International Journal of Comparative Sociologynclc203wagner.pbworks.com/f/Praxis+#7.pdf(Runette,...

http://cos.sagepub.com/Sociology

International Journal of Comparative

http://cos.sagepub.com/content/47/1/34The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/0020715206063256

2006 47: 34International Journal of Comparative SociologyAnita Lacey and Suzan Ilcan

Voluntary Labor, Responsible Citizenship, and International NGOs

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

can be found at:International Journal of Comparative SociologyAdditional services and information for

http://cos.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://cos.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://cos.sagepub.com/content/47/1/34.refs.htmlCitations:

at GEORGE MASON UNIV on February 14, 2011cos.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://cos.sagepub.com/http://cos.sagepub.com/content/47/1/34http://www.sagepublications.comhttp://cos.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://cos.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://cos.sagepub.com/content/47/1/34.refs.htmlhttp://cos.sagepub.com/

Voluntary Labor, Responsible Citizenship, andInternational NGOsAnita Lacey and Suzan IlcanUniversity of Windsor, Canada

AbstractThis article focuses on the relationship between volunteer labor and responsible citizen-ship in an international NGO context. Situated within critical assessments of the voluntarysector, the article examines how voluntary labor is increasingly shaped and steered by theinitiatives of advanced liberalism. Under advanced liberalism, diverse tasks of governmentare redirected from state bureaucracy and distributed to various organizations, agencies,individuals, and citizen groups. Within this context, it explores some key social transform-ations that have led to an increasing reliance on voluntary labor in both government andinternational NGOs. It emphasizes that a range of authorities establish the contemporaryvoluntary sector as a site for providing answers and solutions to social and economicproblems that are now determined to lie outside the reach of the formal domain of thestate. Through the use of substantive international examples on voluntary labor in the inter-national development NGO sector, the authors argue that this sector is increasingly impli-cated in assembling volunteers as ‘responsible citizens’ in the delivery of public services.This responsibilization process produces new effects and plans of actions that are differ-ent from the way traditional liberal approaches viewed volunteers and volunteerism. Thework calls attention to contemporary concerns underscoring voluntary labor and inter-national NGOs, and raises broader questions pertaining to issues of social justice.

Key words: development • international NGOs • responsible citizenship • voluntarysector

If you don’t feel up to crossing the planet to work in Mongolia, you can participate inmany other programs around the world. Volunteer vacations range from expensive andfar away to cheap and close to home. Some require a 10-day minimum commitment;others can be done over a weekend. And while many are quite labor-intensive, othersare fairly cinchy. Volunteer vacations are tax-deductible and more memorable thanordinary trips. However, the amenities are typically far from luxurious. Be prepared torough it a bit. (Runette, 2005: 125)

This excerpt from lifestyle magazine Organic Style highlights one means ofthinking of volunteering, a perspective centered on the experience to be had and

International Journal of Comparative SociologyCopyright © 2006 SAGE Publications

www.sagepublications.comLondon, Thousand Oaks and New Delhi

Vol 47(1): 34–53DOI: 10.1177/0020715206063256


http://cos.sagepub.com/

benefits gained by the volunteer. The definition offered by the United Nations(UN) as part of the 2001 UN Year of Volunteers instead emphasizes altruism:‘Be it understood as mutual aid and self-help, philanthropy and service, or civicparticipation and campaigning, voluntary action is an expression of people’swillingness and capacity to freely help others and improve society’ (in DarcyD’Oliveira et al., 2000: 4). While the impetuses for an individual to commit tovoluntary action may be diverse, the acts of volunteering under advanced liber-alism are intrinsically influenced by the volunteer programs of governments,private businesses, and diverse agencies and organizations. International non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are indeed becoming key actors in a widerange of volunteerism-related decision-making (Pellizzoni, 2003) and volunteerparticipation activities.

This article examines how voluntary labor is shaped and steered by the initia-tives of advanced liberalism. Under advanced liberalism, diverse tasks ofgovernment are redirected from state bureaucracy and distributed to variousorganizations, agencies, individuals, and citizens groups (see, for example, Rose,1999; Isin, 2000; Ilcan and Phillips, 2003). In situating our analysis within criticalassessments of the voluntary sector and international NGOs under advancedliberalism, we discuss some key transformations that have lead to an increasingreliance on voluntary labor in government, private businesses, and diverseagencies and organizations. We emphasize that a range of authorities establishthe contemporary voluntary sector as a site for providing answers and solutionsto social and economic problems that now lie outside the reach of the formaldomain of the state. We employ the term voluntary sector to designate a systemof groups and associations characterized by noncoercive membership and freeand unconstrained participation and activity (Febbraro et al., 1999). Throughthe use of substantive examples of voluntary activity, or labor as we choose tolabel it, in the international development NGO sector, we argue that this sectoris increasingly implicated in assembling volunteers as responsible citizens in thedelivery of public services. We show how this responsibilization processproduces new effects and plans of actions for the voluntary sector and for volun-teerism in the international development NGOs.

VOLUNTARY LABOR UNDER ADVANCED LIBERALISM

Reducing social risks and distributing the costs of risks was a primary concernof liberal state governments in the industrial world of the 20th century. Underthis approach to governing risks, social or public welfare was largely defined asshifting risks from the level of individual citizens, groups, and firms, to society.According to Simon (2002), this approach to welfarism was to be accomplishedthrough the state and its agencies, directly or indirectly. It was an approach thatviewed civil society and the role of volunteerism as existing counter to the stateand as something to be tolerated rather than embraced (see Morison, 2000).

Lacey and Ilcan Voluntary Labor, Responsible Citizenship, and International NGOs 35



However, in the last 30 years in a wide number of liberal states, albeit to varyingextents, the social welfare roles of states have declined (see, for example, Dean,1999; Rose, 1999; Martinez Lucio and Mackenzie, 2004). With the decline of thisrole, we have witnessed the concurrent decentralization of states, the privatiza-tion of public services (Appadurai, 2001), and the devolution of federal respon-sibilities to regional and local governments (Evans and Shields, 2002), privateorganizations (Isin and Wood, 1999; Ilcan et al., 2003) and to NGOs, which havetaken over a wide range of state functions (MacDonald, 2001; Randeria, 2003;Weber, 2004).

Through such transformations, a new rationality of government is emergingthat departs from a focus on society and emphasizes instead the link betweengovernance and the well-being of individuals. This rationality of government,often described as neoliberalism or advanced liberalism (e.g., Dean, 1999; Rose,1999), engages in the production of various modes of subjectification whereparticular individuals, citizens, or groups are viewed as responsible subjects whoare to take greater responsibility for existing social and economic problems. Thepromotion of such an active, responsible subject facilitates the creation ofcertain kinds of expectations and specific ways in which individuals are toconduct themselves (see Borch, 2005).

