International Funding of NGOs in India: Bringing the State Back In

Original Paper

Abstract

This article seeks to understand how the Indian state exercises control over transnational ties between foreign and domestic actors by examining the national legislative practices that determine receipt of foreign funds and the data on foreign funding flows to NGOs (a database of more than 18,000 associations). The article shows how legislative practices of democratic states serve to reduce foreign influence. Issue characteristics are also shown to determine state response to externalization, blocking transnational ties in “high politics” areas such as minority claims. Finally, within state imposed restrictions, religious rather than secular organizations remain dominant transnational actors in India. The study contributes evidence to suggest that contrary to the arguments of world polity theory and many transnational social movement scholars, states continue to remain powerful actors limiting transnationalization.

Keywords

Transnational social movements NGO–State relations Foreign aid Civil society Nonprofit sector India Globalization State sovereignty 

Résumé

Cet article cherche à comprendre comment l'état indien exerce le contrôle d’attaches transnationales d’acteurs étrangers, et intérieurs au pays en examinant les pratiques législatives nationales qui déterminent le reçu des fonds étrangers et les données de la redirection de ces fonds vers les NGO (une base données de plus de 18 000 associations). L’article montre comment des états démocratiques comme l'Inde utilisent des pratiques législatives restrictives pour réduire l'influence étrangère. On montre également des caractéristiques de problèmes pour déterminer la réponse d'état à l'externalisation, bloquant les liens transnationaux de la « la haute politique » comme les revendications de minorité. Finalement, dans le cadre des restrictions imposées par l’état, religieuses plutôt que séculaires, demeurent les acteurs transnationaux dominants en Inde. L'étude apporte la preuve pour suggérer que contrairement aux arguments de la théorie de l’état du monde, et avec eux de nombreux savants de mouvement sociaux transnationaux, les états continuent à rester des acteurs puissants limitant la transnationalisation. Finalement, dans le cadre des restrictions imposées par l’état, religieuses plutôt que séculaires, demeurent les acteurs transnationaux dominants en Inde. Dans l’état actuel des choses, l’étude des preuves suggère que contrairement à la théorie politique et contrairement à de nombreux érudits des mouvements sociaux, l'état continue à imposer des restrictions ayant pour objet de limiter la transnationalisation.

Zusammenfassung

Dieser Beitrag untersucht die nationalen legislativen Verfahren in Indien, die den Erhalt finanzieller Mittel aus dem Ausland festlegen, sowie die Daten über ausländische Mittel, die an nicht-staatliche Organisationen weitergeleitet werden (eine Datenbank, die über 18.000 Vereinigungen enthält), um zu verstehen, wie der Staat transnationale Verbindungen zwischen in- und ausländischen Akteuren kontrolliert. Der Beitrag stellt dar, wie demokratische Staaten wie Indien einschränkende legislative Verfahren anwenden, um den Einfluss aus dem Ausland gering zu halten. Zudem werden die Merkmale der Erlasse beschrieben, um zu bestimmen, wie der Staat auf eine Externalisierung reagiert und transnationale Verbindungen in „hoch politischen“ Bereichen, wie z.B. Ansprüche von Minderheiten, blockiert. Letztlich bleiben in Indien die religösen vor den nicht-kirchlichen Organisationen innerhalb der staatlich auferlegten Einschränkungen die hauptsächlichen transnationalen Akteure. Die Studie liefert Beweise, dass im Gegensatz zu den Argumenten des World-Polity-Ansatzes und entgegen vieler Gelehrter transnationaler gesellschaftlicher Bewegungen die Staaten weiterhin eine einflussreiche Stellung einnehmen und die Transnationalisierung einschränken.

Resumen

En este trabajo se pretende comprender el control que ejerce el gobierno de la India sobre los vínculos entre los interlocutores extranjeros y nacionales examinando las prácticas legislativas nacionales que rigen la recepción de fondos extranjeros y los datos sobre los flujos de financiación extranjera a las ONG (una base de datos de más de 18.000 asociaciones). El trabajo demuestra que países democráticos como la India han establecido legislaciones restrictivas para reducir la influencia extranjera. También se demuestra que determinadas características influyen en la respuesta del estado a la externalización, bloqueando los lazos transnacionales en cuestiones de “alta política” como las reclamaciones de las minorías. Por último, dentro de las restricciones impuestas por el gobierno, se concluye que los actores transnacionales dominantes en la India siguen siendo las organizaciones religiosas en lugar de las seculares. El estudio aporta pruebas que sugieren que, al contrario de lo que propugna la teoría política mundial y muchas eminencias en movimientos sociales transnacionales, los estados continúan siendo interlocutores poderosos a la hora de limitar la transnacionalización.

