The views, insights and opinions expressed below are of the author(s) and are not Accountable Now’s. We are proud to amplify a range of diverse voices that help shape, challenge and push our work as well as the sector as a whole to “do good better.”
Civil society organizations and civic ecosystems around the world are navigating significant changes and crises at the moment. Some of these reflect the broader ‘polycrisis’ of complex and systemic challenges we are experiencing at global, national and local levels, including:
Other challenges are specific to CSOs and civil society ecosystems themselves (although these impact diverse civic actors differently), including a deepening funding crisis, declining levels of trust in civic actors and questions of credibility, and ongoing calls for structural power shifts in the sector towards local and grassroots civic actors.
The current moment of crisis does demand acknowledgement that the status quo was not working for many organizations and communities, nor for addressing many global and local challenges. Thus, while moments of significant challenge often incentivize narrowing our perspective, including on organizational survival, it should also be a moment when the recognition of an untenable status quo gives us a collective opportunity to consider other possible pathways forward. This insight note seeks to unpack some elements of the crisis for global civil society and point to some potential positive directions.
As noted, the political challenges to civil society in most contexts in the world are deepening. However, in most contexts around the world, there is a continued level of acknowledgement of the role and value of a diverse ecosystem of civic and not-for-profit organizations in advancing societal objectives, whether those be service delivery needs of vulnerable populations or broader representation of and advocacy for groups and causes. Nevertheless, there is also a trend of declining trust and credibility in civic actors, along with public institutions more generally, meaning that social support cannot be assumed to hold going forward. In some contexts, questions about legitimacy are the result of intentional framing by actors opposed to the role of civil society, particularly governments, corporations or other non-state actors seeking to weaken competing influence and accountability.
There are some critiques that reflect the nature and dynamics of the civil society sector itself, particularly professional NGOs, including:
However, many of these elements are the result of civil society funding dynamics and the upwards accountability it often necessitates, which significantly shapes organizational systems and practices in ways that are not necessarily conducive to more inclusive, collaborative, and impactful civil society ecosystems.
Accountable Now was founded by CSOs who wanted to voluntarily undertake practices to strengthen their broader accountabilities — or Dynamic Accountability — to their diverse stakeholders, particularly the communities and populations they work with, and ensure a clear focus on their contribution and impacts towards their goals. Over time, the AN network of organizations has refined and strengthened Dynamic Accountability standards, frameworks and practices, like the 12 Accountability Commitments. These reflect a recognition of both the need and the opportunity that shifting, broadening and deepening accountability can play in strengthening the inclusiveness, effectiveness and sustainability of civic organizations, ecosystems and impacts.
At its core, Dynamic Accountability seeks to create more horizontal and equitable relationships between CSOs and the people, communities and other stakeholders they work with that enables mutual trust, accountability and collaboration.
Many champions of Dynamic Accountability across the AN network have a strong intrinsic motivation grounded in the broader values that brought them to the civil society sector. However, in the context of the growing financial crises that many CSOs are facing, they have limited resources to ‘go above and beyond’ what are often significant upward accountability requirements. Furthermore, for many organizations who are seeking to secure diminishing resources to continue their missions and to survive, efforts towards Dynamic Accountability are likely to be perceived as secondary considerations.
Broad calls to shift resources and power away from INGOs towards southern-based organizations, particularly those at the grassroots, are welcome but not necessarily straightforward. Although there are shared values across many northern and southern civic actors and funders, there are also differences and divisions that shouldn’t be minimized. Many southern-based organizations that would likely benefit from a shift in resources are elite, professional NGOs that face similar calls to share power from grassroots organizations and social movements, who themselves may have internal structures and processes that could be more inclusive, democratic and accountable.
Thus, shifting resources and power in global civil society needs to be about strengthening a diverse, representative and collaborative ecosystem of civic actors and their democratic and accountable horizontal and internal practices, not just replicating inequalities along different geographic and organizational fault lines. This is a priority if civil society is to play a more relevant and effective role in addressing the many challenges faced by countries and communities around the world, despite political and funding challenges.
