Development CSOs in Nation Building

“We don’t have to engage in grand, heroic actions to participate in the process of change. Small acts, when multiplied by millions of people, can transform the world.” -- Howard Zinn

Role of Civil Society Organizations in Nation Building

Nowhere in the world are civil society organizations more vibrant and advanced than in the Philippines (Asian Development Bank). After the 1986 People Power revolution that ended more than two decades of the Marcos rule, this newly-found mass strength soon translated into the proliferation of organized people’s groups now broadly termed as civil society organizations (CSOs). In this CSO whole is the subset of Non-government Organizations (NGOs) and People’s Organizations (POs) that are recognized by the State as provided for in the Philippine Constitution and continue to be a part of the development process both in government and private arenas.

During the Cory Aquino presidential term (1986-1992), CSO institutionalized participation was significant in national and regional planning activities. In the Ramos presidency (1992-1998), civil society groups were permitted to engage in national policy and development processes through the Social Reform Agenda which continued during the Benigno Aquino Jr. presidential term and, to an extent, in the present Duterte presidency.

Social Change as Precursor to Development

The bloodless revolution in 1986 was, in many ways, a showcase of the Filipino cultural values and beliefs. The call for mass action by the Manila Cardinal, a religious leader, was heeded by and provided courage to thousands who immediately gathered in a historic urban artifact that is EDSA (Epifanio De los Santos Avenue). As a demonstration of the Filipino faith, prayers were said by a mix of the religious, youth, women, and professional groups. Then, the language and symbolisms for clamoring change were clear, urgent, and inevitable.

The years after the EDSA event allowed civil society organizations to push their agenda for change. Essential to their functions include the following:

• Peace building and protection particularly in conflict-ridden Mindanao;
• human rights protection especially among women and children and other vulnerable groups;
• social cohesion, intermediation and facilitation;
• direct service delivery in the areas of education, training, human resource development, health and nutrition, enterprise development, employment generation, and disaster risk reduction; and
• building active citizenship by participating in local, national and even in global governance processes.

The Busan Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation states that “CSOs play a vital role in enabling people to claim their rights, in promoting rights-based approaches, in shaping development policies and partnerships, and in overseeing their implementation”.

Closing Democratic Spaces

However, the current tide on closing democratic spaces for civil society organizations preempts future social gains. This has resulted to difficult requirements in accessing domestic as well as global financial assistance for valuable CSO development projects. Government restrictions, stricter funding requirements from international funding agencies are now enforced. There is much to assess in terms of CSO performance and their social impact as much as in terms of accountability that include serious issues such as numerous incidence of fund misuse and abuse of opportunity, in both levels of management and beneficiaries.

Again, social control is both internal – having cultural values for the benefit of the disadvantaged and underserved beneficiary groups in the community, as much as external - having institutionalized practices in government and private institutions that will allocate and monitor budget and its use for public welfare.

Closing spaces for CSOs might turn out to be the least effective measure if we want and need their development roles to continue and prosper. CSOs in the Philippines have contributed to democratization more than anywhere else; many key international NGOs and networks are based in the country and are headed by Filipinos (Asian Development Bank).

Ways Forward

The nation continues to struggle from being at the midpoint between a developing country and a developed one - the August 2019 per capita GDP was $7,358 (PhP367,900) ranked as #187 among 211 listed poorest countries (World Population Review). Gross Domestic Product or GDP refers to all goods and services produced in one year; per capita is computed by dividing GDP by its population.

In the 2010 Human Development Report of the UNDP, HDI is index of potential human development if there were no inequality. The Inequality-adjusted HDI actual level of human development 2017 for the Philippines is 0.99, categorized under Medium Human Development, being number #113 out of 189 countries compared to its Asian neighbors Thailand: High 0.755 #83, Malaysia: Very High 0.802 #57, and Japan: 0.0.909 # 19 Very High.

The extent of the CSOs’ role and how it has impacted on the country’s progress is still to be validated and established in one way or another, such as through the status of CSO participation and influence in the country’s commitments spelled out in national programs and international agreements in the efforts to eradicate domestic and global poverty, hunger and human rights abuses.

Some essential ideas to consider in moving forward may include the following:

• Public trust is essential for institutionalization – highlight best practices and make them known to the nation through information, education and communication channels.
• Foster the concept of democracy integration where those who do good work are continually supported as a means to decrease abuses.
• Embody the Filipino values and beliefs in humanitarian participation, moral responsibility, and nationalism which could propel the country faster to its immediate and long-term development goals.