Throughout this article, we employ the term advanced liberalism in anattempt to connote ‘various assemblages of rationalities, technologies andagencies that constitute the characteristic ways of governing in contemporaryliberal democracies’ (Dean, 1999: 149). The term advanced liberalism is used toavoid producing what Peck and Tickell describe as ‘overgeneralized accounts ofa monolithic and omnipresent neoliberalism’ (2002: 381), given that advancedliberalism allows for consideration of the ways in which ‘neo-liberal rationali-ties exist in complex interrelations with neo-conservatism and populist, anti-governmental reaction, as well as with debates on morality and community’(Dean, 1999: 150; see also Rose, 1996; O’Malley, 2001). In this following sectionwe aim to establish the effects of advanced liberal governance on practices ofvolunteering in western liberal states, before examining the ways in which thesevolunteering practices have then come to influence the use of volunteering byinternational development aid NGOs.

In a context where western liberal states no longer attempt to, to varyingdegrees, answer all of society’s education, health, or security needs, individuals,schools, firms, organizations, and communities are increasingly encouraged totake on a greater share of the responsibility for resolving these issues (Rose,1999, 2000; du Guy, 2004). New technologies of advanced liberal governance arebeing utilized by a wide variety of government administrations in a wide varietyof different contemporary liberal nation-states (see Rose, 1999). And yet despitethe lack of absolute uniformity in descriptors and applications of these technolo-gies of governance (see, for example, Dean, 1999, 2002; Albo, 2002), there arenoteworthy commonalities of experience. Through various outsourcing and

36 International Journal of Comparative Sociology 47(1)



political and administrative decentralization schemes of many western liberalstates, particular individuals and groups are encouraged to take on duties thatwere previously the responsibility of states; a case in point is the voluntarysector’s increasing engagement in public service delivery (e.g. Brock andBanting, 2001; Jenson and Phillips, 2001). While such schemes are said to vari-ously accelerate the transition to market economies, uphold competition,increase economic efficiency, reduce public debt burdens from loss-making enter-prises, and improve public service delivery (Banerjee and Rondinelli, 2003), theynevertheless reflect the shift of state responsibilities to various groups of citizens,private sector organizations, and NGOs (Ilcan and Lacey, in press).

As a consequence of advanced liberal efforts, there is an increasing andsignificant involvement of volunteers and volunteer organizations in deliveringa wide array of services. A diverse range of individuals, private enterprises,community agencies, and international organizations have become progres-sively more engaged in assisting disadvantaged people through various forms ofvoluntary labor (see Jenson and Phillips, 2001; Evans and Shields, 2002). Oneimportant aspect of such contemporary practices, under the guise of inherentlydisengaged civil society participation, is that they are not completely separatedfrom private interests, nation-states, or from international organizations andagreements. For example, a recent study of social justice-oriented voluntaryagencies in Ontario, Canada, illustrates how the voluntary sector is investedindirectly by local, provincial and federal governments with the task of trainingvolunteers to become responsible citizens by providing social services to dis-advantaged individuals (Basok and Ilcan, 2003). With the decline of theCanadian welfare state and the restructuring of public services, the authorsargue that these agencies are a form of ‘community government’ that works torelieve the state of some of its obligations to plan and steer from the center, andto deal with social and economic problems (Basok and Ilcan, 2003).

In an advanced liberal agenda of cutting back funding to public services, thevoluntary sector in Canada, for example, is now more heavily involved inservice delivery and less involved in advocacy (see Jenson and Phillips, 2001;White, 2003). This situation highlights the changing relationships occurringacross a broad range of liberal states between government and civil society,and voluntary work as service delivery.1 However, such changes are not onlyoccurring at the individual nation-state level. International developmentadvocates of advanced liberal programs, such as the World Bank and theOrganization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), areemploying the broad concept of civil society to stress ideas of accountabilityand transparency in government activity, and to promote a notion of govern-ance designed to foster an environment where a market economy can flourish(see, for example,World Bank Social Development Program, 2002; IMF/WorldBank, 2005). Such emphases on civil society are indicative of so-called ThirdWay thinking which is attempting to map a new social democratic course




through a transformed engagement with the notion of civil society (seeGiddens, 1994; Rose, 2000). Morison (2000) emphasizes this engagement asone that entails partnerships between government, business and civil society,the promotion of local initiatives to advance social entrepreneurship in thesocial revamping of society, and the protection and development of the localpublic sphere.

What is noteworthy in this and other similar discussions of the broad conceptof civil society is that the contemporary voluntary sector is hailed as providingpossible answers and solutions to a range of social and economic problems thatlie outside the reach of the formal domain of the contemporary liberal ‘enabling’state (Rose, 2000: 1400). It is in this enabling state that we see a decline of therole of the state to answer to ‘society’s needs for order, security, health andproductivity’, and instead ‘individuals, firms, organizations, localities, schools,parents, hospitals, housing estates must take on themselves – as partners – aportion of the responsibility for their own well-being’ (Rose, 1999: 142; see also2000: 1400).

Despite the deliberative use of voluntary labor by advanced liberal states aspart of this responsibilization process (see, for example, Hartman et al., 2000;Medeiros, 2001; Marinetto, 2003), voluntary work is too often readily conceivedof as a past-time, as extraneous, as an act of altruism, rather than as labor. It is,for example, considered an ‘effort’, as in a voluntary effort, but not a delibera-tive act like choosing what to do as a financially rewarding career; volunteerismis often constructed passively (see, for example, Blackstone, 2004). As we shallsee, such social constructions of political action are central to our understand-ing of the role of voluntary labor in enabling states and, more specifically, ininternational development NGOs. If voluntary labor is depoliticized, the agencyof the volunteer is effectively negated. Volunteerism thus easily becomes aneutralized act.

The act of volunteering can also become a highly individualized act, withemphasis placed on the agent rather than subject. It is in this manner that volun-teering has come to play a vital role in contemporary advanced liberal thoughtand practice. For example, Kearns writes of what he terms the ‘active citizen-ship’ campaigns of the British Conservative government under MargaretThatcher in the 1980s and very early 1990s, and following this, under John Major,whereby individuals were called on by the government to recognize theirresponsibilities to their ‘needy neighbours’ and ‘to give of their talents and skills’(1992: 20; see de Tocqueville, 1900, for an earlier use of this term). The idea ofactive citizenship is to be accomplished by ‘voluntary community participation’and by encouraging the expansion of skills and knowledge that facilitate politi-cal and community involvement (Gifford, 2004). Furthermore, it requires indi-viduals to engage in activities formerly performed by the welfare state (see alsoRoy and Ziemek, 2000; Lacey, 2002). In return for their voluntary efforts, indi-viduals are rewarded by a sense of having ‘done good,’ performed charity, and




shared in a common Christian duty, attributes that are also emphasized by theThatcher government’s policies (Kearns, 1992).

