NGOs in the Andhra Pradesh: Political Tools or Legitimate People-centered Organisations?

Introduction Non-Governmental Organisations, by conviction and nature, are expected to take up development programmes, uninhibited by factors which normally plague governmental organisations - bureaucracy, conservative attitudes and procedures. However, NGOs have not fared well in many situations. In Andhra Pradesh, in the context of more than a decade of NGOled development work, and subsequent usurpation of the terminology and methodology of NGOs by the State government, in the early years of 2000, there is now a need to look afresh at the institution of NGOs and their positioning in AP, with a view to understand the necessity of this institution. But this is not to blackwash of the NGO sector in general. NGO sector in India has done yeoman service of the cause of people, in different places and in different contexts. Today, NGO sector is in a position to strengthen democratic structure of India, and can be considered as one of the important pillars of democracy in India. The attempt here is to demystify the NGO sector, in order to enable broader public discussion on the work of this sector. Long back, people like Mahatma Gandhi and Schumacher attempted to enunciate a framework of sustainabiity in different forms viz., Gram Swaraj, Sampoorna Swaraj, small is beautiful and possible. In fact, these concepts have their roots in developed and third world' countries, but the powerful market forces and new trends of industrialisation camouflaged these attempts. However, these attempts are not lost completely but are being pursued by different groups like Alternative Movement in Europe and a few Gandhian groups in India. With the emergence of environmental issues and related developmental' problems in the 1980s, several individuals have emerged to draw attention of the societies to these neo-dimensions of social change. By providence or otherwise, most of them are linked to the NGO sector. But what has been achieved? Civil Society Latest Nomenclature Groups, and individuals, working on social problems came to be called under different names voluntary organizations, charities, philanthropists, social workers, non-governmental organizations, non-governmental development organizations, Government-organised nongovernmental organizations, societies, non-profit organizations, civil society, etc. Each of the names is associated with a particular kind of work and methodology, and also the result of an urge to have a distinct identity. Civil society has no widely agreed definition in general people would immediately think of largely five types of groups: NGOs, CBOs, professional associations (farmers, trade unions, industries, etc..), struggle organizations, and activist groups. However, there can be debate and controversy on what to include, how to define and how to categorise different institutions, associations and groups. Discussing on this is beyond the scope of this paper. Whatever category or definition is taken, civil society in AP was largely concerned and/or associated with Dr. D. Narasimha Reddy, E-mail: nreddy.donthi@gmail.com

empowerment, democratization and participation. This civil society includes a myriad of nonstate organizations of varying membership and interests. In India, particularly, civil society has a long history eventhough the nuances of the work of the civil society has been changing with times and needs. History shows that there have been a number of social reformers who took up the social agenda of the society when the State or the ruling system failed to take cognition of social problems. These interventions gradually become institutionalised. Broadly speaking, the agenda of civil society was focused on education, awareness and influencing. In the course of changes in the political and administrative spheres, as the nation states were emerging, these initiatives assumed delivery roles for themselves. Thus, charity organizations emerged in the civil society. Charity became the vehicle for legitimization of objectives of social change this change has broad ramifications including religious conversions, etc. One has to agree that there have been genuine charity efforts. However, some of these could not remain above suspicion for the motives, especially when it came from people who were in powerful positions, or exploitative structures. Thus, the politics of funding had been the source of suspicion, ridicule and legitimisation. Most of the funds from a few developed countries are expected to be tied. World Bank is infamous for conditionalities for the funds it provides. But, there are others who follow a transparent approach in providing funds. In any case, the most infamous case cited often is the US offer of food for aid. Even today, aid in the form of food is considered legitimate source of funding, while there are any number of concrete facts which show that this is politics and nothing but pure economics aimed at helping the donor country. Organisations such as CARE are questioned because of their role in this. In the recent past, in AP, foreign funds for NGOs has decreased drastically. If foreign funding is running dry and development initiatives are increasing where will NGOs and CBOs get the money to continue their work? With the present crop of youth and students no longer interested in social issues, where do the NGOs get the human resources to continue their work? And where are first line NGO leaders going? The implications of their ever-expanding initiatives on how they manage themselves internally is becoming more and more urgent. However, NGOs today are concerned about funding, sustainability, effectiveness, efficiency, accountability, transparency and influence, among others. They are yet to look into credibility and the politics of funding. Is there politics in funding? Should NGOs receive money from the government? What are the trends in overseas development assistance? How should NGOs relate to donor agencies? How can we be more effective in accessing resources? These are the questions which have not been asked before in AP. In general, the institution of NGO has not come into public debate as widely as required. Not all NGOs are aware, even if they accept, none would admit, that the issue of development funds has very strong political undertones, and which has not been discussed openly so far in Andhra Pradesh and in India. The end result is that many trends which affect NGO funding are not fully understood nor appreciated for what they are: political decisions by persons acting on (and reacting to) very political circumstances.

