Civil society in a divided society: Linking legitimacy and ethnicness of civil society organizations in Bosnia-Herzegovina

Abstract

Civil society (CS) strengthening is central to peacebuilding policies for divided, post-war societies. However, it has been criticized for creating internationalized organizations without local backing, unable to represent citizens’ interests. Based on in-depth empirical research in Bosnia-Herzegovina, this article focuses on the legitimacy of CS organizations (CSOs). 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’ normative frameworks and perceived lack of results. However, we also show that a combination of local and donor legitimacy is possible, and explore this rare but interesting category of organizations.

Civil society organizations and participatory local governance in Pakistan: An exploratory study

“…Similarly, participation mechanism promoted by CSOs helps to interlink citizens with public representatives (de Lancer Julnes & Johnson, ) and make CP more inclusive (Fung, ). But on the contrary, scholars such as Kostovicova (), and Puljek‐Shank and Verkoren () have criticized CSOs for overlooking grassroots institutions and focusing on organizations rendering services rather than fostering society–state relations. Likewise, many scholars (Kreutzer & Jacobs, ; Mohan & Stokke, ) claim that CSOs have specific agenda and self interests.…”

Rethinking Legitimation: Positional and Mediated Legitimation Processes for Croatian NGOs

“…She also notes that it is possible for these audiences to have “conflicting interests,” making universal legitimacy challenging or impossible (p. 184). This concern is supported by the work of Randall Puljek-Shank and Willemijn Verkoren (2017), who show that there is a constant tension between local and donor legitimacy for peacebuilding NGOs in Bosnia: while it is possible for NGOs to have both high donor and high local legitimacy, this is a relatively rare condition.…”

Re-establishing legitimacy after stigmatization: Greenpeace in the North American North

“…The implications of a lack of moral legitimacy are important to appreciate because it hinders an IENGOs work given that the traditional role of NGOs has been to “point out problems in society and give a voice to the marginalized, and this ‘moral voice’ is what strengthens their legitimacy” (Puljek-Shank, 2019, p.7). One such implication is the stigmatization of an individual or group of NGO actors due to a deficit of moral legitimacy because it is “the most meaningful type for judging the legitimacy of NGOs” (Baur & Palazzo, 2011, p.584).…”