Background on the Lebanese Context
Since the end of the civil war in 1990, Lebanon has been seeking political stability, social coherence and security, and economic sustained growth. Lebanon is one of the few countries in the Arab region with a history of relative democratic practices and political plurality. However, fifteen years of internal strife followed by an unstable post war period, led to deterioration in these practices. This period included the presence of foreign armies in Lebanon, continuous aggression by Israelis starting in 1969 followed by an occupation that extended between 1978 till 2000 , and heavy intervention by Syrian Intelligence forces in all aspects of political life,.
Lebanon has faced several political, social, and economic challenges since the end of the war and after the end of the Israeli occupation. The geographically balanced development has been a major challenge in Lebanon. Both political and socio-economic reforms are highly needed to set the country back on track of a balanced and sustained growth. A lot of promised reforms have yet to see the light, including decentralization and the creation of a Senate, the strengthening of municipalities, secularization of the political system, and institutionalization of a voluntary secular family code .
On the political front, reforms in electoral laws are of high importance, given the deformation of the elections process. The current law favors certain political factions over others. The political system embodies discriminatory practices; it is set to represent confessional groups rather than manifest citizenship. Another area in which reform is needed is the judiciary system that has been weakened by the excessive political intervention.
On the socio-economic front, the Lebanese government has directed its efforts towards setting successful reconstruction plans, in addition to policies aimed at sustaining financial and monetary stability. Building capable public institutions and equally spreading basic services to the regions, especially ones remote from the capital Beirut, was a main issue on the Lebanese agenda throughout the nineties. The government approach proposed that addressing the social challenges will be a natural result of economic growth . In this context, Lebanon accumulated a large amount of debt, which exceeds USD 35 billion, and thus presents a huge burden for the Lebanese citizen. Privatization has been a hot topic the last few years, and was presented as a solution for limiting government spending and debt expansion. It is worth noting that the process of addressing privatization still lacks transparency and a proper reflection of social needs. It is highly linked to foreign pressures and agendas .
Lebanese civil society groups have been active in tackling various aspects of social, economic, and political challenges. Although they faced structural challenges after the war and although resources are limited, civil society groups have been active in organizing themselves and identifying effective mechanisms for addressing national challenges. According to the recommendations resulting from first national conference for civil society groups in Lebanon that was held in 1999, there are several priority social issues that need to be dealt with, including :
- Living standards of a big proportion of Lebanese that live below poverty line and the high unemployment among youth and unavailability of job opportunities
- Socio-economic discrepancies among various regions in Lebanon, which impact national social integration
- Lack of adequate coverage by health and social protection systems
- Basic services such as health and education, which are provided to a big extent by the private sector. This causes high levels of divergence in the quality and quantity of services available for various social groups
- Lack of effective national policies regarding major social groups including women, people with disability, elderly, youth and children
- Lack of adequate and implementable mechanisms for the participation of civil society in decision making and policy formulation, while this sector is asked to cover significant gaps in various service provision fields in the time that the public sector’s capacities remain limited
Civil Society in Lebanon
The formation of civil society associations in Lebanon is based on an association law of 1909 issued by the Ottoman Empire, which requires only the notification of the Ministry of Interior of their existence and internal structure. The law is considered relatively adequate compared to the restrictive laws in other Arab countries; accordingly there is a lot of hesitance that a review and update could result in a stricter law. Yet, in some cases, the registration procedures set by the law are used by the Ministry of Interior as means to complicate or delay the registration process.
The war period had a major impact on the role of CSOs in Lebanon, whereby they gained an expanded role when they had to fill in for the absence of governmental institutions. Social welfare associations flourished during the war period, so did family and local community groups. In general, these and other civil society groups moved towards service provision and relief work in order to cover the needs of various constituencies in times of war. Lebanese groups have maintained an effective role in that period and they built a good experience in various areas of service provision. They were able to attract a high number of volunteers, especially in areas of relief and emergency work, in addition to health and education services, literacy programs, as well as rural development. They succeeded in alleviating the burdens of a lot of social services in various communities. They also demonstrated a significant level of partnership with the government, the United Nations, many foreign donor agencies and non- governmental organizations. These experiences proved the importance of cooperation and the potential for coordination and networking between various sectors in Lebanon.
