Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Civil Society Involvement in International Development Cooperation: In Search for Data

  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Participatory decision making seems to be the new development paradigm in international cooperation. It is still a long way, however, to achieve the objectives that are formulated by the international development actors. Non-state actors are only limitedly involved in the policy decision-making. In this paper, we argue that when these actors take their commitment towards civil society organisations serious, more efforts can be made to improve the available data and indicators on these actors’ policy involvement. We discuss the most important existing databases on civil society’s policy participation and find that only limited data is available. This means that there exist opportunities to: first, extend and refine the existing data and indicators on the policy involvement of these actors; and second, include these data and indicators in the assessment exercises of international development organisations. In addition, we observe a difference, between the available data on the traditional social partners and the new civil society organisations. Therefore, we argue that more research, data collection and the elaboration of indices, on the various policy involvement mechanisms of new civil society organisations would be a welcome contribution to the field. Furthermore the opportunity exists to examine the relation with other governance variables, such as accountability, transparency and rule of law.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. World Bank (2005).

  2. European Community, its Member States, the Andean Community and its Member Countries (2003).

  3. Idem.

  4. Andean Labour Advisory Council, Andean Employers’ Advisory Council, and the European Economic and Social Committee (2005).

  5. European Community, its Member States, and the United Mexican States (2000).

  6. Idem.

  7. See Lister and Carbone (2006).

  8. United States Government (2000).

  9. UN (2004).

  10. Annan (1999).

  11. UN (2007).

  12. OECD (2005).

  13. European Community, its Member States, and the Members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific group of States (2000).

  14. Hurt (2006).

  15. Heinrich (2005).

  16. The concept of traditional social partners refers to trade unions and employers’ organisations.

  17. See Caniglia and Carmin (2005), Castells (2004), Meyer (2004), Kriesi et al. (1995).

  18. OECD (2005).

  19. Narayan (2002).

  20. USAID (2001).

  21. OECD (2005).

  22. Council of the European Union (2005).

  23. Price Waterhouse Coopers (2007).

  24. World Bank (2003).

  25. Hayes (2005).

  26. Idem.

  27. Coudouel et al. (2006).

  28. World Bank (2005).

  29. Ishikawa and Lawrence (2005).

  30. Kucera (2001, 2002, 2004), Kucera and Sarna (2004).

  31. ICFTU (1999). The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) merged in November 2006 with the World Confederation of Labour (WCL) to form the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC). http://www.ituc-csi.org/spip.php?rubrique1&lang=en.

  32. United States Department of State (1999).

  33. Neumayer and Soysa (2006).

  34. ILO (1999b).

  35. OECD (2000). Additionally eight more countries are covered that did not have ratifications for either convention in effect during the period from 1989 to 1999. These are Chile, China, India, Iran, Thailand, Korea, New Zealand and the United States.

  36. More information on the rating formula can be found in OECD (2000, pp. 85–87, Annex 1).

  37. OECD (1996, 2000, pp. 23–26, 99), ICFTU (1999), ILO (1998, 1998–9, 1999a, b, c), United States Department of State (1994, 1999).

  38. OECD (2000, pp. 27–28).

  39. Bonnet et al. (2003).

  40. Chataignier (2005).

  41. ILO (2004).

  42. Visser (2002).

  43. Rama and Artecona (2002). See Chataignier (2005) for other less extensive databases on trade unions.

  44. Idem.

  45. ILO (1997).

  46. OECD (2004). See Chataignier (2005) for other less extensive datasets on collective bargaining.

  47. Chataignier (2005).

  48. Cornelius (2003).

  49. For some countries the data refer to 1997 and 1998.

  50. Ishikawa and Lawrence (2005).

  51. Cingranelli and Richards (2004).

  52. See Cuyvers and Van Den Bulcke (2005), Kucera and Sarna (2004), Flanagan (2003), Maskus (2003). In Krumm et al. (2001); Busse (2001), Cooke and Noble (1998), Rodrik (1996), In Lawrence et al.

  53. Kucera and Sarna (2004), Flanagan (2003), Belser (2001), Busse (2001).

  54. Cuyvers and Van Den Bulcke (2005).

  55. See Howard (2005).

  56. Kaufmann et al. ( 2006, 2007).

  57. See Economist Intelligence Unit and Global Insight Business Conditions and Risk Indicators in Kaufmann et al. (2007).