Dr. D. Narasimha Reddy, E-mail: nreddy.donthi@gmail.com

Politics of NGO Funding NGO refers to a certain type of institution, which lies in distinct socio-economic, cultural and political spaces. This now becoming more broad-based with the inclusion of all institutions, organizations, groups or networks, which are distinct from government, and democratic institutions. Almost all the countries, irrespective of their political understanding, have acknowledged these spaces and their occupation by the NGOs, including the most dictatorial regimes. Most of the United Nations institutions have officially recognized NGOs on par with the representatives of the government, in their platforms and working process. The obvious question is why? There could be many reasons, but to put it succinctly we need to look at the position, methodology, and linkages of the NGOs to understand how this had happened and is happening. In general, NGO depicts a fair degree of flexibility and operation in choosing the target group, working methodology and delivery of the goods/needs. However, NGOs are not independent as they appear to be. There are politics behind the growth of the NGO sector, work of the NGOs, and the processes they adopt. 1. Traditional power relationship between Donors and NGOs The relationship between donors and NGOs has always been decided by the funds made available a give and take relationship. Donors do not hesitate to wield the power of funds over the NGOs. They have the advantage of fewer donors and large number of recipient NGOs. This relationship has been used positively to enhance the capacities of the NGOs to deliver in the areas where people need. But it also been used to dictate the programmes wherever the donor feels the need. This need was mostly hidden, probably serving the interests of the business or political class from whom the donor agency receives the funds. Most donors are also recipients of funds in their respective countries and contexts. Thus, the power relationship between the Donor and the NGO is often influenced by the donating section of the people to the Donor agencies. Often the policies and principles of the Donor agencies are built to accommodate the interests of these sections. In some of the European countries, governments channelise their overseas funds through the NGOs operating in their country. Government of Netherlands contributes about 1 percent of their GDP to overseas aid through the NGOs, who become donors in developing countries. 2. Donors and Ideological Politics Another kind of politics is ideological politics donors choosing their own political line and choosing their partners based on this political line. All Official Development Agencies (ODAs) have this strong process methodology to select their partners. Presently, it is now labelled as policy approaches. Donors are increasingly investing on developing their own policies, based on assessments and research, and position papers. They would fund proposals which fit into these policies, or subscribe to the policy objectives. Consultants in general prepare these policies. The politics comes when there is need for trade-off between policy objectives, need to fund some NGO and the basic realities in the project implementation area. These policies, by most donors, are not discussed openly with the partner NGOs.