After the war, civil society groups were focused more on long term development visions than the short term relief work. The main confessional communities (Christian, Muslim both Shiites and Sunnis, Druze, and Armenian Christians) have impacted the rise of associational life in Lebanon. Each sect projects its own service delivery ways through their civil society groups and service providers, which end up often working in specific communities and areas. Moreover, a lot of rising NGOs were linked to political parties and several politicians established their own service provision NGOs and foundations with the aim of promoting their own image. Through providing basic services, such a trend of NGOs plays a major role in reinforcing the patron-client relationship which is a feature of Lebanon and its political system.
Yet, some of Lebanon’s social welfare associations date back to the nineteenth century, and many of them are non-confessional or multi-confessional. They not only survived the civil war but also flourished, filling the vacuum of state services and compensating for the breakdown of public services . According to a study by the Ministry of Social Affairs and the UN Economic and Social Commission for West Asia, the number of registered civil society groups between the year 1865 and September 2002 was around 4037 organization . More than 55% of the organizations were established between 1990 and 2002. Around 82% of them work on social issues while the rest are professional, scientific, or sports and scouts associations. Numbers show that more than 25% of the associations were established to serve the poor and the orphans. This number rises to 52% when looking at the associations that have helping the poor and needy as one of their five priorities. This supports the general observation that CSOs in Lebanon, as in other Arab countries, are more involved in charitable service provision than in advocacy and sustained capacity building programs.
The professional sector consists of around 200 sectoral workers and employees’ associations, and over 50 owners and business associations. The syndicates for lawyers, engineers, journalists, accountants and others are especially influential in Lebanon as in many other Arab countries. Professional umbrella organizations include the International Chamber of Commerce in Lebanon, the Beirut Chamber of Commerce and Industry, and the Association of Lebanese Industrialists. The Confederation of General Workers of Lebanon (CGTL) is the main trade union federation. It is worth noting that the trade union movement had undergone several obstacles such as divisions, takeovers, political and sectarian interventions, and creation of paper unions. This started in 1992; since then the trade union movement increased from 22 confederations to over 37 . Also, the trend of confessional-based unions was a very harmful factor to the union movement, whereby political forces controlled the movement and workers needs were pushed aside.
According to a study undertaken by the World Bank in 2001, the aggregate budget of civil society groups in Lebanon estimates around 192 million dollars and it rises to 296 million dollars if the budgets of religious charities are added. This number represents five times the budget of the Ministry of Social Affairs. However, the study found as well that there are significant disparities in the geographic division of this budget; 57.7% to Beirut, 13.2% to Mount Lebanon, 9.6% to the North, 4.5% to the Ba’alback area, 7.7% to South Lebanon, and 7.3% were spent on nation-wide projects . Ironically, Northern Lebanon and Ba'alback are of the poorest Lebanese regions yet they show the lowest percentages.
The same study observed that the services provided by the non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in the areas of social protection lie in the same areas targeted by the Ministry of Social Affairs, including health services, education and illiteracy eradication, services to vulnerable groups including children, orphans, and elderly, vocational training, and job creation especially for women and disabled groups. Moreover, the services of the NGOs tend to cover the groups that are left out from the governmental programs, especially offering health and education services for the poor.
Although the majority of civil society groups tend to allocate their resources in service provision, other groups are active on human rights issues, women and gender equity, child’s rights, and environmental causes. Also, there are active groups that work on youth issues as well as that of the Palestinian refugees and their living conditions in Lebanon.
A look into Partnership for Development in the International Discourse; from the Rio Summit to the UN 60th General Assembly Summit
Partnership has been often considered integral to mechanisms and processes linked to sustainable development, socio-economic change, and human rights protection. According to the predominant global perspective during the 20th century, the market and the state were the two sets of organizational and institutional tools to reach the goals of development. Now, these two sets of tools have inherent limitations and neither can make up for the deficiency of the other. It is within the context of this public good failure that civil society and non-profit or non-governmental sector develops.