要約

本論文では、NGOの外国資金の受領と外国投資の流れについてのデータ(1万8000件以上にわたる協会のデータベース)を決定する国家の法的慣行を調査し、どのようにインドの州が国内外の関係者と多国籍企業の関係を統制しているかを研究する。本論文では、インドのような民主国家が海外の影響を抑えるためにどのように法的慣行を規制しているかを実証する。また、少数派が要求する「政治の向上」が多国籍企業の関係を妨げること、具体的な州の対応の決定を問題の争点としている。 最終的に、州による規制によって非宗教団体ではなく宗教的団体がインドの多国籍企業の関係者に残存している。本研究は、世界の政治理論と多国籍の社会運動学者の議論に反して、多国籍化を規制する強力な関係者が残存することを立証する。

ملخص

هذا البحث يسعى إلى فهم كيفيه أن دوله الهند تمارس الرقابه عبر روابط الجنسيات المختلفه بين الفاعلين الأجانب والمحليين عن طريق فحص الممارسات التشريعيه الوطنيه التي تحدد إستلام أموال أجنبيه وبيانات تدفقات التمويل الأجنبي للمنظمات الغير الحكوميه (NGO) (مجموعه بيانات لأكثر من ١٨٫٠٠٠جمعيه) . البحث يبين كيفيه دول ديمقراطيه مثل الهند تستخدم ممارسات تشريعيه تقييديه للحد من النفوذ الأجنبي . مشكله الخصائص تم عرضها لتحديد إستجابه الدوله للعوامل الخارجيه ٬ إعاقه روابط الجنسيات المختلفه في مجالات "السياسه العاليه" مثل إدعاءات الأقليه . أخيراً ٬ في إطار القيود التي تفرضها الدوله ٬ المنظمات الدينيه بدلاً من المنظمات العلمانيه لا تزال مهيمنه على الجنسيات المختلفه في الهند . الدراسه تساهم في الأدله التي تشير إلى إنه على النقيض من نظريه العالم السياسي و كثير من علماء الحركه الإجتماعيه من جنسيات مختلفه ٬ و تواصل الدول أن تبقى فاعله قويه في تحديد التدويل

摘要

本文通过对确定是否接收外资的全国性法律法规和流入非政府组织的外资数据(由18,000多家组织构成的数据库)进行考察, 力图进一步理解印度政府如何对外国机构和国内机构的跨国联系行使控制权。我们在本文中试图说明, 像印度这样的民主国家是如何利用制订限制性法律法规来减少来自国外的影响。另外, 本文还列示了问题特征, 以确定国家对外部化的回应, 阻止诸如少数族裔诉求等“高阶政治”领域的跨国联系。最后本文指出, 在印度, 就国家实施的限制框架内而言, 宗教组织而不是民间组织依然主导了跨国联系。本文的研究提出的证据表明, 国家依然在限制跨国联系方面担任着强大的角色, 这一点与世界政体理论和众多跨国社会运动学者所持的观点正好相反。