Dr. D. Narasimha Reddy, E-mail: nreddy.donthi@gmail.com

3. Politics of Personal Relationships With few donors, fewer funds and more recipient NGOs and the larger socio-economic problems, funding is also dependent on the scale and quality of personal relationships between personnel of the donor agencies and the NGOs. These personal relationships often transcend the policies, ground realities and the actual needs. For a considerable period, these relationships dominated the funding pattern in Andhra Pradesh. A coalition of interests was apparent in the 1990s in the funding of projects in AP in the last decade. A few NGO leaders hold the donors as well as the NGOs in their grip to suit their interests. The ideal methodology adopted for such control is the networking process. NGO networks have in general become the pocket boroughs of a few NGO leaders working at the whims and fancies of the lead NGO in the network. Most networks have been established because of the need for funds (because the donor agency would feel it easier to give funds for a group) or some NGO needed legitimacy to their activities. 4. The Politics of Government Funding Government funding cannot be seen as an alternative to foreign funding but as another legitimate source of funds. Donors whether local or foreign, provide funds for particular sets of activities largely initiated by the NGOs, and based on what the NGOs want to do. Government on the other hand, provides funds for the NGOs to implement government programmes. The level of autonomy is entirely different between these two types of funding. There is a level of domestication that NGOs unwittingly enter into the moment they become dependent on government funding that is they become less and less critical of government because of the dependency. The biggest danger in dealing with the government will arise from the degree to which the NGO is tamed or co-opted in the process. Co-option does not only mean conscious, willing co-option. It can also mean, large amounts of time spent sitting down and discussing with them, and therefore losing precious time to work with the people. This issue is related to the balancing between critical collaboration and the potential hesitance to engage in more confrontational forms of struggle. There are decisions that NGOs need to make while avoiding the dangers of domestication, co-option and subservience. In AP, large number of NGOs were domesticated through the watershed programmes and World Bank projects. It was probably done as part of larger World Bank strategy to reduce the antagonistic forces to its reform programmes. Not surprisingly, as the level of World Bank funding increased in Andhra Pradesh, independent foreign funding has decreased substantially. Starved of funds NGOs were forced to seek government funding. Government funding has a rigid framework, more so in the case of World Bank-funded projects. As a result NGO sector in AP has lost much of its vigour, independence and the ability to work on behalf of the people. 5. The Politics of Empowerment Politics of empowerment are mainly focused on grassroots organising. The thrust of empowerment activities is enabling the poor to gain access and control over the resourceseconomic or political-to which they are denied. This means breaking the monopoly of decisionmaking of the traditional centers of power, i.e government and corporate society, and

Dr. D. Narasimha Reddy, E-mail: nreddy.donthi@gmail.com

empowering the non-tradional centers of power example community-based organizations and NGOs. The other aspect is the breaking the monopoly of the resources of the economic elite. This is where the concept of partnership has come in. Real partnerships-which are facilitated by people to-people exchanges is carried out very much by a kind of sharing of analysis and vision. But it is one thing to have shared vision and analysis, it is another thing to operationalise this perspective. The real test of empowerment and partnership can be at the operational level of the programme or project. 6. The Politics of Rights Discourse With the ever decreasing resources, basically due to degradation, competition, intensive usage and inaccessibility, poor people and communities are increasingly getting distanced from the resources which enable their livelihoods. With historical socio-economic deprivation, this denial is becoming much more accentuated. In this context, social movements have been propagating the rights of people. Most often human rights movements and other related struggles were confined to legal rights and have intermittently asked for socio-economic rights even. However, most NGOs have also taken up these rights issue, including the rights over natural resources for example, water and Clean Air. Donors have also taken this approach and are increasingly supporting initiatives which propagate and promote rights of particular communities in particular contexts. However, there is a section of opinion which sees this as an approach to divide the people of India in terms of caste, gender, religion, users, consumers and class. Ofcourse, this approach has its merits in bringing up issues before policy makers and has led to some corrections. However, for NGOs, it becomes a little tedious to follow this approach solely. Hence, many would balance it with other approaches, or switch over to other mainstream methods. 7. The Politics of Advocacy Increasingly, NGOs and donors are foraying into policy arenas, having recognized that poverty alleviation, socio-economic problems and development issues are rooted in government policies, competition and politics. A number of advocacy programmes are being funded to influence the thinking of the governments. This includes the campaigns for more facilities and funds for the betterment of Dalits and other deprived sections, physically handicapped, problems of particular communities such as sex workers, women, traditional communities, workers, etc. In AP, gender and Dalit-based advocacy programmes are more prominent. These are among the many issues which need a closer look from the civil society today. While still a bit heady from the discovery of their relative influence on public policy both locally and internationally, NGOs are beginning to realize that this achievement is also bringing up problems in the way they conduct themselves. 8. The Politics of Donor Priorities In order to maximize the impact of their work, donors tend to have priorities of funding. Donors have mostly based their priorities on different tools and methodologies, which include feasibility