Partnership among public, private, and civil society has been first pursued by the international financial institutions (IFIs) when they were looking to promote their structural adjustment policies (SAP) in the eighties, and was enhanced later in the nineties when they launched the initiative on poverty reduction strategy papers (PRSPs). The stress on partnership reached a peak with the increase of debate around the need to reform the IFIs, mainly the World Bank (W
and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Accordingly, partnership has been increasingly used in the discourse of the UN as well as other international organizations. It has been strongly promoted since the Earth Summit in 1992 held in Rio De Genero and it was a main factor in the implementation process of the resulting Agenda 21.
The discourse on partnership was maintained throughout the series of global summits during the nineties, including discussions on partnerships for sustainable development, human rights, environmental protection, and social and economic development. The multi-stakeholder partnership approach has been linked to good governance. Accordingly, this concept “has been championed by business groups since the days of the original Earth Summit in Rio….for by institutionalizing their role as stakeholders in official fora, corporations gain considerable influence in any outcomes and benefit from an image boost as they are seen to be part of the solution” . This has brought to the surface the issue of corporate social and environmental responsibility.
Within the partnership discourse, CSOs have been the center of attraction, given their values and positive image. The IFIs, the UN agencies, as well as several governments have quested partnership with various kinds of CSOs. For example, common projects were implemented by many European governments or the European Commission (EC) and NGOs during the eighties. Later, the European Union (EU) took a step further by enhancing the role of CSOs in the whole Barcelona process which was launched in 1995. Moreover, CSOs have increasingly worked towards enhancing partnership and collaboration among each other, in a quest to develop networks and initiate broad-based social movements that could exert enough pressure towards achieving change.
During the preparations for the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) partnership was a core issue. Yet, much debate has been raised on the implications of such a concept; these debates are still lingering to date. The inequality among the three sectors threatens the success of partnership between them, given that outcomes could be engineered to the interest of the powerful. Before the WSSD, several NGOs warned of the risks of partnerships undermining the intergovernmental implementation program and the fact that business, with a much stronger economic power than other groups, will drive the multi-stakeholder dialogue processes. In fact, the troika partnership among public, private, and civil society sectors was sometimes considered as a kind of return to the tiers-état of the pre-French revolution, where two dominant minorities- the public and the private sectors- are in control while the majority- civil society- are marginalized .
The MDGs reflected upon the international partnership for development through the eighth (8th) goal. It was stressed that partnership between governments, civil society, and the private sector is essential for a successful achievement of the MDGs. The Millennium Campaign www.millenniumcampaign.org reflects the efforts that the United Nations has invested to enhance the concept of partnership between government and civil society for the MDGs.
Partnership was one of the main issues at the table of the world leaders’ gathering at the 60th General Assembly Summit of the United Nations in September 2005. It was also a main aspect of the messages of the Global Call to Action against Poverty www.whiteband.org which is one the largest global civil society campaigns till date calling for serious and effective action from world leaders on trade, aid, and debt issues. Although effective partnership is becoming more urgent and necessary given the mounting and interlinked challenges we face today in development, human rights, peace and security, the appropriate grounds for partnership is still not set yet.
Development in Lebanon; the Millennium Development Goals Campaign
In general, development policies in post war Lebanon have concentrated on the reconstruction approach. In addition to the pressures of facing the damages resulting from 15 years of war, Lebanon emerged in 1990 to face the challenges imposed by a rapidly globalizing world system and economy . Accordingly, Lebanon was striving to set policies that answer the internal needs while still aligning with international standards and policies, and trying to deal with political, administrative, and legislative complexities.