The British Labour Blair government has been involved in furthering theseactive citizenship campaigns, through, for example, the government’s ActiveCommunities Initiative (Milligan and Fyfe, 2005; see also Rose, 2000). Itattaches particular value to the voluntary sector through its adoption of a newstatement of aims in Clause IV, which contains a commitment by the state topartnership and co-operate with voluntary organizations, and through a seriesof compacts between government and the voluntary sector (see, for example,Lewis, 1999; Morison, 2000; Kendall, 2003; Milligan and Fyfe, 2005). The Labourgovernment also commissioned the Crick Report ‘Education for Citizenshipand the Teaching of Democracy in Schools’ which has come to influence thedevelopment of active citizenship education in British schools for primary topost-16-year-old students (Gifford, 2004; see also Olssen, 2004).

Active citizenship, or what could be more accurately termed responsiblecitizenship (see Ilcan and Basok, 2004), uses a language of accountability thatemphasizes the individual volunteer’s responsibility to others, at the same timeas providing a sense of individual reward for meeting that responsibility(Kearns, 1992).2 Advanced liberalism entails a shifting of responsibilities fromgovernmental agencies and authorities to organizations and individual citizensfor their own service provisions – citizens are not only active in this serviceprovision, but are increasingly responsible for it (Isin and Wood, 1999; Ilcan etal., 2003; Ilcan and Basok, 2004). The process of responsibilization is part of anadvanced liberal rationality of power that is being developed to stimulateagency while simultaneously reconfiguring constraints upon the freedom ofchoice of the agent (see Morison, 2000). In this context, Rose and Miller arguethat power is not so much about imposing constraints on individuals as about‘making up’, or assembling, citizens, in and outside of the nation-state context,capable of bearing a sort of governed freedom (1992: 174). For example, theUnited Nations makes use of a language of responsibilization in its descriptivesof volunteering. In so doing, the UN emphasizes the duty individuals ought tofeel towards fellow individuals, a sense of duty they ought to act on:

As a non-market response to situations in which markets function poorly or have anegative impact, the webs of social connectedness generated by volunteerism consti-tute the most basic safety net protecting the powerless from despair, destitution, abuseand fear. Volunteering is an expression of the individual’s involvement in theircommunity. (Darcy D’Oliveira et al., 2000: 7)

The language here is not merely reflexive or justificatory, it is performative inthe sense that a plan of action is called to remedy the problem of the marketand deemed a necessary effect of government (see Rose and Miller, 1992). Themessage is clear – volunteers perform duties where markets fail and destitutionprevails.

NGOs, both from the North and South, frequently act as service delivery




vehicles in preference to the state (Swift, 1999). In the North American context,the United Way serves as an illustrative example. This NGO encompasses morethan 2000 autonomously organized local United Ways. It engages in extensiveservice delivery and relies heavily on voluntary labor for these activities. Oneof its local organizations, United Way/Crusade of Mercy (UW/CM), is managedentirely by volunteers as opposed to a bureaucratic and paid staff. Overseen bya local board of directors and responsible to the greater Chicago community forvarious public service provisions, its mission is to ‘increase the capacity of organ-ized community health and human-service needs of people in the GreaterChicago area’ (Barman, 2002: 1204). It aims to accomplish this goal throughvolunteer-driven community planning schemes that raise money from donorsthrough workplaces, and distribute these resources to local charities. This localorganization and other United Way organizations produce volunteers as respon-sible citizens for public service provisions on a regular basis.

This use of NGOs to provide social services has in turn generated a relianceon voluntary labor to enact these services, processes that are in fact tied to thebroad influence of advanced liberalism in development policies. This sequenceof effects is succinctly expressed by Hulme and Edwards in their assertion thatthe rise of NGOs in development work particularly since the 1980s has not beenby chance and is instead part of a policy agenda ‘driven by beliefs organizedaround the twin poles of neoliberal economics and liberal democratic practices’(cited in Swift, 1999: 19; see also Ilcan and Lacey, in press). It also brings to thefore a striking aspect of civil society that is, according to Urry, engaged inprocesses of ‘internationalization,’ and ‘much of its significance is in speakingfor and through symbols and modes of address that . . . always in part go beyondnational boundaries’ (2005: 377; see also Lacey, 2005). The use of voluntary workby international development NGOs provides an apt example of this inter-nationalization process. In the following section, we examine the ways in whichinternational development NGOs increasingly rely on volunteers to deliverservices, volunteers who are responsibilized as international citizens.

NGO VOLUNTEERISM AND RESPONSIBLE CITIZENSHIP IN THE DEVELOPMENTCONTEXT

In the development context, ceteris parabus, the need for volunteers is becomingincreasingly abundant. In a study of the voluntary sector in Sri Lanka, forexample, volunteers were found to work under the direction of NGOs in socialservice activities and provide social overhead capital and infrastructure. Themajority of these volunteers work in education, health care, and day-carecenters, provide aid to the needy, build roads, tanks, wells and sanitation facili-ties, or engage in activities designed to provide working capital and marketoutlets (James, 1989, in Roy and Ziemek, 2000). These are all activities that wereonce thought to be, in a Keynesian development context, undertaken by thestate. To take the role of volunteers in the development context further, the




World Bank now looks to the presence of volunteers in a developing communityas a credential for further development investment. Volunteering is seen tocontribute to social capital, and this is in turn measured by the World Bank usingthe Social Capital Assessment Tool to ‘identify communities where projects aremore likely to be a success’ (Swain, 2003: 200).

In a manner akin to the operations and rationales of the United Way/Crusadeof Mercy in Chicago, USA, volunteering in some developing countries is integralto a wider network of informal but essential support systems (Smith, 1999, inRoy and Ziemek, 2000) between local communities, local and internationalNGOs, national governments, and international agencies. Within this widernetwork of informal support systems, there is enormous variation in the typesof relationships fostered between the various actors. Of specific interest here arethe variations in activities of international development NGOs, their reliance onvoluntary labor, and their ability to train volunteers as responsible citizens.

Business-oriented markers have become key indicators of internationaldevelopment NGO success. Feldman writes that the market principles thatguide these organizations’ programs include ‘a concern with efficiency, costs, andmeasurable benefits based on individual and privatized relations’ and a directlycorresponding ‘loss of commitment to the principles of reciprocity, obligation,and community solidarity’ (1997: 50). As national and international develop-ment agencies from the North are increasingly funding NGOs, the donoragencies’ plans of action and practices permeate through to the NGOs as theycontinually seek to secure funds (see, for example, Sethi, 1993; Mohan, 2002;Ilcan and Lacey, in press). The funding relationship is furthered by NGOsseeking ‘more immediate, concrete, or more visible results’ in an effort to‘demonstrate results for the funds they are granted,’ therefore limiting time-consuming grassroots’ consciousness-raising activities and programs (Lebon,1997: 4; see also Wallace et al., 1998) and focusing instead on recruiting particu-lar groups of citizens, such as volunteers, to take on greater responsibility forthose activities modeled on business-oriented and contractual relations.