  58. Not for all the indicators, data are available since 1945. See Davenport (2003).

  59. They distinguish among 23 types of government repression: few group members arrested, many group members arrested, leaders arrested, disappeared or detained, show trials of group members or leaders, torture used to intimidate or interrogate, members executed by authorities, leaders executed by authorities, reprisal killings by civilians, systematic killings by paramilitaries, property confiscated or destroyed, restrictions on movement, forced resettlement, interdiction of food supplies, ethnic cleansing, systematic domestic spying, states of emergency, saturation of police or military, limited use of force against protesters, unrestrained force used against protesters, military campaigns against armed rebels, military targets and destroys rebel areas, military massacres of suspected rebel supporters and other government repression.

  60. Davenport (2003).

  61. Heinrich (2005, 2007), Civicus (2004).

  62. Not for all countries data is available since 1800. See Marshall and Jaggers (2002).

  63. Freedom House (2006).

  64. USAID (2006).

  65. Which lies not immediately in the line of the purposes of this paper, but worth to mention, is the policy participation of civil society organisations, not at the national level, but at the level of international organisations, such as the World Trade Organisation (WTO) or the World Bank. The LSE Global Civil Society 2005/2006 dataset draws a broad picture of global civil society. In relation to the policy participation of the organised civil society, it offers data on: the participation per country of national NGOs in the WTO ministerial meetings, the Council of Europe and the World Bank agencies as well as the participation per country of International NGOs (INGO) in the global INGO network Union of International Associations (UIA). It also provides insight into the financial support governments give to NGOs. Data refer to the year 2004 or the closest year possible. It is important to mention, however, that some indicators are only available for a very restricted number of countries (for instance only Europe or excluding developing countries). See Anheier et al. (2005).

  66. Kaufmann et al. (2007), Global Integrity (2006).

  67. Kaufmann et al. (2007), International Budget Program (2006).

  68. Howard (2003).

  69. Thindwa et al. (2003).

  70. Hyden et al. (2004).

  71. Salomon et al. (2003, 2004).

  72. International Social Survey Programme (2006).

  73. Inglehart (2006).

References

  • Andean Labour Advisory Council, Andean Employers’ Advisory Council, and the European Economic and Social Committee. (2005). Draft Memorandum of Understanding on Interinstitutional Cooperation between the Labour Advisory Council and the Employers’ Advisory council of the Andean Community of Nations and the European Economic and Social Committee. Lima.

  • Anheier, H., Kaldor, M., & Glasius, M. (2005). Global Civil Society 2005/2006. London: Sage Publications Ltd. http://www.lse.ac.uk/Depts/global/yearbook05.htm#introduction.

  • Annan, K. (1999). Speech at the Annual Meeting of the World Economic Forum. http://www.un.org/issues/civilsociety/.

  • Belser, P. (2001). Four essays on trade and labour standards. PhD dissertation. Sussex: University of Sussex.

  • Bonnet, F., Figueiredo, B., & Standing, G. (2003). A family of decent work indexes. International Labour Review, 142(2), 213–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busse, M. (2001). Do labour standards affect comparative advantage? Evidence for labour-intensive goods. Centre for International Economic Studies Discussion Paper 0142. Adelaide: Adelaide University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caniglia, B. S., & Carmin, J. (2005). Scholarship on social movement organizations: Classic views and emerging trends. Mobilization: An International Journal, 10(2), 201–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castells, M. (2004). The network society: A cross-cultural perspective. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chataignier, A. (2005). Statistical indicators relating to social dialogue: A compilation of multiple country databases. Working paper 56. Geneva: International Labour Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cingranelli, D., & Richards, D. (2004). The Cingranelli-Richards (CIRI) Human Rights Database Coder Manual. http://ciri.binghamton.edu/index.asp.

  • Civicus. (2004). Assessing and strengthening civil society worldwide. A project description of the civicus civil society index: A participatory needs assessment & action-planning tool for civil society. Civicus Civil Society Index Paper Series, 2(1). www.civicus.org.

