Search results

This chapter examines the relations between local civil society organizations and the European Union as a way to assess the functioning of multi-level governance in the field of employment policy.

The chapter draws on primary organizational survey data collected in the EU FP7 funded project entitled ‘Youth, Unemployment and Exclusion in Europe’ (Younex, grant agreement n.216111) and for the approach it places itself in the tradition of critical civil society–EU relations research.

For more than two decades, civil society has occupied a prominent position in the rhetoric of European Union multi-level governance. The EU rhetoric conceives of the inclusion of civil society in policy making as a necessary step towards linking the various levels of government (from local to European) as well as the different societal and institutional actors implied by a multilevel governance approach. Moreover, the rhetoric of civil society also serves the goal of tackling the multi-faceted issues of a democratic ‘deficitaire’ EU. This chapter, however, offers a critical appraisal of such a rhetoric by confirming what other studies had unveiled: access to European institutions requires substantial human (‘capital in knowledge’) and economic resources and as such the link existing between the European Union and local civil society organizations is a very thin one, one which is limited to a very few, rich in resources, organizations. The rhetoric of civil society as the connector of levels and types of actors in the multi-level governance approach promoted by the EU should thus be mitigated. The European policy process should be conceived of more pragmatically as an arena where European institutions and member states still act as gate keepers that select and decide which societal interest and voice should have a place within the European agenda. What consequences this has for the overall democratic quality of the European policy process is an issue which should concern us all.

The chapter allows scrutinizing horizontal and vertical dimensions of multi-level governance while expanding knowledge on civil society at both local and European level. Although multi-level governance has become a popular concept it still lacks a consistent empirical assessment, which is something the data discussed here do. Thus, the chapter has implications for research on civil society and citizens’ engagement in public affairs but it is also relevant for scholars working on EU policy-making issues.

Civil society organizations could contribute improving the quality of policies at European level as well as strengthening EU legitimacy to rule. The findings contribute explaining which factors limit civil society access to EU institutions and how these could be overcome.

The chapter corroborates critical views of the EU–civil society relations, the findings suggest that the EU should work with further commitment to offer local civil society organizations and citizens groups real opportunities for their voices and expertise to be heard and considered.

The chapter adopts a critical view of EU–civil society relations challenging the EU multi-level governance rhetoric and discusses the features obstructing civil society actors’ engagement with policy making at the EU level.

The purpose of this research is to seek to understand and explain the non‐governmental organisation (NGO) and its location in civil society in order to provide a basis for future research work. The paper aims to explore and develop understandings of accountability specifically in the context of the NGO and then extend these insights to the accountability of all organisations.

The paper is framed within a theoretical conception of accountability and is primarily literature‐based. In addition secondary data relating to the issues of concern are collated and synthesised.

The research finds that the essence of accountability lies in the relationships between the organisation and the society and/or stakeholder groups of interest. The nature of this relationship allows us to infer much about the necessary formality and the channels of accountability. In turn, this casts a light upon taken‐for‐granted assumptions in the corporate accountability and reminds us that the essence and basis of success of the corporate world lies in its withdrawal from any form of human relationship and the consequential colonisation and oppression of civil society.

The principal implications relate to: our need to improve the analytical incisiveness of our applications of accountability theory; and the possibility of the accounting literature offering more developed insights to the NGO literature. The primary limitations lie in the paper in being: exploratory of a more developed understanding of accountability; and a novel excursion into the world of the NGO and civil society – neither of which feature greatly in the accounting literature.

These lie in the current political struggles between civil society and capital over appropriate forms of accountability. Corporations continue to avoid allowing themselves to be held accountable whilst civil society organisations are often accountable in many different and informal ways. Ill‐considered calls from capital for more oppressive NGO accountability are typically, therefore, hypocritical and inappropriate.

NGOs are introduced in a detailed and accessible way to the accounting literature. The concept of accountability is further developed by examination of relationships and channels in the context of the NGO and, through Rawls' notion of “closeness”, is further enriched.

