What's Being Done On . . . Effective Networking?

Main List of Network Profiles Survey Results Sample Survey Women's Learning Partnership for Rights, Development, and Peace, Interview with Mahnaz Afkhami, President and CEO. African Democracy Forum, Interview with Hannah Forster, Chair. Graðansko Organizovanje Za Demokratiju (GROZD)/Citizens' Organization for Democracy, Interview with Milan Mrdja, Program Manager. CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation, Interview with staff. Global Organization of Parliamentarians Against Corruption, Interview with John Williams, Founder and Current Chair.

CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation

CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation is an international alliance with members and partners in roughly 100 countries that has worked for over a decade to strengthen citizen action and civil society throughout the world, especially in areas where participatory democracy and citizens' freedom of association are threatened. CIVICUS has a vision of a global community of active, engaged citizens committed to the creation of a more just and equitable world. CIVICUS has its global headquarters in Johannesburg, South Africa. The three main objectives that inform its mission are:

• Civic Existence - to promote the rights of citizens to organize and act collectively towards defined goals for the public good.
• Civic Expression - to increase the effectiveness and improve the governance of civil society organizations, as well as their capacity to set and achieve their individual and collective goals.
• Civic Engagement - to foster interaction between civil society and other institutions to increase the voice of citizens in public life.

For more information, please go to: http://www.civicus.org/

Interview:

We would like to thank CIVICUS staff for answering the following interview questions.

Q: Please briefly explain the history of CIVICUS, and describe its structure.

The origins of CIVICUS trace to 1990/91, and discussions in Europe, Asia, Latin America, and the United States about the possible need for an international network to help strengthen philanthropy and voluntary initiative in various regions of the world, possibly globally. The US-based Council on Foundations and the European Foundation Centre were asked to facilitate these discussions, which ultimately led to formation of an exploratory committee - including people with a range of relevant professional backgrounds from some 20 countries - to "oversee a fact-finding study to determine the level of interest and needs that could be fulfilled, as well as the existing mechanisms to meet them. Based on the results of the fact-finding, the international committee will determine the need (if any) for international networking mechanisms among the global independent sector, both donors and donees; ascertain whether or not existing organizations might be vehicles to meet those needs; and where there are obvious voids, develop strategies for additional avenues to fill them."

The work of the exploratory committee was not easy and at times contentious, but ultimately produced cohesion around the principle that "effective societies exist in direct proportion to their degree of citizen participation and influence." This ultimately gave rise to the CIVICUS vision and mission. Through meetings of the exploratory committee, a subsequent "organizing committee" was formed to look more specifically at operating modalities and funding. CIVICUS was officially founded, and the original Board elected, in Barcelona in May 1993.

Structurally, the original vision for the organization was of a centralized "minimalist secretariat," primarily focused on strengthening and supporting regional efforts to enhance citizen participation and influence. In a world with some 6 billion citizens, this vision is obviously subject to an enormous range of interpretations, and there have been questions over the years as to both the appropriate size and structure of the central secretariat, as well as the best ways in which to support regional efforts (and to some extent whether this has remained the right approach).

CIVICUS currently maintains a headquarters in Johannesburg, South Africa, as well as a minimal office in Washington, DC. The Board of Directors consists of 13 members elected by the membership as well as two "co-opted" members generally selected to provide additional geographical reach. CIVICUS currently has 35 staff from more than 20 countries. The overall structure of the organization has been identified as "fair game" for reflection within CIVICUS' recently launched strategic planning exercise, and is thus subject to change.

Q: Why did CIVICUS begin in Washington, DC, and then move its headquarters to Johannesburg?

For purposes of continuity, economy, and not operating in isolation, the Organizing Committee believed the CIVICUS secretariat should be located in Washington, DC for the first three years. It was the view of the Organizing Committee that at that stage it should be moved out of the US, although the decision about location would need to be made by the Board and voting membership. Given other priorities in the early years and some of the funding realities at that time, a move from the US was not considered seriously until a few years later, when it seemed that operations had been consolidated sufficiently and a track record established.

In eventually considering a move out of the US, three locations were considered: Johannesburg, South Africa, Mexico City, Mexico, and Chennai, China. Johannesburg was ultimately selected as it clearly ranked highest in several key indicators, including language, cost of living, telecommunications, enabling environment for civil society, and the presence of embassies.