References

  1. Anheier, H. K. (1989). Private voluntary organizations and development in West Africa: Comparative perspectives. In E. James (Ed.), The nonprofit sector in international perspective (pp. 339–357). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Asian–Pacific Human Rights Network. (1999). The purse strings as the noose: Indian NGOs face new challenges. Available online: http://www.hrdc.net/sahrdc/hrfeatures/HRFO9.htm.
  3. Barrett, D. (1995). Reproducing persons as a global concern: The making of an institution. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Sociology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
  4. Beckfield, J. (2003). Inequality in the world polity: The structure of international organization. American Sociological Review, 68(3), 401–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Behar, A., & Prakash, A. (2004). India: Expanding and contracting democratic space. In M. Algappa (Ed.), Civil society and political change in Asia: Expanding and contracting democratic space (pp. 191–222). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Berkovitch, N. (1997). From motherhood to citizenship: Women’s rights and international organizations. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bob, C. (2005). The marketing of rebellion: Insurgents, media, and international activism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Bob, C. (2007). “Dalit rights are human rights”: Caste discrimination, international activism, and the construction of a new human rights issue. Human Rights Quarterly, 29(1), 167–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boli, J., & Brewington, D. V. (2007). Religious international nongovernmental organizations. Paper presented at the 102nd Meeting of The American Sociological Association, August 11–14, New York.Google Scholar
  10. Boli, J., & Thomas, G. M. (1997). World culture in the world polity: A century of non-governmental organization. American Sociological Review, 62(2), 171–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boli, J., & Thomas, G. M. (1999). Introduction. In J. Boli & G. M. Thomas (Eds.), Constructing world culture: International nongovernmental organizations since 1875 (pp. 1–12). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Camilleri, J. A., & Falk, J. (1992). The end of sovereignty? The politics of a shrinking and fragmenting world. Aldershot, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  13. Carothers, T., & Ottaway, M. (2000). The burgeoning world of civil society. In M. Ottaway & T. Carothers (Eds.), Funding virtue: Civil society aid and democracy promotion (pp. 3–17). Washington DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.Google Scholar
  14. Chandhoke, N. (2005). How global is global civil society. Journal of World-Systems Research, 11(2), 355–371.Google Scholar
  15. Chilton, P. (1995). Mechanics of change: Social movements, transnational coalitions, and the transformation processes in Eastern Europe. In T. Risse-Kappen (Ed.), Bringing transnational relations back in: Non-state actors, domestic structures and international institutions (pp. 189–226). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Corntassel, J. (2007). Partnership in action? Indigenous political mobilization and co-optation during the first UN Indigenous Decade (1995–2004). Human Rights Quarterly, 29(1), 137–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1991). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. In P. J. DiMaggio & W. W. Powell (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 63–82). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  18. Donnelly, E. A. (2002). Proclaiming jubilee: The debt and structural adjustment network. In S. Khagram, J. V. Riker, & K. Sikkink (Eds.), Restructuring world politics: Transnational social movements, networks, and norms (pp. 155–180). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  19. Finnemore, M. (1996). National interests in international society. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Florini, A. M., & Simmons, P. J. (2000). What the world needs now? In A. M. Florini (Ed.), The third force: The rise of transnational civil society (pp. 1–15). Washington DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.Google Scholar
  21. Fruhling, H. (1989). Nonprofit organizations as opposition to authoritarian rule: The case of human rights organizations in Chile. In E. James (Ed.), The nonprofit sector in international perspective (pp. 358–376). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Greensmith, J. (2001). Trends in fundraising and giving by international NGOs. Paper presented at the International Fundraising Congress, Noordwijkerhout, Netherlands.Google Scholar
  23. Hawkins, D. (2002). Human rights norms and networks in authoritarian Chile. In S. Khagram, J. V. Riker, & K. Sikkink (Eds.), Restructuring world politics: Transnational social movements, networks, and norms (pp. 47–70). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  24. Hirway, I., & Chauhan, U. (2000). Political economy of foreign funding of NGOs in India. Journal of Indian School of Political Economy, 12(2), 190–234.Google Scholar
  25. Ikenberry, G. J. (2003). Is American multilateralism in decline? Perspectives on Politics, 1, 533–550.Google Scholar
  26. Indian Catholic (2006). Government to amend Foreign Contribution Act. November 9. Available online: www.theindiacatholic.com
  27. International Center for Not-for-Profit Law (2006). Recent laws and legislative proposals to restrict civil society and civil society organizations. The International Journal of Not-for-Profit Law, 8(4), 76–85.Google Scholar
  28. Jalali, R. (1993). Preferential policies and the movement of the disadvantaged. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 16(1), 95–120.Google Scholar
  29. Jalali, R. (2005a). From conflict to consensus: Foreign aid and the transformation of contentious politics in the south. Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the American Sociological Association, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  30. Jalali, R. (2005b). Foreign aid and civil society: How external aid is detrimental to southern NGOs and social movements. Democracy and Society, 2(2), 24–25.Google Scholar
  31. James, E. (1989a). The non-profit sector in developing countries: The case of Sri Lanka. In E. James (Ed.), The nonprofit sector in international perspective (pp. 289–318). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. James, E. (1989b). Introduction. In E. James (Ed.), The nonprofit sector in international perspective (pp. 3–29). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Karat, P. (1988). Foreign funding and the philosophy of voluntary organizations: A factor in imperialist strategy. New Delhi: National Book Center.Google Scholar