In 2000, Lebanon was among the 191 countries that committed to achieving the MDGs by the year 2015. Lebanon issued its first report on the MDGs in September 2003. The report was prepared through a consultative process between several concerned governmental agencies , the United Nations and the World Bank. Among the members of the advisory group were representatives of civil society . Moreover, the main editor of the report and participant in its preparation was a civil society figure ; a step through which the United Nations aimed at including the input of civil society in the report. However, it can be noted that a real partnership and consistent networking and coordination between the involved governmental institutions, UN agencies, and CSOs was not enhanced through the preparation of the MDGR.
The report indicated that five of the MDG targets are on track towards achievement (halving the number of underweight children, stopping the spread of the AIDS virus and reversing the trend, halving the population with no access to clean drinking water, achieving primary education for all, achieving equal access of boys and girls to primary and secondary education, and decreasing mother mortality to three forth) and three have good probability of being achieved (halving the population living under poverty line, decreasing percentage of children mortality under five years by two thirds, and reaching environmental sustainability). In addition, the supporting environment was judged as very strong for the achievement of the above mentioned targets, except for halving the population living under the poverty line, whose supportive environment was judged average.
Areas for Partnership in the MDGs Beyond the Eighth Goal
In most of the MDG national reports it was stressed that a successful campaign requires strong and consolidated partnerships, coherence of efforts and sharing of information in order to achieve the goals. “It is important to know who should do what to avoid duplication of efforts and achieve better coordination. In addition, strategic partnerships need to be identified and alliances built at a national and/or regional level to achieve the MDGs. This is how all stakeholders could be involved with decision making and be aware of "who is doing what" as well as “who should do what” .
It was stated in the UN Millennium Project latest report titled ‘Investing in Development’ that each country should prepare an “MDG based poverty reduction strategy that should be a detailed operational document attached to a medium term expenditure framework which translates the strategy into budgetary outlays.” Accordingly, the basis for successfully achieving such a step is having a real participatory approach for the preparation of a 10 year framework for action based on a poverty mapping by locality, region, and gender and including a 3 to 5 year MDG-based poverty reduction strategy. It also requires a comprehensive and well-tracked national MDGs campaigns as well as MDGRs that propose strategies and work plans and not merely descriptions and often incredible figures. Unfortunately, these factors are still weak in Lebanon.
In addition, translating the strategies into budgetary outlays means that there ought to be real, effective, and constructive participation for parliament in looking over the preparations of the MDGRs and the analysis of its content. MDGRs ought to be endorsed by parliaments as basis for working plans, which is still not witnessed in Lebanon. Not only endorse the work plans, however parliament should also assess and evaluate them, and later hold governments accountable for their responsibility in implementing policies that reflect these work plans. Moreover, the targets and indicators ought to be localized to be adapted to the local reality. This issue was discussed in the advisory group to the UNDP administrator, where it was not decided to modify the targets and indictors proposed by the secretary general of the UN. It is worth noting that the indicators were suggested in response to the case of LDCs and not countries of middle income.
The identification of effective roles of various players within the framework of the MDGs campaign is a basic necessity for establishing successful cooperation and coordination. However, this process of identifying roles is directly linked to good governance, including issues of corruption, rule of law, promotion of political and social rights, accountability and efficiency of the public administration, sound economic policies, and a supportive environment for the right of association and for the role of CSOs, as well as participation in general. These are the basic values of human rights, democracy, and good governance that have been advocated and well engraved in the Millennium Declaration, which held within it the MDGs. These considerations are pre-requisites for any steps to be taken towards achieving the MDGs.
Accordingly, the ability to achieve a comprehensive campaign or work plan and not just mere separated activities is linked to the success of addressing the issue of role distribution. This could lead to a value-added coordination between the various efforts that are being implemented, thus avoiding resource misallocations and duplication. In this context, it was recommended that “each country should convene an MDG strategy group chaired by the national government and including bilateral and multilateral donors, UN specialized agencies, provincial and local authorities, domestic civil society leaders, including women’s organizations which are traditionally underrepresented” . This could represent a primary beneficial step towards better coordination of efforts and information sharing at the national levels.