Q: CIVICUS has become one of the most important networks of civil society around the globe. How do you measure its success? What are its strongest attributes?

Measuring the success of an entity such as CIVICUS is not at all easy, and has proven to be an enduring challenge. Key elements would include the size and span of the network (not only formal membership but also programmatic partners, subscribers, etc.), political visibility and "weight" in representing civil society perspectives with governments and global institutions and programmatic outputs. On all of these measures we feel CIVICUS has been quite successful, particularly given the extremely challenging mandate and broad range of requests for support, assistance, etc., that CIVICUS receives, and given its limited human resources capacity.

Among CIVICUS' strongest attributes, we would count its proven ability to bring together diverse stakeholders around issues of shared concern, even where there are significant differences on questions of approach or even, at times, substance; its ability to attract talented and dedicated staff from a broad range of countries and professional backgrounds who are consistently committed to pursuing the organization's very challenging work to the best of their abilities; and, its track record of producing highly respectable programmatic outputs and publications with quite limited resources.

Q: What do you think makes CIVICUS have a high membership growth and achieve its objectives?

Some of CIVICUS' membership growth at certain points in its relatively young history has been somewhat artificial, strictly speaking - the result of "pilot" membership-development strategies that proved not to be viable in the long term. To some extent, there have also seemingly been variations in the membership base due to the evolving nature of CIVICUS' collective understanding of its key stakeholder groups. To a significant extent this seems virtually inevitable for an organization that is not only young but also quite unique (and arguably unprecedented) both in mission / mandate and in structure.

For instance, there have been challenges in defining what precisely "membership" means for CIVICUS, not only from a governance perspective but also in relation to organizational activities - i.e., what types and degree of member involvement are most appropriate and serviceable over time. Similarly, it has not always been easy to clearly define or measure "objectives" for such an organization. Overall there clearly seems to be positive trends for both membership (strictly defined) and for the broader network of partners and other stakeholders. It also seems very clear that there is very considerable demand for a global network hub focusing on the promotion, protection and strengthening of civil society and citizen action.

Q: It is often said that a network tends to be successful if it focuses on a specific cause. However, CIVICUS involves over 1,000 participants from over 100 countries. How does it bring those members with such a wide range of backgrounds, experiences, and interests together as a network?

Again, this is a challenge that seems to be inherent in the vision/mission and mandate. CIVICUS communicates on a regular basis with its membership base and other subscribers through its weekly electronic bulletin, e-CIVICUS, as well as less frequently through other periodic or intermittent publications as well as the website. CIVICUS also regularly convenes the CIVICUS World Assembly (annually beginning in 2006), which attracts some 1,000 participants (members and non-members) from around the globe.

Throughout most of its activities - and essentially all activities where another approach is not clearly more appropriate - CIVICUS works to maintain a core focus on generic issues of relevance to civil society actors broadly (i.e., regardless of their area of specialization) while also offering current, proven, or provocative perspectives on a broad range of specific issues.

Q: How does CIVICUS connect its members? For instance, how often do meetings or conferences occur, and how has it made use of information and communications technologies (ICTs)?

In addition to the CIVICUS World Assembly described above, CIVICUS hosts meetings of members where possible in coordination with staff travel. (For instance, if a staff member is traveling to Delhi for a conference, we will often organize a meeting for India-based members as part of the trip.) It should also be said that resource limitations make it extremely difficult to organize these as often as would be ideal.

Members also have access to a "members lounge" section of the CIVICUS website. This has in recent years seen limited use, but with recent additions to the membership department staff, it is hoped that this can be re-invigorated. CIVICUS has also recently added a blog to its website with discussion threads on various current topics and debates (including the current strategic planning process).

Q: What does CIVICUS provide that its participants cannot get on their own?

Perhaps the best brief answer would be efficiencies. We would hesitate to claim that CIVICUS provides things that others cannot get on their own, but we do believe that CIVICUS provides opportunities and information that would not otherwise be easily available, including but not limited to: (1) various high-quality opportunities and fora for networking, information exchange, and shared learning, including most notably the CIVICUS World Assembly; (2) original research on issues of central importance to the functioning of civil society and citizens' movements, mainly through the Civil Society Index; (3) additional weight behind efforts to protect the space for civil society and citizen action through the Civil Society Watch program; (4) a largely neutral, "brokering" role in some high-level discussions among key civil society organizations or between civil society and, e.g., global institutions; (5) a regular, convenient compilation of news items from around the world relevant to civil society through the weekly e-CIVICUS.

