Governance in Areas of Limited Statehood: The NGOization of Palestine

Abstract

In this article, we examine the shifting roles played by non-state actors in governing areas of limited statehood. In particular, we focus on the emergence of voluntary grassroots organizations in Palestine and describe how regimes of international development aid transformed these organizations into professional nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) that created new forms of colonial control. Based on in-depth interviews with 145 NGO members and key stakeholders and a historical analysis of limited statehood in Palestine, we found that social relations became disembedded from the local context and re-embedded in new relations with international donor organizations resulting in a depoliticized public sphere. NGOization of the economy also resulted in new forms of exclusion and inclusion as well as contestations between a new class of urban middle-class professionals working in NGOs and the older generation of activists who were involved in grassroots organizations. Our findings have implications for business and human rights and governance in areas of limited statehood, in particular how private actors such as NGOs are able to exercise power in the economy.

Governance and Business-Society Relations in Areas of Limited Statehood: An Introduction

“…At the same time, international actors deem traditional and representative actors and political parties, seen as legitimate as the local level, as illegitimate. Arda and Banerjee (2019) show how neoliberal ideology penetrating aid regimes resulted in an "NGOization" of collective goods delivery in Palestine. The pressures toward performance management, professionalization, and marketization characterizing the international aid regime lead NGOs to neglect critical voices and the legitimacy of local communities in governing the delivery of collective goods and services necessary for welfare.…”

“…The "dark sides of statehood" (Börzel & Risse, 2020, pp. 270-272) are revealed most clearly in Belhoste and Nivet's (2020) study of the French MNC Lafarge in Syria during the civil war between 2011 and 2014, and in Arda and Banerjee's (2019) study of the role of NGOs in Palestine. Both regions have suffered from prolonged, explosive, and deep-seated political conflicts and war.…”

“…The study by Arda and Banerjee (2019) problematizes the image of the "sovereign state," including the often taken-for-granted premise about "hoststates" ensuring enforcement of international regimes, such as human rights. The Palestinian Authority is limited in controlling the means of violence in the Palestinian context, as the Israeli state's security apparatus can rescind the Palestinian Authority at any time.…”

“…Their observations relate critically to an important argument in some ALS literatures in which the provision of "governance assistance" is framed as an alternative to neoliberal state building packages (Risse, 2013, p. 82). For Arda and Banerjee (2019), such a claim is embedded in a Eurocentric logic because it tends to neglect a space for resistance in which local communities take part and contribute to the process of institution building.…”

“…This study highlights the critical importance of examining indigenous authorities and industries often overlooked in conventional studies of governance and business-society relations (Sjoberg & Barkin, 2018) and provides a framework for exploring the interplay between such indigenous authorities and central state institutions, including the changing forms of state regulation of, and penetration into, an ALS over time. Finally, Arda and Banerjee (2019) focus on Palestine and analyze the transformation of local voluntary grassroots organizations into professional NGOs, acting like private actors more concerned with pleasing international donors than serving the needs of local communities. This study not only critically discusses the often problematic role of non-state actors, such as NGOs, in an area of limited statehood with its own, conflict-ridden and highly dramatic history, but more generally problematizes the ongoing professionalization, managerialization, and marketization of civil society actors, with implications for how to consider their governance contributions.…”