In this regards, there are several areas identified in the Lebanese MDGRs as challenges for the process of achieving the MDGs, and where it is clear that civil society groups could have a major input.
The First Seven MDGs in Lebanon
If measured by income indicators, 6.3 % of the population in Lebanon would be considered very poor; on the other hand, if measured by living conditions indicators, 6.8% of the population would be considered very poor – or approximately 212, 000 individuals (47, 000 families). Yet, there are several challenges in addressing poverty (MDG1) in Lebanon, where real partnership between government and civil society can render a significant added value. These include lack of adequate and consistent data, achieving economic growth that leads to job creation, setting a national and comprehensive strategy for poverty alleviation, achieving a coordination mechanism between involved groups and stakeholders, and addressing the costs of basic services compared to the per capita income. It can be noted that there are three means of intervention when dealing with these 212,000 poor in Lebanon : the first is through the elaboration of specialized programs for the geographical areas characterized by a high density of poor; the second is through the elaboration of specialized programs aimed at those population groups among the poor that are the most affected; and the third is the implementation of specialized interventions to achieve specific goals originating from the MDGs and the national specificities of the poor.
On education (MDG 2), it was identified that one of the challenges is achieving a national plan for primary education that aligns with the recommendations of the World Forum on Education that took place in Dakar in 2000. It was mentioned that new curricula need to be reviewed and updated according to the evaluation result. Also, there is a need for training of teachers and expanding school infrastructure, in addition to the need for student orientation and vocational training that could help students to integrate easily in the job market. On gender equality (MDG 3), it was identified that Lebanon has three abstentions on the CEDAW that keeps certain discriminatory laws like the nationality law that prevents a woman from offering her husband and children her nationality. In addition, a large number of women do not attain the rights that they are offered by the Lebanese laws. It was also mentioned that women participation in the decision making processes at various levels, political, economic and social is very limited. On child and mother mortality (MDGs 4 and 5), it was noted among other challenges that there are significant regional disparities, especially regarding the quality and outreach of the services provided in this regards. On Aids and Malaria (MDG 5), awareness raising regarding the illness and the need to report it were noted as a priority challenge. Moreover, the assessments of the socio-economic impact of such illnesses, especially Aids are still lacking. On environmental sustainability (MDG 7), it was explained that some of the main challenges are unsustainable agricultural practices, highly limited use of renewable energies, bad of quality water, and inadequate sewage system and solid waste management that leads to high levels of pollution at source. The lack of monitoring systems, un-implementable laws and regulations, and lack of coordination of efforts invested by CSOs were also noted in the report.
Although macro planning and national strategies are the responsibility of the public sector through its concerned entities, it is obvious that in all the above mentioned areas, civil society groups can have a significant value added and contribution in various forms. They can monitor then lobby and advocate the government to take over the responsibility to respond to the challenges. They can monitor the implementation of such strategies and plans. Their role is also in raising awareness on rights and preventive measures. Also, through their outreach to various regions, they could address part of the unequal coverage and significant differences in service provision. Moreover, setting proper work plans in various fields and in partnership with involved government agencies could be a supportive factor for civil society groups to overcome the lack of coordination between their efforts.
As for global partnership for development (MDG 8), two approaches exist towards it in Lebanon. One approach claims free trade and investment, particularly foreign direct investment, as the main factors to achieving growth and development. On the other hand, the second approach claims market-oriented policies not sufficient and stresses on the need for more socially oriented policies and a more comprehensive development vision. The implications of the approaches affect the ability to benefit from the advantages that a global partnership could offer. The first approach is about integration in the global economy, while the second approach stresses on the official development assistance (ODA) and debt relief, in addition to the need to elaborate the adequate formula for a fair trade system, and the needs for technical support and proper transfer of technology. Yet on both hands, the main challenge that Lebanon faces is in its governance structure and its ability to strategically manage its relations and partnerships with other countries.