  • Cooke, W., & Noble, D. (1998). Industrial relations systems and US foreign direct investment abroad. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 36(4), 581–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornelius, P. (2003). The Global Competitiveness Report 2002–2003. World Economic Forum. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coudouel, A., Dani, A. A., & Paternostro, S. (2006). Poverty and social impact analysis of reforms. Lessons and examples from implementation. Washington: World Bank.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Council of the European Union. (2005). Joint Statement by the Council and the representatives of the Governments of the member states meeting within the Council, the European Parliament and the Commission. The European Consensus on Development. Brussels. http://www.eusa.org.za/PDFdownload/Development/Consensus_on_Development_November_2005.pdf.

  • Cuyvers, L., & Van Den Bulcke, D. (2005). The quantification of respect for selected core labour standards: towards a social development index? Working Paper 71. Geneva: International Labour Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, C. (2003). Minorities at risk. Dataset users manual 030703. Maryland: University of Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Community, its Member States, the Andean Community and its Member Countries. (2003). Political Dialogue and Cooperation Agreement between the european community and its member states of the one part, and the Andean Community and its Member Countries (Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, Colombia and Venezuela) of the other part. Lima, Brussels.

  • European Community, its Member States, and the United Mexican States. (2000). Economic partnership, political coordination and cooperation agreement between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the United Mexican States, of the other part. Brussels.

  • European Community, its Member States, and the Members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific group of States. (2000). Partnership agreement between the members if the African, Caribbean and Pacific group of States on the one part, and the European Community and its member states, on the other part. Brussels.

  • Flanagan, R. (2003). Labour standards and international competitive advantage. In International labor standards: Globalization, trade and public policy. California: Stanford University Press.

  • Freedom House. (2006). Civil liberties and political rights. www.freedomhouse.org.

  • Global Integrity. (2006). http://www.globalintegrity.org/default.aspx?act=3.

  • Hayes, L. (2005). Open on impact? Slow progress in World Bank and IMF poverty analysis. European Network on Debt and Development, Christian Aid, Save the Children Fund UK and Trocaire.

  • Heinrich, V. F. (2005). Studying Civil Society across the world: Exploring the thorny issues of conceptualization and measurement. Journal of Civil Society, 1(3), 211–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heinrich, V. F. (2007). Civicus Global Survey of The State Of Civil Society. Volume 1: Country Profiles. Bloomfield: Kumarian Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard, M. M. (2003). The weakness of civil society in post-Communist Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard, M. M. (2005). Conceptual and methodological suggestions for improving cross-national measures of civil society: Commentary on Heinrich. Journal of Civil Society, 1(3), 229–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurt, S. (2006). Civil society and European Union Development Policy. In M. Lister & M. Carbone (Eds.), New pathways in international development. Gender and civil society in EU policy. Hampshire: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyden, G., Court, J., & Mease, K. (2004). Making sense of governance: Empirical evidence from 16 developing countries. Boulder: Lynne Riener Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • ICFTU. (1999). Annual Survey of Violations of Trade Union Rights, various issues. www.icftu.org.

  • ILO. (1997). World Labour Report 1997/98. Geneva: International Labour Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • ILO. (1998). Labour and social issues relating to export processing zones. Geneva: International Labour Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • ILO. (1998–9). Country Studies on the Social Impact of Globalisation. Task Force on Country Studies on Globalisation. Geneva: International Labour Office.

  • ILO. (1999a). Ratification and promotion of fundamental ILO Conventions. Geneva: International Labour Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • ILO. (1999b). Report of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations: General report and observations concerning particular countries, Report III (part 1A). Geneva: International Labour Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • ILO. (1999c). ILOLEX: The ILO’s database on International Labour Standards. Geneva: International Labour Office. http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/.

  • ILO. (2004). Statistics of Trade Union Membership. Geneva: International Labour Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inglehart, R. (2006). World Values Survey. http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/.

  • International Budget Program. (2006). http://www.internationalbudget.org/openbudgets/index.htm.

  • International Social Survey Programme. (2006). http://www.issp.org/.

  • Ishikawa, J., & Lawrence, S. (2005). Social dialogue indicators. Trade union membership and collective bargaining coverage: Statistical concepts, methods and findings. Geneva: International Labour Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Mastruzzi, M. (2006). Governance Matters V: Governance Indicators for 1996–2005. Washington: World Bank. www.worldbank.org/wbi/governance/govmatters5.

  • Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Mastruzzi, M. (2007). Governance Matters VI: Aggregate and Individual Governance Indicators 1996–2006. Washington: World Bank. http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi2007/.

