Submit a thread to our digital quilt for the chance to be featured in an exhibition and win £200. Learn more
Menu

Category: Knowledge Hub

CIVICUS World Assembly in Bogota

Posted on by Vijay Krishnarayan

Been there, done that…

There are two types of delegate to the CIVICUS World Assembly. The hardened veterans who have been there, done that and worn out the tee-shirt. They take a particular joy in telling anyone who cares to listen how many times they have heard it all before. Then there are those that are never tire of this amazing moment when civil society colleagues from across the globe come together to talk and think. I’ll confess here that this year I felt myself drifting dangerously towards that first rather unattractive group. But that was before I had a chance to stop and take stock of what was being said.

This was the first opportunity for civil society to come together in the Sustainable Development Goal era. It was one of the most diverse CIVICUS gatherings with more than 900 people converging in Bogota. They reflected the gamut of civic perspective: concerned individuals; local groups; national associations; international federations; development donors; government officials; and the occasional tribune from business.

These are interesting times for civil society. The new agenda for 2030 brings with it a new reality regarding its resourcing. We’ve known for some time that there is less money around for the usual work from the usual sources but last year’s Financing For Development discussions in Addis signalled the end for Official Development Assistance. That cat has the attention of many pigeons: from government donor agencies increasingly having to defend their ever smaller budgets to international NGOs having to review their business models accordingly.

Ever since the phrase War on Terror was coined it was clear that civil society would be caught in the cross fire. In the run up to the conference the violent deaths of brave people working for social justice in each part of the world brought that home to delegates in a chilling way.

The move to have the conference in Colombia at this time was in part a decision aimed at making it more diverse with a better balance between delegates from the North and the South. It was also designed to support the continuing peace process and highlight the importance of civil society in making the ultimate outcome a lasting one.

These contextual factors made delegates look at some of the usual agenda items through different glasses. “Shrinking space for civil society” has been a preoccupation at these gatherings for nearly 20 years but the evidence of the increasingly violent closing down of dissent with impunity is transforming this issue from the metaphysical to something very real.

The context also revealed the tensions within civil society. I heard from several delegates and not just the young, a sense that the organisations that were established in the 1980s to coordinate and articulate civic voice were now impeding. These intermediaries were taking up too much of the “shrinking space,” coveted by new social movements and networks.

The frustration of these new players is fuelled by government institutions that are still unable to engage with multiple stakeholders let alone those who continue to be kept at the margins. It’s also driven by an awareness of the need for urgency in addressing inequality, violence and a damaged environment.

Reduced funding from established donors is also turning civil society in on itself. New initiatives portray themselves as closer to people than established civil society organisations with the promise of impact and results. “Fundamediaries” or those that make the connections between donors and implementing agencies are despised for skimming scarce resources. At the same time civil society in the South rightly question why only 1% of official development assistance comes to them directly.

The diversity of civil society and the operational constraints faced by the sector as a whole means that competition is inevitable but it comes at a time when collaboration with the sector is needed more than ever. Organisations like the Commonwealth Foundation have an obligation to enable dialogue and cooperation between civic stakeholders. At the same time there is also an obligation to help civil society organisations to adapt and come to terms with a changing context.

The evidence from this year’s ICSW is that new approaches are challenging the orthodoxies – space for some may be shrinking but for others new opportunities are being taken advantage of. Funding for some is reducing but new forms of social organisation are coming up with ideas for self-financing and effecting change. The painful truth is that hardened veterans like me will be some of the toughest to convince that these new ways can work but at the very least Bogota convinced me that I need a new tee-shirt.

People’s Forum sets the benchmark for an inclusive Commonwealth

Posted on by Joe Byrde

Vijay Krishnarayan reviews the significance of the Commonwealth People’s Forum held in the wings of CHOGM Malta 2015, and its implications for the future.

