Civil Society Organizations as Supporters of Authoritarian Rule? A Cross-Regional Comparison (Vietnam, Algeria, Mozambique)

对威权主义和公民社会的研究缺乏跨区域的比较研究，批判国家和统治的概念，探索威权主义国家权力的基础及其保存方式。同样，民间社会组织（cso）的角色多样性研究不足。该项目探讨了何种类型的公民社会组织有助于维护或削弱各种类型的专制国家权力，以及以何种方式。为了对三个非常相似的案例（越南、阿尔及利亚和莫桑比克）进行跨区域、以结构为重点的比较，我们使用了在每个首都城市和另一个大城市开展业务的民间社会组织的总数。这个项目的基本假设是公民社会、公民社会组织和国家不是相互对立的；相反，它们共同构成一个整体，相互依存，相互影响。只有当我们从关系的角度分析这些依赖和影响的关系时，公民社会组织形成了什么特点，它们的各种活动产生了什么影响，才会变得明显。cso是多价的（Kössler）。这种互动和公民社会组织的多价性将分两个步骤进行探讨：首先，我们将调查在何种背景下，不同类型的公民社会组织在其内部结构、活动及其代表的世界观中发展出支持专制/专制主义或有利于民主/民主的属性，或两者的混合。我们还探讨了这些特征是如何与对公民社会的理解相关联的。我们将使用经过经验测试的cso类型以及三个标准清单。其次，我们将研究各种类型的公民社会组织（提供卫生服务的公民社会组织；参与/促进政策的制定、决策和实施的公民社会组织）是否以及以何种方式帮助维护或削弱国家的基础设施权力，以及各种类型的公民社会组织以何种方式帮助加强或削弱围绕国家传播的性别规范的话语权力。基于对这两个步骤产生的数据的比较分析，我们将产生更复杂的假设，这些假设将有助于建立关于各种类型的公民社会组织和各种形式的专制国家权力相互依赖的中间状态的理论结论。该项目在概念、方法和地理方面有以下方面的突破：-以公正的方式探讨公民社会组织活动的影响；-它采用以行动为中心的民间社会概念，并将民间社会组织理解为这种行动的浓缩；-它抓住了民间社会行动的认知理想基础，并采用了反思和解释的观点；它是以一种探索性的方式设计的，用定性的方法探究因果关系，检验最初的假设，并从案例研究中得出结论。该研究项目将与本地学者密切合作进行。

Research on authoritarianism and civil society lacks cross-regional, comparative studies critiquing the concepts of state and dominance and exploring the foundations of authoritarian state power and the ways it is preserved. Likewise, the role-diversity of civil society organizations (CSOs) is under-researched. The project explores what types of CSOs contribute to the preservation or weakening of various types of authoritarian state power, and in what ways. For a cross-regional, structurally focused comparison of three very similar cases (Vietnam, Algeria and Mozambique) we use the total number of CSOs operating in each capital city and in another large city.The basic assumption of the project is that civil society, CSOs and the state are not mutually antagonistic; rather, together they constitute a whole and are interdependent and reciprocally influential. What features CSOs develop and what the effects are of their various activities become apparent only when we take a relational perspective and analyse those relationships of dependence and influence. CSOs are polyvalent (Kössler).Such interaction and the polyvalence of CSOs will be explored in two steps:First, we will investigate in which contexts various types of CSOs develop authoritarian/authoritarianism-supportive or democratic/democracy-conducive properties, or mixtures of both in their internal structures, activities, and in their representatives worldviews. We also explore how such features are related to understandings of civil society. We will use an empirically tested typology of CSOs along with three criteria checklists. Second, we will examine whether and in what ways various types of CSOs (those delivering health services; those involved in/contributing to the formulation, decision-making and implementation of policies) help preserve or weaken the infrastructural power of the state, and in what ways various types of CSOs help strengthen or weaken the discursive power surrounding gender norms propagated by the state.Based on a comparative analysis of the data that will result from both steps, we will generate more complex hypotheses that will help establish theoretical conclusions of middle-range status regarding the interdependency of various types of CSOs and various forms of authoritarian state power.The project breaks fresh ground in terms of concepts, methodology and geography in the following ways:- The effects of CSOs activities are explored in an unbiased way; - it uses an action-centred concept of civil society and understands CSOs as a condensation of such action; - it captures cognitive-ideal foundations of civil society action and applies a reflexive and interpretative perspective; and- it is designed in an explorative way, probing causalities with qualitative methods, testing initial hypotheses, and drawing conclusions from case studies.The research project will be carried out in close cooperation with local scholars.