The African Women’s Development and Communications Network(AWDCN) expounds on the practical and more abstract implications of thisbusiness orientation in terms of quantifiable outcomes of development aid(1994). The Network argues that northern-based international NGOs havefocused their attention on specific outcomes that ‘may not have long-termbenefits,’ and on funding on a project-by-project basis, which does not covernon-project costs such as administrative and overhead expenses:

This kind of funding also perpetually ties the African nonprofits to the donors. In somecases, if the donors withdrew their support, the organizations would collapse. Energyis therefore spent on survival strategies rather than long-term strategic planning andmanagement. And there is a lack of autonomy for deciding on-the-spot priorities. Thishas led to some resentment of northern organizations by African ones that seeconditions placed on them as neocolonization and that dislike enforcement of some




stringent measures and demands by donor organizations. (1994: 174; see also Nelson,2001)

The implication of centering on productivity and short-term project lines in theinternational development NGO environment often means that NGO volun-teers not only become gradually more responsible for ‘survival’ kinds of workbut also increasingly tied to networks of contested information and knowledgeabout what it means to offer voluntary labor.

Voluntary labor is frequently thought of as automatically advantageous todeveloping communities and especially legitimate, more so than professionalpaid work, because of the notion that volunteers have a genuine commitmentto a project, rather than acting according to pecuniary or self-rewardinginterest (Van Rooy, 2004; see also Goodin, 2003). This romantic notion of thevolunteer’s role in development projects for international NGOs ignores,however, a fundamental power dynamic. The questions asked of where, when,how, are posed by the donor and/or the volunteer, possibly as a representativeof the donor, rather than the recipient, as the excerpt at the beginning of thisarticle implies – it is up to the volunteer to decide where and how their effortsare best spent. ‘Donors and lenders may need to be able to give and lend; butpotential recipients may not need to receive or borrow’ (Chambers and Pettit,2004: 146).

In accordance with contemporary advanced liberal agendas, increased pro-fessionalization of international development NGOs has seen a shift in focuswithin NGOs. There has emerged an increasing emphasis on raising publicprofiles and responding to the demands of donors, rather than to the needs andinterests of the people who they claim to represent (Wallace et al., in Van Rooy,2004). Desforges cites the argument of Michael Edwards, formerly a develop-ment professional for Oxfam and for Save the Children:

Increasingly the charity becomes a business itself, reshaping decisions around abottom line of market share . . . There is little room for constituency building since thisis a slow and expensive business with little guarantee of payback in financial terms –it is considered an overhead rather than a core programme activity. (Edwards, inDesforges, 2004: 566)

In a step towards changing the balance of power in contemporary aid prac-tices, the Voluntary Service Overseas (VSO) NGO, an international volunteerorganization with recruitment bases in Canada, Kenya, the Netherlands, thePhilippines, and the UK, has established a workshop process. The workshopprocess enables VSO staff members to meet with potential partners who mightwant to host volunteers, and review that partner’s vision and goals in relation tothe prospective volunteer placement. At the end of the workshop, it mightemerge that a volunteer placement is not needed at all (Blackburn et al., 2002,in Chambers and Pettit, 2004; see also the example of ATD Fourth World Volun-teers, in Fagergren, 2004). Two further examples of volunteer-involved NGO




projects that appear to have empowered local communities in the South, ratherthan donors or North-based volunteer workers, are the India Population ProjectVIII and Barani Area Development Project (Brinkerhoff, 2003). Brinkerhoffdemonstrates that in each of these projects, diverse partnerships between inter-national donors like the World Bank, national donors such as the India Popu-lation Project, both North- and South-based NGOs, and community-basedvolunteers operate in processes designed specifically to overcome donor-domi-nated power relationships.

The concurrent emphasis in the international NGO arena to ‘professionalize’activities by following business-like practices and the desire to use volunteerlabor as a sign of authenticity or genuine-ness (see also Korten, 1990; Parsonsand Broadbridge, 2004), and as a budget-savvy endeavor, are at odds (Smillie,1995; Van Rooy, 2004). Weiss and Collins argue that NGO field operations areincreasingly staffed by younger volunteers, who sometimes lack the experienceand expertise necessary, but are called upon as international NGOs struggle torespond to emergencies with larger numbers of people involved (1996, see alsoSalamon et al., 2000). The issue of balance arises – how to balance the increaseddemand for services and therefore labor while attempting to also reduce theflow of funds to labor costs. The answer, however, cannot be to rely, or indeedto facilitate a reliance, on voluntary labor forces that are inexperienced or ill-equipped.

Yamamoto and Ashizawa (2001) imply that the ability of individual nation-states to define the public good and to provide such goods to society has notonly been limited by the pressures of globalization but the reliance on the volun-teer sector has been a logical reaction to this process. This alludes to a lack ofchoice by governments of nation-states. Further, the sentiments of Yamamotoand Ashizawa assume a uniformity of experience of globalization and itsimpacts and a roughly even starting base. Decisions made by governments ofEuropean Union member-states to introduce welfare reforms that impingeupon social welfare programs cannot be compared to the lack of an existingsocial welfare infrastructure in Darfur, for example. Nevertheless, despitemassive variations in experience between rich North and poor South states,volunteers are increasingly filling public service positions that have been facili-tated by advanced liberal programs and policies (see Roy and Ziemek, 2000;Ilcan and Basok, 2004). This is demonstrated in the objectives of the EuropeanUnion Vision 21 project, whereby volunteer workers are called upon to fill inthe gaps in social service institutions in the anticipation of increasing ‘thecapacity of social work bodies to cater for the needs of disadvantaged groups’(Vision 21, 2004, no page numbers; see also Feldman, 1997; Swift, 1999).




IMAGINING VOLUNTEERING IN INTERNATIONAL NGOS

Local and international NGOs are often popularly imagined to act as vanguardsagainst state agendas. Indeed, it is precisely their separation from the state –inherent in the name – that is a key defining feature. However, whether individ-ual and international NGOs are seen ‘as a progressive arm of an irresistiblemarch toward liberal democracy . . ., an extension of the push toward privatiza-tion, or a means to resist the imposition of western values, knowledge, anddevelopment regimes depends on the perspective and agenda of the imaginer’(Fisher, 1997: 442). This final section aims to further investigate the effects ofthis conception of NGOs, and also the ways in which voluntarism with inter-national development NGOs is imagined.