The United Nations recognizes “civil society” as the “third sector” of society, along with public (governmental) and private sector organizations. The term global “third sector” comprises the worldwide reach of civil society organizations (CSOs). In this chapter, we discuss how technological advancements could influence global civil society. Humans and machines will increasingly interact and collaborate closely in the future. The Industry Revolution (IR) 5.0 brings new challenges, such as artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning, which pose significant opportunities but also important risks to the role of CSOs. Regarding opportunities, it can be highlighted the potential of the IR 5.0 to better work with big data and to increase knowledge in support of the participation of CSOs in global governance and debates, more precisely by increasing their capabilities in knowledge production and practical implementation. One example is the role of AI in making sense of the large volume of data recorded by satellites, drones, and sensors throughout the planet to better inform environmental policies and debates. Risks are also significant, particularly for an incipient and pioneering technology that takes time for the governance systems to understand and regulate. Another example is the misuse of technology and algorithms to generate targeted misinformation and propaganda to influence public opinion and elections. Governments around the world and leading high-tech companies should define a framework that regulates IR 5.0. Global civil society could play an important role in demanding and lobbying the creation of this framework. For this goal, CSOs need to understand how stakeholders see and adapt to technological challenges.

This chapter is organized as follows. The introduction will discuss the key characteristics of the so-called “global civil society,” as well as identify the major challenges emerging from the transition from IR 4.0 to IR 5.0. Then the authors will discuss the impact of these technological advancements on global civil society from the specific perspectives of: (1) how international organizations and governments refer to them; (2) how bilateral and multilateral development partners (BMDP) are challenged by them; and (3) how higher education institutions adapt to them.

In the first section – “IR 5.0 and Human Social Capital: Diverse discourses for the same phenomena?” – we will study how the different discourses penetrated the international public sphere. International organizations, such as the European Union and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, mentioned it officially and entered the discussion, while others, such as the International Labour Organization, seem to skip it and maintain their focus in the IR 4.0. However, the discourse on AI is not restricted to international organizations. Some states, like Japan and China, have already positioned themselves, producing their discourses. More specifically, the authors examine the official discourses in the national and international public arena, and identify the different topics, perspectives, and absences in each of them, understanding the existence of gaps or complementarity between them. In the second section – “How do bilateral and multilateral development partners look into the role of AI and CSO?” – we will examine, likewise, the concept of AI, then address how international organizations and national governments are incorporating or ignoring its consequences, to discuss the main benefits and risks that AI represents for the global civil society. In the third section – “The academic new syllabi of the future: The tandem solutions” – we will study the impact on the way the students’ syllabi in the institutions associated with higher education are designed to accommodate the forthcoming challenges in terms of the construction of human social skills. The last section concludes. Methodologically, this research is supported by inductive comparative qualitative analysis, non-participated observations, and empirical international experience, combined with discourse analysis and interviews.

Development project implementation involving ecological and social externalities is an iterative process due to dynamic challenges emerging from the need to reconcile multiple, and often conflicting, interests of stakeholders. Stakeholder interactions result in learnings for project developers as well as policy makers. This paper aims to track corporate-civil society organizations-state interactions and learnings in case of a port development project in an eco-sensitive and socially challenging region of India.

The authors try to unpack the interactions among various stakeholders in the case of development of Dhamra Port being developed by the Dhamra Port Company Ltd, in the state of Orissa, India.

The authors find that sustainable development policy formulation and implementation is an evolutionary process involving plugging of governance gaps at each successive stage with civil society actors playing an active role.

The study is based on single case of a major port development in India.

The paper highlights that development in emerging economies through large projects is unavoidable. The development-sustainability dilemma cannot be overlooked any further; rather, it needs to be resolved with complete participation of all involved stakeholders.

The paper provides account of long and complex interactions among various players involved in developmental project in an emerging economy. The learnings from the paper will be relevant for policymakers, corporate executives and civil society activists.