Lebanon’s administrative performance creates a real obstacle for achieving an increase in growth. Public administration suffers weak productivity and efficiency, and lack of capable and competent human resources. It also faces the problem of transparency and accountability. This also applies to the whole political and judiciary system. Thus there is a crucial need for appropriate structural reform programs that could address the weaknesses of the public and private sectors, while supporting an attractive environment for investments and sustainable growth prospects. Moreover, there is a need to address the capacities of the financial system and the problems implied by the budget deficit and the high levels of interest rates which have significantly limited the investment of private groups in the productive sector.
Accordingly, the Lebanese Millennium Development Goals Report (MDGR) recommended consistency and rapidity in introducing core political reforms, establishing the structural adjustment process through working on improving productivity and competitiveness, reforming the legal system and enhancing the independence of the judiciary system, as well as improving accountability measures in both the public and the private sector. In addition, it stressed on the importance of supporting the productive sector, especially small and medium enterprises. Consequently, the abovementioned factors, if implemented, would create a significant opportunity to enhance and develop various partnerships and international agreements, and therefore positively benefit from them, like the Euro-Mediterranean partnership, Paris II agreement , the trade agreements with the World Trade Organization and other Arab countries , as well as various projects with the World Bank and the United Nations Development Program (UNDP).
The 8th MDG is especially important for Lebanon given that its geographic location, liberal financial and economic policies, and skilled human resources constitute a wealth of supportive factors for successful integration in the global system and for enhancing its role as a commercial, cultural, and communications center in the Region. Furthermore, goal number eight is a critical factor for the success of the other seven goals. Accordingly, it is beneficial that various concerned groups in Lebanon to develop cooperation and communication regarding the 8th MDG, which is one of the most important and complex MDGs in the Lebanese context. There is a need for identifying capacities of government agencies and CSOs that need to be developed in order to enable successful political debate and advocacy campaigns regarding goal number eight. This requires elaborating the process of communication and cooperation between the government, the concerned UN agencies, and CSOs, especially groups involved with issues of global and regional partnership and working towards setting common vision and mechanisms for addressing the donor society.
A Look into Partnerships of Civil Society Organizations with Various Groups
Partnership between CSOs, public sector institutions, and the private sector is a building block in the new conceptions and approaches to development, in which the role of the government is more limited. Lebanon participated in various UN Summits that stressed partnership as core to the development process, including the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo, the 1995 Summit on Social Development in Copenhagen, and Beijing Conference on Women in 1995, the Millennium Summit in 2000, the Summit on Financing for Development and the Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002, and lately the UN 60th General Assembly Session that took place in New York during September 2005.
Between Government Institutions and Civil Society Organizations
Lebanese civil society groups have made it clear in several statements, most notably in the declaration of the first national conference for CSOs in 1999 , that partnership is a means to enhance the role of various sectors and not to limit the role of government in return for an expansion of civil society’s role. Civil society cannot be an alternative for government in provision of social services. The role of the government is essential in setting development policies; yet a strong role for government should not imply a restriction on the space available for civil society. A balanced partnership between government and civil society, including partnership in setting policies, planning, implementing, and evaluating programs, could be means for more effective, cost-adequate public services that equally reach various factions of society. It could also lead to more comprehensive and effective policies that reflect the needs and priorities of local communities in various regions of Lebanon.
In a partnership relationship with government, CSOs should be independent in their structural management and decision-making. CSOs should be keen on selecting adequate representatives to sit on common committees; personnel that can reflect the organization’s objectives clearly and firmly, and be able to envision the value added of the partnership and consistent consultation with other groups.
Yet in the same time, partnership between government and CSOs should not be limited to technical and managerial relations and common committees. It should develop to reflect the new notions of development where civil society’s role is essential in the process of building basis for democracy and social equity and is not constrained to service provision.
A real partnership for development between government and CSOs would necessitate that the latter have the right to set their needs and elaborate their vision, objectives, policies, and mechanisms. The partnership would be the result of the common grounds that CSOs and government could identify in all those areas. Accordingly, this process necessitates :
1. Setting a legal framework which provides CSOs with enough freedom and independency to choose their structural organization, targets, and programs. In Lebanon, the association law is relatively supportive of a vibrant role for civil society, although it could still be used to hinder freedom of association.