Typologies of NGOs have reflexively reinforced a synonymy between suppos-edly universalized progressive causes and NGOs by their very definition (see,for example, Korten, 1990). Tvedt provides the example, among others, of thesuccess of the American-based Unification Church in gaining access to the inter-national NGO community at the United Nations, based on the loose ultraisticdefinition of NGOs employed by the UN (2002; see also Willetts, 2001). TheUnification Church has been judged by the US Congress as pursuing a world-wide theocracy, determined to undermine the separation between church andstate, a goal in clear contradiction with the aims of the United Nations (seeTvedt, 2002). The set of criteria offered by the ECOSOC agency of the UnitedNations (2005) is overly broad and indeed the National Rifle Association(NRA) of the United States meets the definition just as, for example, the OhioCoalition against Gun Violence. Reflected here is the normative assumptionthat NGOs are altruistic and progressive, but such assumptions come from aparticular imagining of NGOs.

Each international NGO can be imagined differently, according to theperspective of the individual evaluating or experiencing the organization (seealso Van Rooy, 2004, on framing). Taking a prominent international develop-ment NGO as an example, a Canadian financial contributor to CARE Canadawill inevitably bring a different gaze or imagining to the work of CARE thaneither a paid or volunteer Canadian project worker in Tanzania. Each of thesepeople will imagine and experience CARE differently when compared to theimaginings of local volunteers or members of communities where the organiz-ation’s projects are being enacted. An historical example from the sameorganization offers another imagining. After providing over 150,000 foodpackages to refugees and others in South Vietnam in 1955, the politics ofCARE became particularly noteworthy among certain groups. US officialspromoted the organization’s participatory efforts as boosting South Vietnam’s‘opposition to communism’ (Pergande, 2002: 173), an imagining that wouldconceive CARE volunteers as responsible international citizens for particularpolitical purchase.




Desforges argues that international development NGOs are ‘imagined asdelivering global citizenship to individuals,’ enabling citizens in northern donorcountries to ‘have their say on what international development practices andpolitics should look like’ (2004: 555). An important part of the imagining ofthese organizations from the perspective of people in the North is the popularbelief that remote participation through volunteer fundraising efforts or directpersonal financial contribution gives them a stake in the activities of the NGOin development activities in the South (Eyben and Ferguson, 2004). Urry arguesthat such an imagining is typical of the ways in which membership of organiz-ations is now increasingly imagined:

Membership has typically been thought of in terms of joining organisations that thenprovide various rights and duties to their members . . . But what is now happening isthat new ‘organisations’ have developed which are much more media-ted throughvarious global fluids. People can imagine ourselves as members (or supporters) of suchorganisations through purchases, wearing the T-shirt, hearing the CD, surfing to theorganisation’s page on the web, buying the video of iconic figures and so on. Objectscan provide for that sense of vicarious or fluid ‘network-membership’. (2000a: 44; seealso Urry, 2000b)

People can believe themselves to be members or supporters of such organiz-ations by supporting them as volunteers, perhaps by thinking of themselves aspart of an imagined larger voluntary body (Anderson, 1983).

In an investigation into the politics of altruism, Lissner uses the analogy of s/hewho pays the piper calls the tune to state the extent of this invisible hold overboth donated money and time (1977). He cites the heads of two internationaldevelopment NGOs who support the notion that agency representatives are bothlegally and morally obliged to respect the expressed and assumed wishes of theirsupporters, the first of whom argues that ‘this money does not belong to us’ andthe second claims that ‘you can use other people’s money, which they entrust toyou, only for the objectives you believe they understand and intend to support’(cited in Lissner, 1977: 271). However, as Eyben and Ferguson (2004) maintain,this notion of international NGOs being accountable to donors can be turned onitself so that donors are in fact accountable to poor people.

Such imaginings might appear to be remote and have little bearing on theday-to-day practices and operations of international development NGOs them-selves. However, as stakeholders, donors and volunteer workers can activelyshape these NGOs. Who or what is of greater influence, however, on the activi-ties and general modus operandi of these organizations is a pervasive politicaland economic imperative that, as we argue, is part of an advanced liberal planin development practices. In this regard, Desforges argues that internationaldevelopment NGOs are increasingly more oriented towards legitimating theirown organizational style and survival than in educating donor publics inendemic causes of poverty in the South or campaigning for justice: ‘[I]t isthe ability of organizations to reproduce themselves as actors over time that




legitimates their agenda, rather than legitimation provided by support for thejustice of a particular cause’ (2004: 566).

Voluntary labor, despite normative assumptions of altruism, is utilized in thisprocess of market-orientation of NGO activity, and is itself increasingly pro-fessionalized. The United Nations Volunteers (UNV) program, under theauspices of the UN Development Program (UNDP, 2003), is a volunteeringscheme that aptly fits Giddens’s description of ‘clever volunteers’ (1994: 94),whereby highly specialized professionals with precise qualifications are calledfor (see UN Volunteers, 2005a). Professional policy advisors, environmentalspecialists, specialized medical practitioners, even volunteerism specialists, areamong the volunteers called for by the UNDP. These are volunteers who matchwhat Hustinx and Lammertyn describe as the ‘ideal-typical construct of reflex-ive volunteerism’, which works to exclude ‘less privileged population groupsfrom contemporary volunteer action’ (2003: 183). By extension, this demand forhighly specialized professionals as volunteers in the development sector alsoexcludes members of communities targeted for development. As volunteerscome to increasingly partake in activities once provided for by states as publicservices, their labor and skills too will become increasingly specialized. Trainingopportunities within developing communities will become exceptional, as in thecases illustrated in India and Pakistan by Brinkerhoff (2003) which further high-light the power of donors and NGOs to shape developing communities (see alsoIlcan and Lacey, in press).

While development agencies like the UNDP continue to ‘bring-in’ expertvolunteers, local people in developing communities do act as volunteers in theprovision of social services and programs, and are thus responsibilized for theirown welfare. In a clear demonstration of the responsibilization of citizens withindeveloping communities, the UNV conducted a training course of local munici-pal administrators and representatives of local city halls and human rightsassociations in the Burkina Faso capital. The goal of the training course, accord-ing to Francesco Galtieri, the UNV Program Officer, is that of raising citizens’awareness around social, economic and cultural rights, and participatory democ-racy will help the country involve the beneficiaries of local development initia-tives as responsible actors of decentralization (UN Volunteers, 2005b). Here, weare provided with another example of what Turner (2001) describes as thevoluntary sector being called upon to satisfy communal needs, needs that areleft exposed in the enabling state (Rose, 2000).

