Government and the Nonprofit Sector in Latin America

Appe, Susan; Layton, Michael D.

doi:10.1515/npf-2014-0028

Cited by 17 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Scholars have examined the government-CSO relationship from various perspectives (Appe and Layton 2016;Young 1999Young , 2000.…”

Section: Adversarial Relationshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The adversarial perspective has been the focus of many studies (Appe and Layton 2016;Brinkerhoff and Brinkerhoff 2002;Najam 2000;Salamon 2002;Young 2000). CSOs in developed countries have a long history of informing and influencing policy (Boris 1999), often through legislative advocacy (Reid 1999).…”

Section: Adversarial Relationshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, Anheier, Glasius, and Kaldor (2001) pointed out that the strength of civil society is rooted in its ability to hold those in power accountable. The adversarial relationship between CSOs and the government or state has been changing in countries such as India, Peru, Columbia, and Mexico (DiazAlbertini 1993;Kumar 1997;Appe and Layton 2016). An important question is how to stimulate research on individual governments, to understand institutional decisions regarding what relationship a government desires with CSOs.…”

Section: Adversarial Relationshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, most of this research has focused on Western democracies and on the role and efforts of CSOs (Appe and Layton 2016;Guo and Zhang 2014;Najam 2000;Smith 1984). Studies of legislative advocacy (Saidel 2002;Schmid, Bar, and Nirel 2008;Mosley 2010;Child and Grønbjerg 2007) have examined CSOs' organizational capacities and legal restrictions, and the impact of those factors on CSOs' legislative advocacy efforts, mainly in developed countries.…”

Section: Cso Advocacymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In such cases they are likely to be influenced by CSO opinions. By contrast, if a government has an adversarial relationship with CSOs (Appe and Layton 2016;Brinkerhoff and Brinkerhoff 2002;Young 2000;Salamon 1999), and policy makers do not trust CSOs, legislators will not seek expert opinions or information from the CSOs. In Tunisia, for example, the historically strained relationship between the state and CSOs is changing under the new democratic regime.…”

Section: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Legislators’ Need for Civil Society Expertise: Tunisian Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Opportunity

Abdel-Samad

2017

Nonprofit Policy Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Scholars have examined the government-CSO relationship from various perspectives (Appe and Layton 2016;Young 1999Young , 2000.…”

Section: Adversarial Relationshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Adversarial Relationshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Adversarial Relationshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Cso Advocacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Legislators’ Need for Civil Society Expertise: Tunisian Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Opportunity

Abdel-Samad

2017

Nonprofit Policy Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Shifting the Development Discourse: A Narrative of a Civil Society Network in Ecuador

Appe

2016

J of Intl Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article provides a narrative of the emergence and formalization of a civil society network in Ecuador. The narrative provides a backdrop to explain how organized civil society produces an alternative discourse by shifting key descriptors related to civil society and development. While civil society-state relations still unfold in Ecuador, an alternative development discourse with shifted descriptors has helped to consolidate the civil society network. This shifting of development discourse may provide an avenue for organized civil society to continue to better argue and demonstrate its contributions to social development.

show abstract

Civil Society Organizations in a Post‐Aid World: New Trends and Observations from the Andean Region

Appe

2017

Public Admin & Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary The objective of this article is to outline approaches taken by civil society organizations (CSOs) in order to advance their work in social development given the changes in the aid architecture. It focuses on the Latin American region, particularly Andean countries, but many of the challenges and opportunities in a “post‐aid world” are insights that might prove helpful to other regions as well. The article provides a comprehensive outline of approaches that CSOs are taking given the changes in aid grouped into three categories: aid models, organizational considerations and revenue sources and modes of fundraising. Many of these have been in practice for sometime but might need to be more strategically used as CSOs manage the changing contexts. CSOs in Latin America and the Andes are considering a multitude of options, and while the approaches considered in the article are not an exhaustive list, they provide an overview of viable directions, which might positively influence CSOs' sustainability and continued provision and promotion of a myriad of public goods and services. The article ends with observations about aid shifts and its implications for CSOs and social development more broadly. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Government and the Nonprofit Sector in Latin America

Cited by 17 publications

References 16 publications

Legislators’ Need for Civil Society Expertise: Tunisian Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Opportunity

Legislators’ Need for Civil Society Expertise: Tunisian Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Opportunity

Shifting the Development Discourse: A Narrative of a Civil Society Network in Ecuador

Civil Society Organizations in a Post‐Aid World: New Trends and Observations from the Andean Region

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About