  34. Keck, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond borders: Advocacy networks in international politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Khagram, S., Riker, J. V., & Sikkink, K. (2002). From Santiago to Seattle: Transnational advocacy groups restructuring world politics. In S. Khagram, J. V. Riker, & K. Sikkink (Eds.), Restructuring world politics: Transnational social movements, networks, and norms (pp. 3–23). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  36. Krasner, S. D. (1978). Defending the national interest. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Krasner, S. D. (1995). Power politics, institutions, and transnational relations. In T. Risse-Kappen (Ed.), Bringing transnational relations back in: Non-state actors, domestic structures and international institutions (pp. 257–279). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Kudva, N. (2005). Strong states, strong NGOs. In R. Ray & M. F. Katzenstein (Eds.), Social movements in India: Poverty, power, and politics (pp. 233–266). New Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Liu, D. (2006). Women’s movement and global agendas in China and India. American Sociological Review, 71(6), 921–942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mathews, J. T. (1997). Power shift. Foreign Affairs, 76(1), 50–66.Google Scholar
  41. Mayhew, S. H. (2005). Hegemony, politics and ideology: The role of legislation in NGO–Government relations in Asia. Journal of Development Studies, 41(5), 727–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Merry, S. E. (2006). Human rights and gender violence: Translating international law into local justice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  43. Meyer, J. W. (1987). The world polity and the authority of the nation-state. In G. M. Thomas, J. W. Meyer, F. O Ramirez, & J. Boli (Eds.), Institutional structure: Constituting state, society and the individual (pp. 41–70). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  44. Meyer, J. W., & Rowen, B. (1991). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure in myth and ceremony. In P. J. DiMaggio & W. W. Powell (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 41–62). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  45. Ministry of Home Affairs, Receipt of Foreign Contributions by Voluntary Associations, Annual Report (2001)-02; Annual Report (2003)-04; India. (2004)-05 annual report available online: www.mha.nic.in
  46. Mohan, R. C. (2006). India and the balance of power. Foreign Affairs, 85(4), 17–32.Google Scholar
  47. National Endowment for Democracy (2006). The backlash against democracy assistance: A report prepared by the National Endowment for Democracy. Washington DC.Google Scholar
  48. Nepstad, S. E. (2002). Creating transnational solidarity: The use of narrative in the U.S.–Central American peace movement. In J. Smith & H. Johnston (Eds.), Globalization and resistance: Transnational dimensions of social movements (pp. 133–149). New York: Rowman Littlefield.Google Scholar
  49. O’Brien, R., Williams, M., Goetz, A.-M., & Scholte, J. A. (2000). Contesting global governance: Multilateral economic institutions and global social movements. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Pant, H. V. (2006). Saudi Arabia woos China and India. Middle East Quarterly, Fall. Also available online www.meforum.org/article/1019
  51. Princen, T. (1995). Ivory, conservation, and environmental transnational coalitions. In T. Risse-Kappen (Ed.), Bringing transnational relations back in: Non-state actors, domestic structures and international institutions (pp. 227–253). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Risse-Kappen, T. (1995). Structures of governance and transnational relations. In T. Risse-Kappen (Ed.), Bringing transnational relations back in: Non-state actors, domestic structures and international institutions (pp. 280–313). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Rudolph, S., & Piscatori, J. (1997). Transnational religion and fading states. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  54. Salamon, L. M. (1993). The global associational revolution: The rise of the third sector on the world scene. Occasional Papers, No.15. Institute for Policy Studies, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.Google Scholar
  55. Schafer, M. J. (1999). International nongovernmental organizations and Third World education in 1990: A cross-national study. Sociology of Education, 72, 69–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Schofer, E., & Fourcade-Gourinchas, M. (2001). The structural contexts of civic engagement: Voluntary association membership in comparative perspective. American Sociological Review, 66(1), 806–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sikkink, K. (1993). Human rights, principled issue-networks and sovereignty in Latin America. International Organization, 47(3), 411–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sikkink, K., & Smith, J. (2002). Infrastructure for change: Transnational organizations, 1953–93. In S. Khagram, J. V. Riker, & K. Sikkink (Eds.), Restructuring world politics: Transnational social movements, networks, and norms (pp. 24–44). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  59. Sklair, L. (2001). The transnational capitalist class. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  60. Slaughter, A.-M. (2004). A new world order. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Smith, B. (1989). More than altruism: The politics of European international charities. In E. James (Ed.), The nonprofit sector in international perspective (pp. 319–338). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Smith, J. (1997). Characteristics of the modern transnational social movement sector. In J. Smith, C. Chatfield, & R. Pagnucco (Eds.), Transnational social movements and global politics: Solidarity beyond the state (pp. 42–58). New York: Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Smith, J., & Johnston, H. (2002). Globalization and resistance: An introduction. In J. Smith & H. Johnston (Eds.), Globalization and resistance: Transnational dimensions of social movements (pp. 1–12). New York: Rowman Littlefield.Google Scholar
  64. Smith, J., Pagnuccco, R., & Chatfield, C. (1997). Social movements and world politics: A theoretical framework. In J. Smith, C. Chatfield, & R. Pagnucco (Eds.), Transnational social movements and global politics: Solidarity beyond the state (pp. 59–77). New York: Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Staples, E. S. (1992). Forty years: A learning curve, the Ford Foundation programs in India 1952–1992. New Delhi: Ford Foundation.Google Scholar
  66. Tarrow, S. (1998). Power in movement: Social movements and contentious politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  67. Tarrow, S. (2005). The new transnational activism. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  68. U.S. Department of State (2005). International Religious Freedom Report 2005. Released on November 8.Google Scholar
  69. Vallier, I. (1971). The Roman Catholic Church: A transnational actor. International Organization, 25(3), 479–502.Google Scholar
  70. Wiest, D. (2007). A story of two transnationalisms: Global Salafi Jihad and transnational human rights mobilization in the Middle East and North Africa. Mobilization, 12(2), 137–192.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society for Third-Sector Research and The Johns Hopkins University 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Palo AltoUSA

Personalised recommendations