Culture as Structure in Emerging Civic Organizations in Russia

Abstract

After nearly 20 years of democracy-building projects in Russia, a robust civil society has yet to develop. While researchers have suggested political conditions, misaligned incentives, or the unintended consequences of Western funding as possible reasons for this situation, the impact of culture on civic organizations has been overlooked. This article draws on ethnographic research of civic organizations in Novosibirsk, Russia to illustrate the impact of national and organizational culture on emerging civic organizations. Most civic organizations in Russia are influenced by cultural legacies of patronage and personalism, Soviet-style collectives, and group boundaries reinforced through taking tea. Reproduction of these cultural norms results in bonding social capital rather than the bridging social capital associated with democratic society. The ongoing structuration of civic organizations through the reproduction of tsarist and socialist legacies illustrates the importance of understanding the cultural contexts of civil society development.

Nonprofit Influence on Public Policy

“…However, despite these limitations and the papers focus on only two specific types of organizations in three regions, our findings show a strong relationship with the extended literature on civil society in Russia Jakobson & Sanovich, 2010;Spencer, 2011).…”

“…First the public rejected volunteering in formalised settings as a reaction to forced participation in public life during the Soviet period which meant that NPOs have difficulties in recruiting volunteers (Howard, 2002); second as a result of Russia's constricted social space legacy NPOs are parochial and inward looking resulting in a lack of public participation and support of NPOs (Crotty, 2006;Spencer, 2011). Third NPOs were unsuccessful in developing domestic funding channels relying on foreign support directed at activities without public support (Henderson, 2002).…”

Post-Soviet Civil Society Development in the Russian Federation: The Impact of the NGO Law

“…The term 'NGO' is more widely used to characterize formal civil society groups in democratizing contexts (Mercer, 2002), such as Russia (Spencer, 2011). NGOs are defined by the Russian Federal Law on Public Associations as "voluntary, self-governing, non-profit formations set-up by individuals who have united on the basis of the community interests to realise common goals".…”

The Multi-Functionality of Professional and Business Associations in a Transitional Context: Empirical Evidence from Russia

“…One of the examples from our interviews that illustrates this function is 'All these conferences, fora, round tables, including those that we conduct on certain topics, allow the scientific community, political quarters, and representatives of the business community to meet and come up with certain positions and recommendations' (Interview, member of IU). The fact that informal bonding types of community building practices prevail over more formal bridging practices among Russian PBAs is supported by the findings of an ethnographic research of nonprofits, which pointed out traditionally high levels of informal social capital in Russia (Spencer 2011). Most researchers agree that deficient levels of formal social capital hinders democratization and civil society development, remaining a common problem across transitional countries, as was also revealed in the case of Czech NPOs (Neumayr et al 2009).…”

“…Community building is rated somewhat more important when measured by PBAs' goals and not in work hours. Such a difference could be attributed to the character of the community building function, since in transitional societies bridging trust and horizontal communications take longer time to develop (Spencer 2011). Therefore, even though PBAs give a high priority to community building, the amount of time they allocate for its implementation on a daily basis is somewhat lower.…”