The Impact of Governmental Policy on the Effective Operation of CSOs: A French Case Study

Abstract

Worldwide, civil society organizations (CSOs) are an integral component in the complex network that comprises the public sphere improving the welfare of our communities. In the second half of the twentieth century French CSOs' contributions to their citizens' welfare have become increasingly valued. Nevertheless, radical changes to employment policies during the Sarkozy regime (2007)(2008)(2009)(2010)(2011)(2012) impacted social services to unemployed migrants. In addition, central government constrained local governments' ability to fund social services, pushing a shift from a culture of "granting subsidies" to one based on "public procurement contracting" (Langlais 2008). These environmental changes are likely to transform CSO-government relationships.This research asks two questions: what is the impact of such radical changes and what possible responses can organizations make, if they are to survive? To answer these, we utilize a case study of a French CSO (Association), which is highly dependent on public funding to deliver its urban-based migrant programs. We utilize the lens of resource dependency, focusing on the interrelationships and interactions that impact CSOs' legitimacy and support. Effects of the reforms include a change from relatively cooperative relationships with government to adversarial exchanges. Moreover, this CSO's activities are apprehended by public funders as short-term single projects considered in isolation from one another so that its overall outcomes are not quantitatively measured. As a result, the CSO's overarching and long-term social and economic contribution to the territory's public sphere is in jeopardy.

Dominant stakeholders, activity and accountability discharge in the CSO sector

“…Resource dependency and CSOs’ need for financial sustainability drive an upwards stakeholder bias. Therefore, despite possessing legitimacy, downwards stakeholders without power or urgency may be ignored by CSOs’ accountability processes (Connolly et al., ; Cordery & Baskerville, ; Cordery et al., ; Dixon et al., ; Mitchell et al., ; Mourey, Eynaud, & Cordery, ; Najam, ).…”

The multiplicity of logics, trust, and interdependence in donor‐imposed reporting practices in the nonprofit sector

“…As resource dependence makes organizations vulnerable to resource flows and institutional pressures (Khieng & Dahles, 2015; Verbruggen, Christiaens, & Milis, 2011), NGOs aim to diversify their funding sources in order to reduce the risk of financial vulnerability (Mourey et al., 2013; Suárez & Hwang, 2013). Certain types of NGOs, such as empowering and advocacy organizations, have to rely extensively on grants from a narrow range of institutional donors (Cordery & Sim, 2018; O'Dwyer & Unerman, 2008), which determines a higher level of financial vulnerability (Saidel, 1991) and greater financial accountability demands (Goncharenko, 2019).…”

“…Resource dependence and vulnerability together with legitimacy challenges can be named as some of the main drivers of NGO accountability (Goddard & Assad, 2006; Mourey, Eynaud, & Cordery, 2013; Suárez & Hwang, 2013). The position of institutional donors as dominant stakeholders (Cordery & Sim, 2018) empowers them to establish targets and demand accounting information beyond official disclosures (Assad & Goddard, 2010; Reheul, Van Caneghem, & Verbruggen, 2014) and, therefore, to shape the accounting and accountability practices of the NGOs they support (Cordery, Crawford, Breen, & Morgan, 2019; O'Dwyer & Unerman, 2007).…”

Future scenarios for the charity sector in 2045

“…Recent reports paint a bleak future for charities at the local level (Alcock et al, 2013;Mourey et al, 2013;National Coalition for Independent Action, 2015), with generosity in decline and volunteers in short supply (Sanders et al, 2008). Traditional means of philanthropy (such as regular volunteering, grants and street appeals) are being abandoned and, while new forms of giving are emerging, donors and recipients report barriers to finding productive and effective models of giving (Eikenberry & Kluver, 2004;Salamon, 2014).…”

“…Further, fundraising scandals are frequently reported, suggesting regulation is not synchronized with new methods (Morgan, 2015), and controversies arise over, for example, what Kapoor (2013) calls 'celebrity humanitarianism'. Charities' preoccupation is with the short-term future, dependent on current political policies and giving models (Alcock et al, 2013;Mourey et al, 2013; National Coalition for Independent Action, 2015). There are also concerns that increased professionalization of the charity sector has led to higher staff perquisites, diminishing the public benefits available (Morgan, 2015).…”