权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Democratic renewal in Civil Society Organisations

民间社会组织的民主复兴

基本信息

批准号：
ES/N009096/1
负责人：
Daniel King
金额：
$ 2.76万
依托单位：
Nottingham Trent University
依托单位国家：
英国
项目类别：
Research Grant
财政年份：
2015
资助国家：
英国
起止时间：
2015 至无数据
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=ES%2FN009096%2F1
关键词：
Democratic renewal Civil Society Organisations

项目摘要

It is often argued Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) are central to a vibrant, democratic society. Charities, voluntary groups, community associations, and informal networks of like-minded individuals, are praised for being more responsive and in-touch than political parties and governmental organisations and able to articulate the needs of local communities, particularly those who lack influence and cannot speak for themselves. CSOs are driven by values to produce social change within their community. Therefore, they can be innovative in designing and delivering services that people actually need and, through active participation, CSOs can foster 'social capital': developing the networks, norms and trust, necessary for cooperation and social engagement. This not only increases community cohesion but harnesses local community resources, grassroots energy, enthusiasm and ideas to build a vibrant civil society. Together, these features mean that CSOs have the potential to facilitate civic democratic renewal and support citizens' services that are actively run by and for local communities, rather than being dictated to by central government or private enterprises driven by profit and market forces.Over the past three decades successive governments have tried to capitalise on the responsive and democratic elements of CSOs to provide services previously delivered by the state. For instance, a written aim of the current government is to "support the creation and expansion of mutuals, co-operatives, charities and social enterprises, and enable these groups to have much greater involvement in the running of public services" (Cabinet Office, 2014). Consequently, in increasing numbers, schools, libraries, health and social care services, and many previously delivered public services are being run by CSOs or private organisations. To date, over 100 public services have been "spun out" in "Public service mutuals" and the government's stated aim is for 1 in 5 public sector workers to run their own mutuals (Mutuals Taskforce Report, 2015). As CSOs are called upon to deliver public services, concerns have been raised over the impact this might have on the less measureable, democratic functions of a healthy civil society. As service providers, competing with private businesses, they are subject to regulation by both state and market forces, limiting members abilities to promote and respond to community and membership needs. The influential Baring's Foundation Report has recently argued CSOs are losing their democratic heritage (2015), highlighting the 2014 Lobbying Act which places new restrictions on CSOs campaigning and commissioning that does not support independence and diversity of the sector. CSO, they argue, have in effect become victims of a 'gagging clause' and can now be viewed as the contractual arm of the state, providing services rather than advocacy. There are also growing concerns this is accentuating the undemocratic of CSOs, centralising power and potentially corrupting them and their original independence and intentions.This seminar series explores these issues and asks: what are the features that promote and undermine the role CSOs play within democratic civic renewal? With speakers from leading CSOs such as Greenpeace, UNESCO and Co-operatives UK, inter-disciplinary academics including from geography, business, economics, sociology, peace studies, philosophy and political theory and policymakers the seminar series investigates these issues from multiple perspectives. It will also build upon existing examples from the experiments that are occurring throughout the UK and Europe where new forms of CSOs are currently being developed.The six seminars will examine the meaning, conditions, possibilities and promises of democracy within civil society. By bringing together an inter-disciplinary network of academics, policymakers and practitioners it will develop a long-term shared interest in civil society and democracy.

民间社会组织（CSO）是一个充满活力的民主社会的核心。慈善机构、志愿团体、社区协会和志同道合的个人的非正式网络因比政党和政府组织更敏感和更有联系而受到赞扬，并能够表达当地社区的需求，特别是那些缺乏影响力和不能为自己说话的人。价值观驱使民间社会组织在其社区内进行社会变革。因此，它们可以创新地设计和提供人们实际需要的服务，通过积极参与，民间社会组织可以促进“社会资本”：发展合作和社会参与所必需的网络、规范和信任。这不仅可以增强社区凝聚力，还可以利用当地社区资源、基层能量、热情和想法来建立一个充满活力的公民社会。这些特点合在一起意味着，民间社会组织有潜力促进公民民主复兴，支持由当地社区积极管理并为当地社区服务的公民服务，而不是由中央政府或受利润和市场力量驱动的私营企业来支配。在过去的三十年里，历届政府都试图利用民间社会组织的响应和民主元素来提供以前由民间社会组织提供的服务。该州例如，本届政府的书面目标是“支持互助会、合作社、慈善机构和社会企业的创建和扩大，并使这些团体能够更多地参与公共服务的运作”（内阁办公室，2014年）。因此，越来越多的学校、图书馆、保健和社会护理服务以及许多以前提供的公共服务正在由民间社会组织或私营组织经营。迄今为止，已有100多项公共服务在“公共服务互助会”中“分拆”，政府的既定目标是让五分之一的公共部门工作人员经营自己的互助会（互助会工作组报告，2015年）。由于民间社会组织被要求提供公共服务，有人担心这可能对健康的民间社会的较难衡量的民主职能产生影响。作为与私营企业竞争的服务提供者，它们受到国家和市场力量的监管，限制了成员促进和满足社区和成员需求的能力。有影响力的巴林基金会报告最近认为民间社会组织正在失去民主遗产（2015年），强调2014年的游说法案对民间社会组织的活动和委托施加了新的限制，不支持该部门的独立性和多样性。他们认为，公民社会组织实际上已经成为“压制条款”的受害者，现在可以被视为国家的合同机构，提供服务而不是宣传。人们也越来越担心这会加剧民间社会组织的不民主、权力集中并可能腐蚀它们及其最初的独立性和意图。本系列研讨会探讨这些问题并提出疑问：促进和破坏民间社会组织作用的特征是什么在民主公民复兴中？来自绿色和平组织，联合国教科文组织和英国合作社等主要民间社会组织的演讲者，跨学科学者，包括地理，商业，经济学，社会学，和平研究，哲学和政治理论以及政策制定者，研讨会系列从多个角度调查这些问题。它还将借鉴联合王国和欧洲各地正在进行的试验中的现有实例，这些地方目前正在发展新形式的民间社会组织，六次研讨会将审查民间社会内部民主的含义、条件、可能性和承诺。通过汇集学术界、决策者和从业人员的跨学科网络，它将发展对民间社会和民主的长期共同兴趣。