CONCLUSION

There is a need for ongoing examination of the role of voluntary labor in inter-national development NGOs, an examination that this article aims to contrib-ute towards. The need for this analysis has been generated by concurrentpropensities of decreasing state intervention under the influence of advanced




liberalism, the impact of advanced liberalism on NGO practices, and increasinglabor demand and human need in developing and non-developing communities.Voluntary labor can too easily be contextualized as altruistic and, in the contextof the third sector and/or civil society, as detached from the state. In contrast,this article has demonstrated the increasing role that both states and inter-national organizations play in shaping the voluntary sector as a force in theresponsibilization of citizenry. As advanced liberal enabling states retreat fromthe provision of social services, volunteers and voluntary organizations areincreasingly called upon, by these very same states, to deliver a wide array ofservices. Individual citizens are in this way responsibilized for the welfare ofothers. This process of responsible citizenship is furthered by extending a senseof individual reward for those who volunteer to meet this need and imbuedresponsibility.

In further accordance with advanced liberalism and the withdrawal of statesfrom welfare or social service provisions, non-governmental organizations actincreasingly as service delivery agents. We have demonstrated that, in doing this,NGOs act as either the suppliers or organizers of voluntary labor. The imaginedseparation between the voluntary sector and states is thus further obscured.Volunteers are responsibilized to work in roles once performed by states or, insome development contexts, in the ongoing absence of state-supported socialservice institutions. As this article has explicated, assembling volunteers asresponsible citizens in the delivery of public services has enormous implicationsfor: the long-term viability of those services, given the donated nature of volun-tary labor; the quality of services, given the precarious nature of voluntary laborsupply, and; for the relationship between volunteers and local communities,given the potential for agenda-setting by either the volunteers themselves or theNGOs that act as overseers. Despite these shortcomings, the voluntary sector asa whole is nevertheless itself increasingly responsibilized for public serviceprovisions.

At the heart of much voluntary action lies a desire for positive and justchange. This article has not sought to undermine this expressed desire; instead,it has sought to highlight some of the possible misconceptions of contemporarypractices of volunteerism. Advanced liberalism, as practiced by state govern-ments and international organizations, continues to shape the ways in whichvoluntary labor is called upon and put to use. As we have shown, non-governmental organizations in enabling states and in the international develop-ment context increasingly act in conjunction with agents and institutions ofadvanced liberalism to supply voluntary labor for responsible citizenshipprograms. Such programs act to make individuals, in this case volunteers,responsible for the welfare of others through service provision. NGO volunteersare thus increasingly acting, unwittingly, to facilitate advanced liberal programsof social service and welfare withdrawal. This is a relationship that is worthy ofongoing future examination.





ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research received support from the Social Sciences and HumanitiesResearch Council of Canada, Canada Research Chair program of Dr SuzanIlcan, University of Windsor. The authors would also like to acknowledge thehelpful comments of the anonymous reviewers and IJCS Editor.

NOTES

1 This article does not aim to provide a comparative study of the differences in changesin the roles of states of various nation-states globally. Instead, it aims to report andanalyze the broad, yet non-uniform, influence of the effects of advanced liberalism onNGO voluntarism practices, particularly those NGOs engaged in internationaldevelopment practices.

2 The rewards have been related to the virtues of mutual obligation in the language ofcommunitarianism (Sandel, 1996; Etzioni, 1998, 2004; Tam, 1998, all in Ilcan andBasok, 2004).

REFERENCES

African Women’s Development and Communication Network [AWDCN] (1994) ‘TheVoluntary and Nonprofit Sector in Sub-Saharan Africa’, in M.D. de Oliveira Institutode Ação Cultural and Rajesh Tandon Society for Participatory Research in Asia (eds)Citizens Strengthening Global Civil Society, pp. 145–94. Washington, DC: CIVICUSWorld Alliance for Citizen Participation.

Albo, G. (2002) ‘Neoliberalism, the State, and the Left: A Canadian Perspective’,Monthly Review 54(1): 46–55.

Anderson, B. (1983) Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread ofNationalism. London: Verso.

Appadurai, A. (2001) ‘Deep Democracy: Urban Governmentality and the Horizon ofPolitics’, Environment and Urbanization 13(2): 23–43.

Banerjee, S.G. and Rondinelli, D.A. (2003) ‘Does Foreign Aid Promote Privatization?Empirical Evidence from Developing Countries’, World Development 31(9): 1527–48.

Barman, E. (2002) ‘Asserting Difference: The Strategic Response of Nonprofit Organiz-ations to Competition’, Social Forces 80(4): 1191–222.

Basok, T. and Ilcan, S. (2003) ‘The Voluntary Sector and the Depoliticization of CivilSociety: Implications for Social Justice’, International Journal of Canadian Studies 28:113–31.

Blackstone, A. (2004) ‘“It’s Just About Being Fair”: Activism and the Politics of Volun-teering in the Breast Cancer Movement’, Gender and Society 18(3): 350–68.

Borch, C. (2005) ‘Systemic Power: Luhmann, Foucault, and Analytics of Power’, ActaSociologica 48(2): 155–67.

Brinkerhoff, J. (2003) ‘Donor-Funded Government–NGO Partnership for Public ServiceImprovement: Cases from India and Pakistan’, Voluntas: International Journal ofVoluntary and Nonprofit Organizations 14(1): 105–22.

Brock, K. and Banting, K. (2001) ‘The Non-Profit Sector and Government in a NewCentury: An Introduction’, in K. Brock and K. Banting (eds) The Non-Profit Sectorand Government in a New Century, pp. 1–28. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s UniversityPress.




Chambers, R. and Pettit, J. (2004) ‘Shifting Power to Make a Difference’, in L. Grovesand R. Hinton (eds) Inclusive Aid: Changing Power and Relationships in InternationalDevelopment, pp. 137–62. London: Earthscan.

Darcy D’Oliveira, M., Leigh, R. and Campanaro, R. (eds) (2000) Below the Waterline ofPublic Visibility: Roundtable on Volunteerism and Social Development. The Hague:United Nations Volunteers.

Dean, M. (1999) Governmentality: Power and Rule in Modern Society. London: Sage.Dean, M. (2002) ‘Liberal Government and Authoritarianism’, Economy and Society

31(1): 37–61.Desforges, L. (2004) ‘The Formation of Global Citizenship: International Non-

Governmental Organisations in Britain’, Political Geography 23: 549–69.de Tocqueville, A. (1900) Democracy in America, 2 vols, trans. H. Keene. New York: The

Colonial Press.Du Guy, P. (2004) ‘Against “Enterprise” (But Not Against “Enterprise”, For That Would

Make No Sense)’, Organization 11(1): 37–57.Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) of the United Nations (2005) ‘Consultative

Status with the United Nations’. Available at: [http://un.org./esa/coordination/ngo],accessed 12 July 2005.

Evans, B.M. and Shields, J. (2002) ‘The Third Sector: Neo-Liberal Restructuring, Govern-ance, and the Remaking of State-Civil Society Relationships’, in C. Dunn (ed.) TheHandbook of Canadian Public Administration, pp. 139–58. Toronto: Oxford Uni-versity Press.

Eyben, R. and Ferguson, C. (2004) ‘How Can Donors Become More Accountable toPoor People?’, in L. Groves and R. Hinton (eds) Inclusive Aid: Changing Power andRelationships in International Development, pp. 163–80. London: Earthscan.