Dr. D. Narasimha Reddy, E-mail: nreddy.donthi@gmail.com

studies, pre-investment assessment, their own business or political needs and independent studies. In general, donors declare their priorities and proposals for funds are sought as per these priorities. In their anxiety to receive funds, donors tend to make these priorities as broad as possible donors do mobilize funds in other countries through various methodologies. This broad framework gives them the flexibility to choose the NGOs and the proposals. NGOs, which have the capacity to understand these priorities generally have the ability to get these funds. These priorities do change occasionally based on constant assessment, shifting priorities of the countries in which the donors are placed, changing objectives of the donors to donor agencies, etc. The popular perception among donor agencies operating in India is that NGOs in AP are quick to adopt themselves to these changing priorities. 9. Politics of Sizes Size of the NGO is also a factor in linkages and decisions size in terms of finances, human resources and number of projects. Most often, small NGOs, often with one or two employees, including the promoter, do not get the space to include their opinions. Many donors feel comfortable to work with the established NGOs in terms of years of experience, human resources, infrastructure, financial levels and extent of operations. In a particular period, there were some donors who came forward to work only with small NGOs, or upstarts. However, given the number of small NGOs, such efforts were miniscule and discontinuous. Employees of donors do play important role in deciding the partners. They would do so, based on their comfort levels. Majority of small NGOs, at micro-level, do struggle to raise funds, respond to the needs of documentation for legal and donor support, fight domestic dissent (over the choice of employment) and yet work with the community. Recent legislations, as in the past, related to NGOs, discriminate them, by putting them on par with large NGOs. There are NGOs with as high as Rs.5,000 crore turnover per annum, and with as little as Rs.10,000 turnover. It was surprising to know that recent Commonwealth Games were conducted by CWC, which is also a registered society. Thousands of crores were routed through this. Many religious trusts also come under this category. 10. Politics of area of operations Given the number of NGOs, whole gamut of activities and donor priorities, there is competition over not only resource mobilisation, but also in owning up area of operations. Turf war is common in large, government-run schemes. Networks and other methods do resolve some of these issues. These tussles/war over particular geography, or community is serious and is also at times hilarious. Perception Given this situation, with regard to funding of NGO work in AP, there are three popular perceptions about NGOs in AP:

Dr. D. Narasimha Reddy, E-mail: nreddy.donthi@gmail.com

1. Number of NGOs are increasing. 2. Work of NGOs is not as pious as it is made out to be 3. Government has proved that they can adopt NGO methodologies and deliver the needs to the people. The number of registered NGOs is on the rise. In fact, a few districts such as Guntur, Prakasam, Cuddapah and Chittoor have more number of NGOs than the number of villages. With the government, both at central and State-levels, deciding to involve NGOs in the watershed development works and drought relief works, the number of NGOs registered have gone up. Today, NGOs have been established by political leaders, MLAs, MPs, Ministers and their relatives, contractors and retired and serving government employees. Most of such NGOs were established to garner government funds for development works which are otherwise not available. Thus, NGOs have become the conduits of accessing funds of the government for the same class of people who were dependent on government funds earlier. In fact, this route of funding has also helped in avoiding the problems of accountability. There is a serious need to look at the origins of most NGOs (who started it, and with what objective), basically to understand the impact of the NGO work on poverty alleviation and development. More and more politicians and corporates are also establishing their own NGOs. Politicians, some of whom are businessmen, would like to build their image, establish networking, avail government schemes and claim tax exemptions. Companies, as part of their corporate social responsibility or to promote their marketing networks also, are showing interest in establishing NGOs. Reforms and Civil Society Recognising the unique positioning of NGOs, registered under Societies Act, governments are also establishing NGOs for particular kinds of work. Government of AP has taken this further to transfer all its welfare functions to government-established, bureaucrat-run NGOs. This is an innovative strategy to avoid subjecting World Bank-projects to accountability to the legislature and other Constitutional mechanisms. However, this impacted on the credibility of the civil society, and has resulted in confusion and the growth of incomprehensible relationships and linkages. Such NGOs and the dependent NGOs in the NGO sector have become the tools of legitimization of World Bank-dictated reforms in Andhra Pradesh. In years around 2000, There were wide array of reforms underway in AP and India with different implications for civil society. There was a large gap in the discourse of the civil society and the thrust for AP State reform programmes. These reforms from the NGO point of view aim at reduction in state intervention, promotion of privatization and greater involvement of multinational corporations in the domestic market. However, from the governments perspective, reforms were necessary to increase the state capacity towards management and marketorientation, and promotion of political equity and participation. On the one hand, civil society celebrates the power of social groups and organizations to contribute to the institutional changes necessary for democracy and development, the crux of the government reforms are aimed at privatisation and management, giving prominence to market