Commonwealth Foundation colleagues travelled back from Malta last November quietly happy with the job that we had done together with our Maltese partners to bring civil society organisations together on the subject of resilience. We saw nearly 350 delegates from 44 countries immersed in 19 sessions getting under the skin of the concept of resilience over three days at the Commonwealth People’s Forum (CPF 2015). An initial sense of having done something good was borne out as the results from the delegate survey came in. They scored the Forum highly – particularly as a space for fellowship and learning, but with the benefit of a few months distance it is a little easier to appreciate the significance of the gathering and start to think about the implications for the future.

The Forum’s theme was ‘What Makes Societies Resilient?‘ and it struck a chord with many in civil society. With ‘resilience’ being invoked at every opportunity and in every development arena, CPF 2015 aimed to provide civil society with an opportunity to define the term based on the realities they witness. The development discussion on resilience to date has been confined to economics and the environment but the Forum heard that the concept has much wider application. The theme also provided an opportunity to acknowledge the leading role that small states have had in making the case for resilience, using the Commonwealth as a platform.

The complexity of the challenges and the consequent need for sophisticated strategies was reflected in the outcome statement – The Malta Declaration on Governance for Resilience. It provided analysis and recommendations as well as an annotated record of the proceedings. Credit is due here to the team of session producers, chairs, rapporteurs and the Chief Rapporteur.  Together they produced a focussed document that makes an important contribution to the continuing global discussion on the inter-relationship between governance and development. It is already being cited (either as a whole or its specific sections) as an agenda for dialogue by civil society organisations.

In delivering the Forum there were a number of successes and firsts, which are worth recounting. The most significant of these was the space made for policy dialogues. For many years civil society organisations have been asking for room to engage directly with ministers and government policy makers. This call has been loud when it comes to the biennial Heads of Government Meeting. While that issue remains on the agenda, the Foundation has sought to create new spaces where dialogue can take place. In Malta policy forums were set up, which brought civil society and government representatives together. The agendas for these interactions were designed by civil society organisations. These constructive engagements focussed on transformative education and Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Inter-sex (LGBTI) rights and resulted in policy recommendations that were presented to Ministers. In turn this meant that the set piece dialogue between civil society delegates and Foreign Ministers was much more focussed and constructive that they have been in the past.

There was also a new emphasis on hearing non-Commonwealth perspectives. While encouraging a Commonwealth audience and acknowledging the emphasis delegates placed on learning we brought new perspectives that had not been heard in a Commonwealth setting. For example colleagues from Latin America gave insights on a colonialism that resonated with Commonwealth listeners and yet added something new. These voices helped bring substance and added a new depth throughout the agenda.

The question time assembly that was held between the three candidates vying to become the next Secretary General of the Commonwealth and civil society delegates was also a highlight. The idea was warmly embraced by the Speaker of the Maltese House of Representatives who graciously hosted and chaired the session on the floor of Malta’s Parliament. Delegates welcomed the opportunity to find out more about the candidates’ vision for the Commonwealth and how each of them saw civil society. This was a first and demonstrated that the Commonwealth can respond to the need to include civil society in its political processes. It must to stay true to the Commonwealth Charter’s vision of civil society as partners in promoting and supporting Commonwealth Principles and Values.

Reflecting on the Forum as a whole, if there was one overarching message it was on the need for equitable development. A consistent refrain at the CPF echoed the commitment behind the Sustainable Development Goals to leave no one behind. The Forum understood the ways in which for example women, migrants, indigenous people and LGBTI people are not heard or included in policy discussions that have a direct bearing on their lives. The Heads of Governments’ 2015 communiqué is encouraging as is the designation of the Commonwealth theme for 2016 as ‘An Inclusive Commonwealth‘ but civil society will continue to ask for and expect governance that delivers development and dignity for all.

Any objective observer at the CPF in Malta could begin to perceive that reform of the Commonwealth’s ways and means is underway. These changes are not waiting for a report or an expert panel but are being driven by member states that want to see the Commonwealth add value to democracy and development and by civil society organisation’s that subscribe to its principles. The Commonwealth Foundation is a willing partner. We look forward to working with our member states to make change happen and to supporting civil society organisations putting life in to a Commonwealth of the People.

Vijay Krishnarayan is the Director of the Commonwealth Foundation.