Fagergren, A. (2004) ‘Help for All Distressed: ATD Fourth World is at the Heart ofVolunteering’, UN Chronicle 3: 29–31.

Febbraro, A.R., Hall, M.H. and Parmegiani, M. (1999) Developing a Typology of theVoluntary Health Sector in Canada: Definition and Classification Issues. Ottawa:Public Health Agency of Canada.

Feldman, S. (1997) ‘NGOs and Civil Society: (Un)Stated Contradictions’, Annals of theAmerican Academy of Political and Social Science 554(November): 46–65.

Fisher, W.F. (1997) ‘Doing Good? The Politics and Antipolitics of NGO Practices’,Annual Review of Anthropology 26: 439–64.

Giddens, A. (1994) Beyond Left and Right: The Future of Radical Politics. Stanford, CA:Stanford University Press.

Gifford, C. (2004) ‘National and Post-National Dimensions of Citizenship Education inthe UK’, Citizenship Studies 8(2): 145–58.

Goodin, R. (2003) Reflective Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Hartman, Y., Jennings, L. and Gilmour, J. (2000) ‘“Hi, I’m Joe and I am a Mutual Partici-

pant in Society”: The Rise of Compulsory Voluntarism’, paper presented at TASAConference, Flinders University, Adelaide, 6–8 December.

Hustinx, L. and Lammertyn, F. (2003) ‘Collective and Reflexive Styles of Volunteering:A Sociological Modernization Perspective’, Voluntas: International Journal of Volun-tary and Nonprofit Organizations 14(2): 167–87.

Ilcan, S. and Basok, T. (2004) ‘Community Government: Voluntary Agencies, SocialJustice and the Responsibilization of Citizens’, Citizenship Studies 8(2): 129–44.

Ilcan, S. and Lacey, A. (in press) ‘Governing through Empowerment: Oxfam’s GlobalReform and Trade Campaigns’, Globalizations 3(2).




Ilcan, S. and Phillips, L. (2003) ‘Making Food Count: Expert Knowledge and GlobalTechnologies of Government’, Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology40(4): 441–61.

Ilcan, S., O’Connor, D. and Oliver, M. (2003) ‘Contract Governance and the CanadianPublic Sector,’ Relations Industrielle/Industrial Relations 58(4): 620–43.

Isin, E. (2000) ‘Governing Cities without Government’, in E. Isin (ed.) Democracy,Citizenship and the Global City, pp. 148–68. London and New York: Routledge.

Isin, E. and Wood, P. (1999) Citizenship and Identity. London: Sage.International Monetary Fund [IMF]/World Bank (2005) Global Monitoring Report.

Available at: [http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/cat/longres.cfm?sk=18196.0], accessed13 July 2005.

Jenson, J. and Phillips, S.D. (2001) ‘Redesigning the Canadian Citizenship Regime:Remaking the Institutions of Representation’, in C. Crouch, K. Eder and D. Tambini(eds) Citizenship, Markets, and the State, pp. 69–89. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kearns,A.J. (1992) ‘Active Citizenship and Urban Governance’, Transactions of the Insti-tute of British Geographers 17(1): 20–34.

Kendall, J. (2003) The Voluntary Sector. London: Routledge.Korten, D.C. (1990) Getting to the 21st Century: Voluntary Action and the Global Agenda.

West Hartford, CN: Kumarian Press.Lacey, A. (2002) ‘Networks of Protest, Communities of Activism: Autonomous Activism

in Contemporary Britain’, PhD thesis, Monash University, Melbourne.Lacey, A. (2005) ‘Networked Communities: Social Centres and Activist Spaces in

Contemporary Britain’, Space and Culture: The International Journal of Social Spaces8(3): 286–301.

Lebon, N. (1997) ‘Volunteer and Professionalized Activism in the Sao Paolo Women’sMovement’, Conference paper, 1997 Meeting of the Latin American Studies Associ-ation, Guadalajara, Mexico.

Lewis, J. (1999) ‘Reviewing the Relationship between the Voluntary Sector and the Statein Britain in the 1990s’, Voluntas 10(3): 255–70.

Lissner, J. (1977) The Politics of Altruism: A Study of the Political Behaviour of Volun-tary Development Agencies. Geneva: Lutheran World Federation.

MacDonald, L. (2001) ‘NGOs and the Discourse of Participatory Development in CostaRica’, in H. Veltmeyer and A. O’Malley (eds) Transcending Neoliberalism:Community Based Development in Latin America, pp: 125–53. Bloomfield, CT:Kumarian Press.

Marinetto, M. (2003) ‘Who Wants to be an Active Citizen? The Politics and Practices ofCommunity Involvement’, Sociology 37(1): 103–20.

Martinez Lucio, M. and MacKenzie, R. (2004) ‘“Unstable Boundaries?” Evaluating the“New Regulation” within Employment Relations’, Economy and Society 33(1):77–97.

Medeiros, C. (2001) ‘Civilizing the Popular? The Law of Popular Participation and theDesign of a New Civil Society in the 1990s Bolivia’, Critique of Anthropology 21(4):401–25.

Milligan, C. and Fyfe, N. (2005) ‘Preserving Space for Volunteers: Exploring the LinksBetween Voluntary Welfare Organizations, Volunteering and Citizenship’, UrbanStudies 42(3): 417–33.

Mohan, G. (2002) ‘The Disappointments of Civil Society: The Politics of NGO Interven-tion in Northern Ghana’, Political Geography 21: 125–54.




Morison, J. (2000) ‘The Government-Voluntary Sector Compacts: Governance, Govern-mentality, and Civil Society’, Journal of Law and Society 27(1): 98–132.

Nelson, P. (2001) ‘Information, Location, and Legitimacy: The Changing Bases of CivilSociety Involvement in International Economic Policy’, in M. Edwards and J.Gaventa (eds) Global Citizen Action, pp. 59–72. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.

Olssen, M. (2004) ‘From the Crick Report to the Parekh Report: Multiculturalism,Cultural Difference, and Democracy – The Re-Visioning of Citizenship Education’,British Journal of Sociology and Education 25(2): 179–92.

O’Malley, P. (2001) ‘Genealogy, Systematisation and Resistance in “Advanced Liberal-ism”’, in G. Wickham and G. Pavlich (eds) Rethinking Law, Society and Governance:Foucault’s Bequest, pp. 13–25. Portland, OR: Hart.

Parsons, E. and Broadbridge, A. (2004) ‘Managing Change in Nonprofit Organisations’,Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations 15(3):227–43.