Dr. D. Narasimha Reddy, E-mail: nreddy.donthi@gmail.com

forces, managerial efficiency and accountable government. Chandrababu Naidu tried to fill this gap by inventing programmes such as Janmabhoomi and other programmes like Neeru-Meeru. However, several evaluations of these programmes point to the fact that they at best reflect addendum programmes, the objectives of which are suspect in the eyes of both the people and the civil society alike. In this context, it has to be agreed that institutional change and democratization require enlightened and sustained pressures from organised groups of civil society. A reform programme, which pursues socially accountable public policies and upholds the rule of law, is likely to benefit from the growth of civil society institutions and actors. Losers, and the representative civil society, is bound to be skeptical of the reform programmes, in a context of weak alternative livelihoods in the private sector, absence of adequate social protection or safety nets, the long period of gestation of institutional reforms and poor governmental track records in managing reforms. In the private sector, large sections of population dependent on agriculture and handloom sectors are affected by the reform process which discourage state welfare programmes, and favourable policy prescriptions. This has alienated the civil society which represents the interests of these sections of population. Privatisation of public undertakings, and reduction in government staff threaten trade unions not just in terms of employment, but also reduction in their membership and funds. Though there are continuing protests, they are tapering off for a variety of reasons. This is despite the evidence of growing poverty and unemployment. Decimation of organised movements need not be construed as acceptance and participation. It might weaken the efforts to evolve a civil society committed to democracy, leading to the growth of anti-state organisations. Seen in a different sense, there is an argument that within the civil society, NGOs are playing a pernicious role in dissipating the dissent to the reform programmes. There is a strong suspicion that NGOs have become the tools of the State to manage dissent, strongly aided by multilateral agencies and donors. Though there is no way of establishing this, nor conforming this, a thorough analysis of politics of funding would probably yield a better understanding of the realities. In any case, growth of civil society would mean dispersal of authority, emergence of multiple centers of social power, and limits to the authority and power of the state, with no single organization dominating the situation. Going by the ideological climate of the times, thrust of the reform programme appears to be orientated towards empowerment of markets and business-oriented groups. Such a limited approach has the potential to alienate other sections of civil society, and thus harm or slow down the reform process itself. The worry is about governance reforms. This would increase the possibilities of a situation of contestation. In general, there is a lack of correspondence or convergence between the agenda of the civil society and the content of the state reforms. Civil society is championing the cause of people asking for institutional changes for democracy and development, while the reform programme limits itself to privatization of essential services. Underlying the state reform discourse is the need for the government and civil society groups to view reforms as a process that may require

