Autonomy or dependency? Relations between non-governmental international aid organisations and government

Abstract

This article focuses on the growth and change that the Norwegian non-governmental international aid field has undergone since the Second World War. Questions are raised on the relationships and borders between the organisations involved and the government. What are the reasons for the apparent closeness of government to nongovernmental organisations? A short theoretical discussion is followed by an empirical description of the Norwegian (and Scandinavian) non-governmental 'landscape'. This description is followed by a discussion of government policy towards these organisations in Norway (and also, to a certain extent, the other Scandinavian countries), and in conclusion some questions are raised on their future role.

Co-Operation or Co-Optation? NGOs’ Roles in Norway’s International Climate and Forest Initiative

“…Similar to that which Grendstad et al find in the environmental field, Steen concludes that "although Norad is based on a well-regulated bureaucratic system, there are no indications that this has created any serious conflict with the NGOs" [36] (p. 157). However, Tvedt [37], who for decades has been studying Norwegian NGOs working with development aid, has a rather different view.…”

“…At one end of the scale we find Steen [36] and Grendstad et al [13], who argue that Norway is a special case where a hybrid, dual strategy of co-operation and confrontation is feasible without the NGOs having to compromise. At the opposite end of the scale we find Tvedt [37], who claims that Norwegian civil society development organisations already are co-opted/silenced by the state through generous funding systems.…”

“…In Norway, according to Steen [36], also in the field of development aid "relations between government and NGOs can be characterised as 'near' or 'close'" [36] (p. 157). Similar to that which Grendstad et al find in the environmental field, Steen concludes that "although Norad is based on a well-regulated bureaucratic system, there are no indications that this has created any serious conflict with the NGOs" [36] (p. 157).…”

“…A pertinent question with regard to Brazil, Indonesia, and Tanzania is thus what roles are adopted by NGOs in these countries: how, if at all, is "the Norwegian government/NGO model" (regardless of whether one initially agrees with the position of Steen [36] and Grendstad et al [13], Dryzek et al [11] or Tvedt [37])-embedded in the NICFI funding schemes-"exported" and adapted to these country contexts.…”

“…In this paper, we will operationalise the positions of Steen [36] and Grendstad et al [13], Dryzek et al [11] and Tvedt [37], by placing them on a continuum between two contrasting strategies: co-operation and confrontation. The category of co-operation is divided into two sub-categories, relating to the two roles that NGOs may play: policy design in the initial phase and implementation on the ground.…”