Government funding for NGOs?

                   Government Funding for NGOs?

 Tom Kaydor/15 April 2014

This post is in response to a blog post on government's funding for NGOs in Australia and other Western countries.

It is quite fascinating to read about government’s support to NGOs.  Fascinating because in developing countries, NGOs raise their own finances to fund development programmes, which in my view support government’s development priorities.  Without doubt, a troika approach to development involving the government, donors/NGOs, and the local communities (Haynes 2008) is fundamental if development must succeed in developing countries. And government’s support to NGOs in developing countries could further advance development interventions in a multifaceted way.

However, without questioning the systems in place to facilitate transparent and accountable utilization of government’s financial support to NGOs in Australia and other countries, there seems to be genuine reasons why NGOs in developing countries are not supported by government’s funding. First, the governments “do not have adequate resources for their own priorities”, and are therefore complaining about budgetary shortfalls, thus looking up to donors to support development process, sometimes through direct budget support. Second, the rules governing the establishment and operation of NGOs are weak, thereby making it difficult, if not impossible, to hold NGOs accountable. Third, NGOs in developing countries view themselves as pressure groups that should hold government accountable, advocate against societal ills and promote democracy and human rights. By so doing, governments perceive NGOs as spies and agents of the West, which uses democracy, accountability, transparency, human rights, et al. as preconditions for aid.  As a result of mistrust in governments, donors and aid agencies tend to trust NGOs than governments with funding to directly implement development programmes in developing countries.

I think the scenario above undermines development efforts in developing countries as suggested by Haynes (2008). It would be preferable where NGOs to be accountable to governments, and that donor funding provided to NGOs in developing countries should be based on national priorities for which national governments have got no funding. Combined and well coordinated effort can increase development outcomes and national levels.

One may ask, who sets the national priorities? The simple answer is government. However, it is my view that NGOs must partner with government to identify national priorities and determine gaps for which aid can be sought for development interventions. Government is obliged to ensure the useful participation of NGOs, local communities and partners in development planning and implementation processes. I am making this point because some of the funds provided to NGOs in developing countries tend to target sectors which other donors are simultaneously funding, hence the issue of multiple support to single development priorities. This sometimes leads to corruption of donor funds, and leaves some urgent development priorities unfunded. Equally, NGOs tend to behave like opposition politicians and more often than not produce politicians in developing countries. How these new elites enhance governance and promote development is another question begging answers. Nevertheless, the role and interventions of NGOs have made significant impact in developing countries. Without the intervention of NGOs, it is unclear what developing countries would be like up to present.

Is it good at all for government to support NGOs? Indeed yes, this is a lesson to be learned and a best practice for developing countries.  Good if such lesson were shared, especially guidelines by which funding to NGOs are determined, et al. Case studies on such practices could even proof more strategic for replication in developing countries.

In view of the above, lessons on how governments support NGOs would be good to share. The rules and regulations governing NGOs and their modus operandi are also desirous.