing nations. Too many NGOs in a nation (particularly one ruled by a warlord) reduces an NGO’s influence, since it can easily be replaced by another NGO. Resource allocation and outsourcing to local organisations in international-development projects incurs expenses for an NGO, lessening the resources and money available to the intended beneficiaries. NGO missions tend to be paternalistic, as well as expensive.

Legitimacy, an important asset of an NGO, is its perception as an “independent voice”. Neera Chandhoke wrote in a Journal of World-Systems Research article, “To put the point starkly: are the citizens of countries of the South and their needs represented in global civil society, or are citizens as well as their needs constructed by practices of representation? And when we realize that INGOs hardly ever come face to face with the people whose interests and problems they represent, or that they are not accountable to the people they represent, matters become even more troublesome.”

An NGO’s funding affects its legitimacy, and they have become increasingly dependent on a limited number of donors. Competition for funds has increased, in addition to the expectations of donors who may add conditions threatening an NGO’s independence. Dependence on official aid may dilute “the willingness of NGOs to speak out on issues which are unpopular with governments”, and changes in NGO funding sources have altered their function.

NGOs have been challenged as not representing the needs of the developing world, diminishing the “Southern voice” and preserving the North–South divide. The equality of relationships between northern and southern parts of an NGO, and between southern and northern NGOs working in partnership, has been questioned; the north may lead in advocacy and resource mobilisation, and the south delivers services in the developing world. The needs of the developing world may not be addressed appropriately, as northern NGOs do not consult (or participate in) partnerships or assign unrepresentative priorities. NGOs have been accused of damaging the public sector in target countries, such as mismanagement resulting in the breakdown of public healthcare systems.

The scale and variety of activities in which NGOs participate have grown rapidly since 1980, and particularly since 1990. NGOs need to balance centralisation and decentralisation. Centralising NGOs, particularly at the international level, can assign a common theme or set of goals. It may also be advantageous to decentralise an NGO, increasing its chances of responding flexibly and effectively to local issues by implementing projects which are modest in scale, easily monitored, produce immediate benefits, and where all involved know that corruption would be punished.

This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article < https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-governmental_organization >; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA.