[WSIS CS-Plenary] To engage or not to engage, a questionnaire for NGO's

[mclauglm at po.muohio.edu]

See also this piece from today's Los Angeles Times:

FOCUS: Activists Move From the Streets to the Inner Sanctum
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/L022005Y.shtml


Lisa McLaughlin



>Perhaps right now is a good time to reflect on, and cast an opinion about,
>civil society engagement with intergovernmental institutions....CIVICUS
>would like your opinion.
>
>Tracey Naughton
>
>  Release Date: 14 February, 2005
>>
>>  By Kumi Naidoo, CIVICUS Secretary General and Chief Executive Officer
>>
>>  A matter that has raised much debate recently is whether civil society
>>  organisations should engage with local, national and global
>>  intergovernmental institutions such as the World Bank or the United
>Nations.
>>
>>
>>  What really is engagement? Engagement can take various forms. These can
>>  include: submitting petitions, letters of appeal or correspondence which
>>  puts forward a case that runs counter to the policies and actions of such
>>  institutions; participating in meetings with these institutions when they
>>  seek to 'consult' with civil society organisations; participating at the
>>  micro level in a joint venture around project delivery; participating in
>>  policy shaping processes such as the Extractive Industries Review
>undertaken
>>  last year by the World Bank; or simply participating in events of governing
>>  institutions whether it be the annual meetings of the World Bank and the
>IMF
>>  or a conference of a department or ministry of a national government.
>>
>>  Allow me to use the World Bank as an example of a powerful global
>>  institution, which is owned by member governments, albeit unevenly, with
>>  rich countries dominating control. Civil society organisations have long
>>  argued for a voice around the policies and actions of the World Bank.
>>
>>  The old slogan: "Think Globally Act Locally" does not work on its own
>>  anymore, since real power, particular around fundamental economic issues
>>  that affect the lives of ordinary people all over the planet, is held at
>the
>>  global level. For civil society organisations from developing countries to
>>  act solely locally means removing themselves from where, increasingly, real
>>  power resides.
>>
>>  Civil society, as also reflected in CIVICUS membership, has three different
>>  approaches to engagement with an institution such as the World Bank. A
>>  growing number have adopted a Principle Non-Engagement Position. Those that
>>  hold this view believe that global institutions like the World Bank are
>>  stuck in the geopolitics of 1945 when many of these institutions came to
>>  life.
>>
>>  Given that the World Bank is governed by a principle of "one dollar one
>>  vote" means that rich country governments, often without the express
>>  approval of their citizens, exercise a disproportionate degree of influence
>>  around the policy and practices of the institution. They argue that
>>  institutions such as the World Bank are part of the problem rather than
>part
>>  of the solution and engagement is a waste of time, energy and resources.
>>
>>  A second approach might be called a Selective Engagement Position, where
>>  civil society organisations make a choice on which of the opportunities of
>>  engagement that present themselves provide the possibility of pushing for
>>  meaningful change in policies or practices. Each opportunity is determined
>>  by a cost-benefit analysis of what might be achieved if civil society
>>  engages with the relevant part of an institution such as the World Bank.
>>
>>  A third approach might be called a Comprehensive Engagement Approach, which
>>  is premised on the reality that, notwithstanding the shortcomings of
>>  institutions such as the World Bank, it is important for civil society's
>>  perspectives, views and participation to be pushed for and secured. This is
>>  to control the damage of any harmful policies and practices of the World
>>  Bank or to secure more meaningful development outcomes in projects that
>have
>>  promise and potential.
>>
>>  Clearly, civil society organisations have to make a controversial and
>  > complex set of strategic and tactical choices. Our challenge right now
>is to
>>  agree to disagree on the different tactical approaches our colleagues
>within
>>  civil society might adopt. While it is critical that we respect those
>>  organisations that adopt, for example, a Principle Non-Engagement Position,
>>  it is equally important that those that adopt alternative strategies are
>not
>>  dismissed as "collaborators" when their overall work is clearly in support
>>  of social, economic, political and civic justice.
>>
>>  CIVICUS member, as well as several other partners in civil society, have
>>  debated these issues rigorously over the last few years, given that CIVICUS
>>  is leading an initiative to develop a set of recommendations on how the
>>  World Bank could transform its engagement with civil society.
>>
>>  This transformation is aimed at having greater accountability for previous
>>  engagements, as well as to ensure that such engagements are transparent,
>>  legitimate and subject to democratic accountability.
>>
>>  This work will come to a climax with the delivery of a set of
>>  recommendations which has received several inputs ranging from those who
>are
>>  highly critical of any form of engagement to those, particularly from
>>  developing countries, who have not had the opportunity to engage in the
>>  past.
>>
>>  Given that many of our global public institutions are located in the
>>  developed world, it is not surprising that previous engagements with the
>>  World Bank, for example, have had a disproportionate level of participation
>>  by our colleagues in developed countries. Apart from a conscious political
>>  decision of non-engagement, as was the case with the South African NGO
>>  Coalition, where I previously served as Executive Director, the factors
>that
>>  have prevented southern engagement include location, financial resources,
>>  access to information and the fact that the majority of civil society
>>  organisations in the South are currently heavily engaged in project
>>  delivery, rather than policy advocacy. Thankfully, many civil society
>>  organisations in developing countries are finding that putting all their
>>  eggs in a project delivery basket with tackling policy deficits, does not
>>  get us very far.
>>
>>  In the light of the above, I would like to appeal to you, irrespective of
>>  which strategic position you hold with regard to engagement with the World
>>  Bank, to share your views with us via a survey that we are currently
>>  undertaking. The survey can be accessed on-line at at
>>  <http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=70812822283> World Bank-Civil Society
>>  engagement. The deadline has been extended to 9 March 2005.
>>
>>  Please feel free to encourage your colleagues, members and partners to fill
>>  in the survey since we are keen to hear the perspectives of as many civil
>>  society organisations around the world. I thank you in advance for taking
>>  time to consider this and wish you well in the important work that you are
>>  doing to work for a more just world.
>>
>>  Warmest regards,
>>
>>  Kumi Naidoo
>>
>>  Please send your comments and suggestions to e-mail
>>  <mailto:kumi at civicus.org> kumi at civicus.org
>>
>
>------ End of Forwarded Message
>
>
>--
>Nyaka - Communication & Development
>Tracey Naughton
>Consultant
>201 Somerset Hall
>239 Oxford Road
>Illovo  2196
>South Africa
>
>Phone/fax:    +27 (0) 11 880 5030
>cell:                 +27 (0) 82 821 1771
>Email:              tracey at traceynaughton.com
>_______________________________________________
>Plenary mailing list
>Plenary at wsis-cs.org
>http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary