What is it about?

Many donor policies for divided, post-war societies are built around the idea of strengthening civil society (CS). These policies have been criticized for creating internationalized organizations without local backing that are unable to represent citizens’ interests. This article explores the question of legitimacy of CS organizations (CSOs) based on in-depth research in Bosnia-Herzegovina. It explores why legitimacy for donors rarely accompanies legitimacy for local actors. We hypothesized that whilst donors avoid supporting mono-ethnic organizations, seen as problematic for peacebuilding, ‘ethnicness’ may provide local legitimacy. However, our analysis of CSOs’ ethnicness nuances research characterizing organizations as either inclusive or divisive. Moreover, local legitimacy is not based on ethnicness per se, but CSOs’ ability to skilfully interact with ethnically divided constituencies and political structures. In addition, we offer novel explanations why few organizations enjoy both donor and local legitimacy, including local mistrust of donors’ values and perceived lack of results. Local actors most frequently connected legitimacy with their perception of whether a given organization is 'solving concrete needs'. We also show that a combination of local and donor legitimacy is possible, and explore this rare but interesting category of organizations.

Featured Image

Read the Original

This page is a summary of: Civil society in a divided society: Linking legitimacy and ethnicness of civil society organizations in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Cooperation and Conflict, October 2016, SAGE Publications,
DOI: 10.1177/0010836716673088.
You can read the full text:

Read

Contributors

The following have contributed to this page