Q: Have the objectives of CIVICUS changed over time given new global challenges?

While CIVICUS' objectives have not changed over time, there have been significant shifts in emphasis and relative priority as the result of changes in the external (political) environment. Most notably, the current so-called "war on terror" has had a devastating impact on democratic space generally and civic space specifically; as a result, CIVICUS has had to divert resources into efforts to defend civic space and civil society in a substantial number of countries where repressive NGO legislation has been promulgated in the name of the "war on terror" or where there have been attacks on media freedoms.

On the other hand, while CIVICUS' convening role is still important, there are significantly more civil society convening events that happen regionally, or on a thematic basis, than when CIVICUS hosted its first World Assembly in 1995. This has allowed CIVICUS to fine-tune the objectives behind the CIVICUS World Assembly around the theme, "Acting Together for a Just World."

Q: There are currently at least 8 core programs under CIVICUS. How did they come about? How do they enhance CIVICUS' overall networking efforts?

CIVICUS' core programs evolved mainly as a programmatic framework to address the three pillars of civic existence, civic expression and civic engagement, which CIVICUS takes as one way of framing the contextual and capacity elements that must be in place for vibrant, thriving, effective civic participation in societies. That is, in order for civil society to flourish and citizen action to be effective and meaningful: (1) core rights of association, assembly and expression must be affirmed and respected; (2) there must be an enabling legal, regulatory and resourcing environment; and, (3) there must be meaningful opportunities for engagement with public decision-making processes. Various core programs aim to address different aspects of these requirements.

Other current CIVICUS programs, such as the Millennium Development Goals Program, have come about largely as a result of requests from substantial external constituencies for CIVICUS to take on a specific convening or facilitating role, generally due to CIVICUS' reputation as a "fair, neutral broker."

Q: What are the biggest challenges CIVICUS faces today as a network?

There are four major challenges CIVICUS faces today. The first challenge is clarity of central concepts. Some of the challenges with which CIVICUS must grapple clearly stem from ambiguity within the central term "civil society" and the diversity of opinions as to how to settle this ambiguity. Key areas of uncertainty within this include: (1) whether this is most fundamentally a descriptive or a normative term; (2) whether "civil society" should be understood as a sector (and if so, in relation to what other sectors, as a sub-sector (and if so, of what sector), and, in either case, how it relates to other sectors and/or sub-sectors; and, (3) its boundaries (i.e., what is included/excluded, and on what basis).

The second challenge is identifying and managing expectations. A key challenge lies in knowing how to draw upon the expertise members, partners, board members, etc., to map and prioritize organizational challenges and expectations. As CIVICUS' profile and reputation have grown, it has proven quite challenging to manage the very large and very diverse range of expectations on CIVICUS, ranging from, for instance, highly specific requests for capacity building support to specific grass-roots organizations to high-level expectations on CIVICUS to serve as one of the key (and in some cases the key) advocate on behalf of civil society concerns (including sector-specific concerns) with global institutions.

The third challenge is assessing and managing risk. With CIVICUS' growing visibility and credibility, CIVICUS faces an increasingly complex calculus on questions of risk, particularly relating to its advocacy work on behalf of civil society actors who face serious threats to personal safety, security and liberty. Two questions that are receiving reflection at the Board level as part of the current strategic planning exercise are: (1) What kinds and level of risk are we prepared to take? and, (2) What kinds and level of risk are we prepared to ask others to take?

The fourth and final challenge CIVICUS faces today is capacity constraints. Intimately related to the previous challenge, CIVICUS also faces very real human and financial capacity limitations that hamper the network's ability to deliver on its extremely ambitious and challenging mandate. Although it would be very difficult to quantify accurately, CIVICUS is perhaps resourced to deliver on well under half of the expectations it faces, and delivers on perhaps half. This issue of capacity is increasingly important in light of the question of risk noted above.

Thank you very much for your time and sharing your insights with us.