Advantages and Disadvantages of Ngos in Development Process of Less Developed Country.
The term NGO (Non Governmental Organisation) seems to be deceptively simple. However it has been defined by different individuals and scholars. According to Asian Development Bank the term non-governmental organization refers to “an organization not based in government, and it is not created to earn profit”. United Nations defines it as “private organizations that pursue activities to relieve suffering, promote the interest of poor, protect the environment, provide basic social services or undertake community development”. The first definition is over-simplistic and leaves out important aspects of why NGOs are formed. However, the United Nations definition looks complete in itself as it gives emphasis to the idea that an NGO is an agency that is primarily engaged in work relating to the areas of development or humanitarian work at local, national and international levels. Another usefully concise definition is that provided by Vakil (1997), who states that, “NGOs are self-governing, private, not-for-profit organizations that are geared to improving the quality of life for disadvantaged people’’. This definition completes everything that may have been left out by the two definitions above. Three things now come outstanding about NGOs: they are not in government, they are private, they form to uplift the lives of the poor, they are non profit entities. We can therefore easily contrast NGOs with other types of groups such as trade unions, organizations concerned with arts or sport, and professional associations.
In terms of their structure, NGOs may be large or small, formal or informal, bureaucratic or flexible. In terms of funding, many are externally funded, while others depend on locally mobilized resources. Some may be well resourced and affluent, while others may be leading a ‘hand to mouth’ existence, struggling to survive from one year to the next. There are NGOs with highly professionalized staff, while others rely heavily on volunteers and supporters. In
In terms of their structure, NGOs may be large or small, formal or informal, bureaucratic or flexible. In terms of funding, many are externally funded, while others depend on locally mobilized resources. Some may be well resourced and affluent, while others may be leading a ‘hand to mouth’ existence, struggling to survive from one year to the next. There are NGOs with highly professionalized staff, while others rely heavily on volunteers and supporters. In
References: Edwards, M. and Hulme, D. (1996). Too close for comfort: NGOs, the state and donors. World Development 24, 6: 961–73. Hearn, J. (2007). African NGOs: The new compradors? Development and Change 38, 6: 1095–110. Korten, D. (1990). Getting to the 21st Century: Voluntary Action and the Global Agenda. West Hartford: Kumarian Press. Lewis, D. (2005). Actors, ideas and networks: trajectories of the non-governmental in development studies’. In Uma Kothari (ed.), A Radical History of Development Studies. London: Zed Books. Mitlin, D., Hickey, S. and Bebbington, A. (2007). Reclaiming development? NGOs and the challenge of alternatives. World Development 35, 10: 1699–720. Vakil, A. (1997). Confronting the classification problem: toward a taxonomy of NGOs. World Development 25, 12: 2057–71.