Peck, J. and Tickell, A. (2002) ‘Neoliberalizing Space’, Antipode 34: 380–404.Pelizzoni, L. (2003) ‘Knowledge, Uncertainty and the Transformation of the Public

Sphere’, European Journal of Social Theory 6(3): 327–55.Pergande, D. (2002) ‘Private Voluntary Aid and Nation Building in South Vietnam: The

Humanitarian Politics of CARE, 1954–61’, Peace and Change 27(2): 165–97.Randeria, S. (2003) ‘Cunning States and Unaccountable International Institutions: Legal

Plurality, Social Movements and Rights of Local Communities to Common PropertyResources’, Archives Européennes de Sociologie XLIV(1): 27–60.

Rose, N. (1996) ‘The Death of the Social? Refiguring the Territory of Government’,Economy and Society 25(3): 327–56.

Rose, N. (1999) Powers of Freedom: Reframing Political Thought. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

Rose, N. (2000) ‘Community, Citizenship and the Third Way’, American BehavioralScientist 43(9): 1395–411.

Rose, N. and Miller, P. (1992) ‘Political Power Beyond the State: Problematics of Govern-ment’, British Journal of Sociology 43(2): 172–205.

Rotolo, T. and Wilson, J. (2004) ‘What Happened to the “Long Civic Generation”?Explaining Cohort Differences in Volunteerism’, Social Forces 82(3): 1091–121.

Roy, K. and Ziemek, S. (2000) ‘On the Economics of Volunteering’, ZEF DiscussionPapers on Development Policy. Bonn: Center for Developmental Research.

Runette, C. (2005) ‘Five Amazing Volunteer Vacations’, Organic Style 5(2): 94–125.Salamon, L.M., Hems, L.C. and Chinnock, K. (2000) ‘The Nonprofit Sector: For What

and for Whom?’,Working Papers of The John Hopkins Comparative Nonprofit SectorProject, No. 37, Baltimore, MD.

Sethi, H. (1993) ‘Action Groups in the New Politics’, in P. Wignaraja (ed.) New SocialMovements in the South: Empowering the People, pp. 230–55. London: Zed Books.

Simon, J. (2002) ‘Taking Risks: Extreme Sports and the Embrace of Risk in AdvancedLiberal Societies’, in J. Simon and T. Baker (eds) Embracing Risk: The ChangingCulture of Insurance and Responsibility, pp. 177–208. Chicago, IL: University ofChicago Press.

Smillie, I. (1995) The Alms Bazaar. London: IT.Swain, N. (2003) ‘Social Capital and its Uses’, Archives Européennes de Sociologie

XLIV(2): 185–212.Swift, J. (1999) Civil Society in Question. Toronto: Between the Lines.



Turner, B.S. (2001) ‘The Erosion of Citizenship’, British Journal of Sociology 52(2):189–209.

Turner, S. (1998) ‘Global Civil Society,Anarchy and Governance: Assessing an EmergingParadigm’, Journal of Peace Research 35(1): 5–42.

Tvedt,T. (2002) ‘Development NGOs: Actors in a Global Civil Society or in a New Inter-national Social System?’, Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and NonprofitOrganizations 13(4): 363–75.

United Nations Development Program (UNDP) (2003) ‘Volunteerism and Develop-ment’, Essentials 12(October): 1–12.

United Nations Volunteers (UNV) (2005a) ‘Vacancies for Volunteers’. Available at:[http://www.unvolunteers.org/volunteers/unvvacs/index.htm], accessed 10 July 2005.

United Nations Volunteers (UNV) (2005b) ‘Citizenship Training to Help StrengthenDecentralization Process in Burkina Faso’. Available at: [http://www.unv.org/Infobase/news_releases/2005/05_07_07BFA_citizen.htm], accessed 15 July 2005.

Urry, J. (2000a) Sociology Beyond Societies. London: Routledge.Urry, J. (2000b) ‘Global Flows and Global Citizenship’, in E. Isin (ed.) Democracy,

Citizenship and the Global City, pp. 62–78. London: Routledge.Urry, J. (2005) ‘The Good News and the Bad News’, Critical Sociology 31(3): 375–78.Van Rooy, A. (2004) The Global Legitimacy Game: Civil Society, Globalization, and

Protest. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Vision 21 (2004) ‘Volunteerism and Social Services in the 21st Century’. Available at:

[http://www.vision21.neostrada.pl/ab.html], accessed 30 March 2005.Wallace, T., Crowther, S. and Shepherd, A. (1998) ‘Is the New Professionalism Sapping

Grassroots Vigour?’ Available at: [www.id21.org/society/8cNH2.html], accessed 2February 2005.

Weber, H. (2004) ‘Reconstituting the “Third World”? Poverty Reduction and Territori-ality in the Global Politics of Development’, Third World Quarterly 25(1): 187–206.

Weiss, T.G. and Collins, C. (1996) Humanitarian Challenges and Intervention: WorldPolitics and the Dilemmas of Help. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

White, D. (2003) ‘Social Policy and Solidarity, Orphans of the New Model of SocialCohesion’, Canadian Journal of Sociology 28(1): 51–76.

Willetts, P. (2001) ‘Transnational Actors and International Organizations in GlobalPolitics’, in J. Baylis and S. Smith (eds) The Globalization of World Politics: An Intro-duction to International Relations, 2nd edn, pp. 356–86. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.

World Bank Social Development Program (2002) World Bank–Civil Society Collabor-ation – Progress Report for Fiscal Years 2000 and 2001. Available at: [http://siteresources.worldbank.org/CSO/Resources/ProgRptFY0001.pdf], accessed 12 July 2005.

Yamamoto, T. and Ashizawa, K.G. (2001) ‘Overview’, in T. Yamamoto and K.G.Ashizawa (eds) Governance and Civil Society in a Global Age, pp. 9–29. Tokyo: JapanCenter for International Exchange.

Dr Anita Lacey works as a Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Social Justice andGlobalization Studies at the University of Windsor. Her research fields and interests includealternative globalization and global justice movements, the idea and ideal of communityand community spaces, particularly in regards to protests, and global social policy and




development politics. Address: Social Justice and Globalization Studies, Department ofSociology and Anthropology, University of Windsor, 401 Sunset Avenue, Windsor, Ontario,Canada N9B 3P4. [email: [email protected]]

Suzan Ilcan is Professor of Sociology, and Canada Research Chair in Social Justice andGlobalization Studies, in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at the Universityof Windsor. Her current work is primarily concerned with the problematization of globalprogrammes, expertise, and governance in international contexts. She is presently workingon two funded research projects, one on expert knowledge and social transformations andthe other on concepts of community, justice, and responsible citizenship in internationaldevelopment organizations. Address: Department of Sociology and Anthropology,University of Windsor, 401 Sunset Avenue, Windsor, Ontario, Canada N9B 3P4. [email:[email protected]]



Date post:	23-Oct-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

International Journal of Comparative Sociologynclc203wagner.pbworks.com/f/Praxis+#7.pdf(Runette,...

Documents