  • Kriesi, H., Koopmans, R., Duyvendak, J. W., & Giugni, M. (1995). New social movements in Western Europe: A comparative analysis. In Social movements, protest, and contention (Vol. 5). Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.

  • Kucera, D. (2001). The effects of core workers rights on labour costs and foreign direct investment: Evaluating the “conventional wisdom”. Geneva: International Labour Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kucera, D. (2002). Core labour standards and foreign direct investment. International Labour Review, 141, 1–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kucera, D. (2004). Measuring trade union rights: A country-level indicator constructed from coding violations recorded in textual sources. Geneva: International Labour Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kucera, D., & Sarna, R. (2004). How do trade union rights affect trade competitiveness? Working Paper 39. Geneva: International Labour Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lister, M., & Carbone, M. (2006). New pathways in international development. Gender and Civil Society in EU Policy. Hampshire: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, M. G., & Jaggers, K. (2002). Polity IV Project: Dataset Users’ Manual. Maryland: University of Maryland. http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/polity/.

  • Maskus, K. (2003). Trade and competitiveness aspects of environmental and labor standards in East Asia. In K. Krumm & H. Kharas (Eds.), East Asia integrates: A Trade Policy Agenda for shared growth. Washington: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, D. S. (2004). Protest and political opportunities. Annual Review of Sociology, 30, 125–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narayan, D. (2002). Empowerment and poverty reduction. A sourcebook. Washington: World Bank.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Neumayer, E., & de Soysa, I. (2006). Globalization and the right to free association and collective bargaining: an empirical analysis. London: LSE Research Online.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (1996). Trade, employment and labour standards: A study of core workers’ rights and international trade. Paris.

  • OECD (2000). International Trade and Core Labour Standards. Paris.

  • OECD. (2004). Employment outlook. Paris.

  • OECD. (2005). Paris declaration on aid effectiveness. Paris. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/57/60/36080258.pdf.

  • Price Waterhouse Coopers. (2007). Sustainability impact Assessment of the EU-ACP Economic Partnership Agreements. http://www.sia-acp.org/acp/download/20070516-Rapport-SIA-EU-ACP-UK.pdf.

  • Rama, M., & Artecona, R. (2002). A database of labor market indicators across countries. Washington: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodrik, D. (1996). Labor standards in international trade: Do they matter and what do we do about them? In R. Lawrence, D. Rodrik & J. Whalley (Eds.), Emerging Agenda for global trade: High stakes for developing countries. Washington: Overseas Development Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, L., Sokolowski, S., & Ass. (2004). Global Civil Society: Dimensions of the non-profit sector (Vol. 2). Bloomfield: Kumarian Press.

  • Salomon, L., Sokolowski, S., & List, R. (2003). Global Civil Society: An overview. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thindwa, J., Monico, C., & Reuben, W. (2003). Enabling Environments for civic engagement in PRSP countries. In Social development notes: Environmentally and socially sustainable development network. Washington: World Bank.

  • UN. (2004). Report of the secretary general in response to the report of the panel of Eminent Persons on United Nations-civil Society Relations, A/59/354. New York.

  • UN. (2007). The united nations and civil society. New York. http://www.un.org/issues/civilsociety/.

  • United States Department of State. (1994). Country reports on Human Rights practices. Washington.

  • United States Department of State. (1999). Country reports on Human Rights practices. Washington.

  • United States Government (2000). Trade and Development Act of 2000. http://www.agoa.gov/.

  • USAID. (2001). Participation, consultation, and economic reform in Africa. Economic Fora and the EG-DG Nexus. Occasional Papers Series. Washington.

  • USAID (2006). The 2005 NGO sustainability index for central and Eastern Europe and Eurasia. Washington. http://www.usaid.gov/locations/europe_eurasia/dem_gov/ngoindex/.

  • Visser, J. (2002). Unions, unionisation and collective bargaining trends around the world. Geneva: International Labour Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (2003). A user’s guide to poverty and social impact analysis. Washington: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (2005). Issues and options for improving engagement between the World Bank and Civil Society Organizations. Washington: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rafael Peels.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Peels, R., Develtere, P. Civil Society Involvement in International Development Cooperation: In Search for Data. Soc Indic Res 93, 331–349 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-008-9320-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-008-9320-x

Keywords

Navigation