Dr. D. Narasimha Reddy, E-mail: nreddy.donthi@gmail.com

new forms of mutual engagement, and to understand the limitations of extra-legal forms of competition. However, there is a need for the reform process to bring in the understanding that there is no trade-off between the growth of civil society organizations and the powers of the state. This might be difficult with the central government adopting a strongly centralized approach to governance which means the process of reform is highly dependent on the individuals. NGOs are increasingly replaced by the government in known rural development programmes like watershed development, thrift and credit, afforestation and welfare activities. This is being done in the name of corruption and lack of results of such partnership. However, government cannot ignore the fact that corruption is within the governance system and is not within the voluntary sector. Voluntary sector is accountable to the people. For this reason, governance reforms can find a surprising ally in voluntary sector wherein the corruption in government is reduced, enabling a development-oriented partnership with the government. Reforms that are aimed at power sharing require new types of political competition or dialogue between activists groups, leading political parties and struggle movements, if tensions in the political contexts are to be contained. Reforms of decentralization require a dispersal of both political and civic power and cooperative relations between various levels of government and among civic organizations in order to nurture a universal civic order at both central and local levels. To be effective, there is a need for to build the institutional capacity and competence in policy advocacy of the civil society, especially that of the voluntary sector. To obviate the criticism of the control of reforms being in the sectional interests, reform programme has to encourage the participation of voluntary sector in service provisioning. Presently, through competitive bidding government is contracting-out its activities to private sector. In few cases, private companies including multinationals are being hired to manage urban solid waste disposal. There are reports over privatization of water distribution, both in rural and urban areas, similar to what is being done in energy sector. Civil society participation, especially that of voluntary sector, can be improved by enabling subcontracting of government services to include NGOs to manage services that were previously provided by the government in areas such as health, education, rural road construction, sanitation, etc. Such an inclusive approach can lead to the growth of service-oriented NGOs. Reforms have to be cautious about the development of new policy-making actors, with specialist knowledge, usurping the role of the civil society. Central aspects of public policy are increasingly being screened off from the pressures of civil society and elected representatives through the involvement of global consultancies, networks of outisde individuals and institutions. Bureaucrats are deciding the quality and range of services to be provided, unlike the consumers, though it is said that reforms are inherently demand-led and pro-people. Consumer organizations are very weak in Andhra Pradesh. If the aim of reforms is to bring public services closer to the people, consumers and small-scale organizations have to be empowered. Smallscale organizations have the advantage of flexible work practices and low overhead costs.

Dr. D. Narasimha Reddy, E-mail: nreddy.donthi@gmail.com

Many NGO initiatives indicate the success of a different approach to development, highlighted by the efforts of several individuals most of whom remain unsung and unnoticed. They are institutions by themselves, and some have built institutions which have carried forward their founder's vision. These individuals are uninhibited by the trappings of systems and procedures. Their efforts are fuelled by their zeal and enthusiasm, and are motivated by their concern, values and philosophy. They are resourceful, indigenous and are at home with the grassroot levels. They are accountable to their integrity, and are responsible to their values. However, as societies are becoming modern, accordingly conducive conditions for emergence of such individuals are becoming hazy. Despite this, individuals with such temperament can still be found. However, the only change from the past can be, they need to be provided the wherewithal to realise their vision, which in general is to direct social change onto a constructive and positive course. This is one of the efficient paths to realise sustainable development, especially in India where important turns in social change happened only through the efforts of some legendary individuals. Summary In conclusion, one can say that NGO sector is under transformation, because of globalization, liberalization and privatization. Being in a transitory phase, one cannot be sure whether the civil society would be able to hold onto its character of championing the cause of the people, especially the disadvantaged. It is also important to bear in the mind the differential capacities of civil society organizations and the forces of privatization of natural resources. With private sector, especially the corporate sector, promoting its own section of civil society organizations, including lobby organizations, unions, representative organizations (for example, farmers organizations), etc., the NGO sector that champions the impacted people is tiny and puny in comparison. State-run or supported organizations also do support these private sector-led organizations through various means, especially by replacing the genuine organizations at the consultation or negotiations tables. Over a period, this would mean scotching the scope of opinion sharing and denial of opportunity. Delusion of the ruling class would continue. It is time that the NGO sector and civil society, as in present conditions, is discussed more, which probably would lead to diffrentiation between various CSOs. Importantly, this might help in exposure of civil society organizations which promote the interests of corporate sector and reform-centered governmental objectives.

10

Dr. D. Narasimha Reddy, E-mail: nreddy.donthi@gmail.com