Global civil society is at an inflection point. The acute crisis that many organizations are experiencing due to the sudden withdrawal of US foreign assistance has compounded the growing challenges faced by civil society over the past decade in terms of civic space, credibility, collaboration and impact on global and local challenges.
As discussed above, the status quo was not working for many organizations and communities, a fact that the current crisis should not serve to minimize. While moments of crisis for many civic organizations and ecosystems may tend to incentivize narrowing our perspective, including organizational survival, it should also be a moment when the acknowledgment of an untenable status quo gives us a collective opportunity to consider other possible pathways forward.
Furthermore, there have been numerous positive developments over the past decades that seek to address the challenges faced across civil society, and strengthen the inclusiveness and effectiveness of the sector going forward. This growing body of examples of ‘positive deviation’ from dominant practices described above can demonstrate different ways of supporting, connecting, and engaging in collective and collaborative relationships, actions, learning and impacts.
What are the cases where relationships, leadership, funding dynamics, and organizational practices enable diverse, representative and balanced civic ecosystems to work more collaboratively, democratically, effectively and sustainably towards broader systemic shifts that address the root causes of societal challenges, not just visible symptoms?
What kinds of systems, practices, and relationships enable dynamic, democratic and equitable accountability across these diverse organizations from funders to grassroots movements?
We need to rethink how we understand, engage and diverse civic actors to strengthen the ecosystems needed for more systemic change to confront the multiple crises we face at global, national and local levels. Dynamic Accountability can be a central element of a shift in systems, practices and relationships that strengthen civil society ecosystems for systemic change. Principally, Dynamic Accountability can enable diverse civic actors (e.g. INGOs, local professional CSOs, grassroots actors) to collaborate more effectively and leverage their potential complementarities in terms of roles, capacities, and resources. However, as discussed above, most existing funding approaches and practices have contributed to fragmented civil society organizations and efforts dominated by upward accountability to donors. Yet there are calls for shifting funding dynamics in ways that place more emphasis on collaborative, locally-led and systems change approaches. Increased funding for inclusive, collaborative and effective civil society ecosystems is needed now more than ever, particularly given the political challenges of shrinking civic space.
Moreover, there is significant promise in bringing together Dynamic Accountability practices in civil society with systems thinking and practice. Systems thinking and tools help us understand complex challenges and the systemic factors and root causes that hold these in place, informing change pathways necessary to shift the system in a more positive direction. This inherently calls for considering the role and contributions of multiple actors across the system, including the need for greater alignment and complementarity in the civil society ecosystem that Dynamic Accountability practices can enable.
One example that I was involved in that reflects these ideas is the SPARK program undertaken by the International Budget Partnership. SPARK sought to engage and support coalitions with meaningful leadership by membership-based organizations representing marginalized groups, alongside other CSOs and government allies, enabled by information sharing, open dialogue, and mutual accountability. The program supported systemic analysis of why public resources and services systems were ‘stuck’, particularly understanding the political dynamics involved. This was complemented by systems-aware strategy, impact and learning practices to inform and adapt systems change approaches. Collective approaches like SPARK that embed Dynamic Accountability and systems change practices and strategies may be a promising example to inform other efforts to support more horizontal, collaborative and impactful efforts among coherent civic ecosystems addressing structural challenges in politically challenging contexts.
In conclusion, organizations and communities around the world are becoming painfully aware of the crisis that is deepening in the civil society sector, as well as more broadly. Most of the outcomes will be negative for organizations, people and the planet. However, the silver lining may be the opportunity to examine, discuss, and take collective action on what needs to shift in the civil society ecosystem to enable more inclusive, democratic, accountable and effective civic engagement that can make an even more meaningful contribution to the many challenges that we are facing at global, national and local levels.
The author would like to thank Angela Crack, Marlen Mondaca, Velina Petrova and Megan Colnar for their insightful comments on an earlier draft. Any errors or omissions are the authors alone.
Accountable Now is committed to promoting a more just, equitable & accountable world. Do you have a story to share that demonstrates how organizations can strengthen their Dynamic Accountability practices?