Much potential has been ascribed to the emergence and possibilities of a “global civil society,” one that takes the concept of civil society and civic activism and involvement beyond the traditional confines of the nation-state, and moves it instead into a globalized and increasingly politically integrated context. In general, the concept of global civil society has been treated as a positive development, with considerable attention being paid to the emancipatory and participatory opportunities that it presents. This essay explores the other side of the equation, i.e., the marginalization of national and European-level civil society and these participatory and emancipatory benefits in Central and Eastern Europe during a process of globalization and EU integration. Drawing from the emerging literatures on global civil society, this paper compares the normative and empirical emphases of that literature with the experiences and opinions of Central and Eastern European environmental NGOs. It examines how Central and Eastern European environmental movements have moved toward becoming more interconnected both in Europe and worldwide, yet are marginalized in favor of a style of environmental policy-making emerging from Brussels that emphasizes technocracy, scientific over public knowledge, and a top-down approach to the policy-making process. As a result, many of the democratic elements of civil society found at the national level have became neglected at the European and the global levels, replacing democratic politics (at least in the form of social movements) with the emergence of supranational technocratic institutions.

In this chapter, the authors argue that the performance and dynamic of civil society in Brazil has been fundamentally guided by local institutions, but that the issues, approaches and political decisions that gained publicity, and thus helped to strengthen civil society mobilization, have been strongly influenced by the agendas of the so-called “global civil society.” It would be wrong to classify them as foreign issues or declassify them based on the argument that they consider largely external interests or the reality of developed countries. The authors will attempt to show how the issues on the civil society agenda that are supported in arenas of public debate in Brazil are filtered by local institutions and are only considered relevant if they mirror the reality of the country and correspond to the aspirations, demands and challenges of certain segments of society.

Civil society-based institutions have had a significant historical impact in Europe on the one hand in formation of modern notions of the nation and on the creation of national identity and on the other hand in definition of citizenship rights and understanding of the democratic culture. If support for citizenship rights through civil society organizations – at the workplace and in public institutions – is weakly articulated, it creates a fragile democratic culture and, consequently, less comprehensive social protection. The possibility of civil society becoming a locus for democratic learning, political reflexivity and governance depends, firstly, on its specific institutional mechanisms and, secondly, on the broader institutional configuration, which civil society forms part of.

Purpose – This chapter on global civil society provides a definition of global civil society, and also provides a historical and theoretical overview of social movements. This chapter also presents a taxonomy of non-state actors and demonstrates at the theoretical level that actions and initiatives by non-state actors since the 1990s’ globalisation. In this chapter, the concept of civil society is presented as a form of globalisation from below, and its role in the participatory governance of societal processes implies forms of soft regulation and moral authority which transcend the role of states as enforcers.Design/methodology/approach – This chapter is based on an extensive literature review.Findings – Actions and initiatives by non-state actors in the current age of globalisation have been increasing. This increase has become more evident with the more stringent traceability of processes associated with the development of information and communication technologies (ICT), and private forms of organisation networking at the local and transnational level. This has re-defined geographical boundaries, creating proximity between individuals which goes beyond physical constraints, and it has extended definitions of communities to multiple levels of identification and convergence, but also divergence.The concept of civil society and its role in the participatory governance of societal processes implies forms of soft regulation and moral authority which transcend the role of states as enforcers. The idea of civil society opens a space for non-traditional actors to actively participate and engage in the political processes of change in society, for the betterment of marginalised groups, the environment or social justice in general. The diversity of roles that single individuals have in society allows them to participate from different angles.Although the concept of civil society has limitations due to its breadth, manifestations of a global civil society can be understood as forms of globalisation that occur outside traditional institutional settings.Originality/value of chapter – This chapter provides a general overview on civil society, and its relevance for analysing contexts of international business, and MNES's relations with community and non-governmental groups. Within this chapter, it is also conceptually describe how multinationals as non-state actors have increasingly playing a role in providing welfare.