2. Establishing consistent and institutionalized mechanisms of consultation between institutions of the public sector and civil society, which could allow enhancing partnership and limiting competition, incoherence, and overlapping efforts. Several joint committees have been established for dialogue and consultation between government and civil society in Lebanon. However, their limited role have shown the necessity to review their structure and mandate as well as the criteria and efficiency of their mechanisms
3. Supporting and acknowledging the right of civil society groups to defend and protect the citizens’ political and civic, as well as economic, social, and cultural rights
4. Acknowledging the alignment between the roles of civil society in service provision and the importance of their role in advocacy and policy formulation.
The legitimacy of civic activity and freedom of association is integral to the international conventions on human rights, including both civic and political rights as well as economic, social, and cultural rights, which most Arab countries, including Lebanon, have ratified. The independence of CSOs is directly related to an adequate legal framework which includes independence of vision, objectives, programs, and activities as well as independence of management, organizational procedures, and financial processes.
It is important to note that partnership between civil society and government institutions cannot prosper without respect of the relation from both sides. On one hand, government should respect the independency of CSOs and set criteria for managing this relation, especially in cases of common programs and service provision activities. In addition, government should support CSOs through tax exemption procedures as well as direct financial contributions. On the other hand, CSOs should develop a clear vision and identify the mission and targets that reflect the real needs and priorities of their constituency and social sectors that they are serving. CSOs should work towards establishing networks and coordination forums which could strengthen their voice and role. They should also work towards enhancing their legitimacy through respecting measures of transparency, accountability, respect of internal laws and financial procedures, as well as rotation of power and democratic internal processes.
After the end of the war, several bodies, institutions, and committees were established to facilitate and coordinate the work of civil society and public sector institutions. Among these were:
- The Economic and Social Council where there are seats for five civil society representatives. Also, the Council includes representatives of the private sector, industrialists and merchants, as well as unions of labor, farmers, and that of teachers and university professors, among others.
- The National Council for Children which includes representatives of civil society and involved governmental agencies and institutions
- The National Committee for Women’s Issues
- The National Committee for People with Disabilities
In the past years, there were many forms of cooperation with the public sector, but none ever reached the level of a real partnership. Accordingly, there is a need to evaluate these processes and institutions, looking into the roles of involved groups and mechanisms of representation and dialogue.
The Lebanese Ministry of Social Affairs (MoSA); a pioneer in partnership with civil society groups
MoSA was re-established as an independent institution after the war in 1993, through resolution 212. Its main role was to provide needed social services and protection to the most vulnerable and in need social groups; thus following issues of hardship cases such as orphans, people with disability, various family matters, drug addiction, families of martyrs and detainees in Israeli prisons, people injured during the war, and others. In principle, the target groups of MoSA are divided among, children, elderly, and adults and women in vulnerable social conditions. Its mandate indicated that services will be provided directly or through non-governmental service provision groups. It also indicated that the Ministry should follow-up and monitor these groups and their service provision in various regions of Lebanon.
Before the war, the Ministry had strong relations and very successful partnerships with civil society groups through the Committee for Social Revitalization (MAslahat Al In3ash Al Ijtima3i). However, during war times, partnerships became weaker as the Ministry was unstable and civil society groups were involved in short-term emergency activities. After the war, the Ministry worked on re-enhancing partnership relations with civil society groups. Partnership projects are 70% funded by the Ministry, and the remaining 30% is covered by the partner group through the services they provide and not through financial contributions. For each project, a common committee is established with representation from both sides. They meet on periodical basis and follow various stages of the project. MoSA’s collaboration with civil society groups was highly important for the success of the regional social services centers that the Ministry established in various regions of Lebanon. Civil society groups often served as the link between MoSA and the local communities. MoSA saw in civil society groups and NGOs a partner in providing increasingly needed social services and a support in equitable outreach to various regions. The ministry perceives that the relationship with civil society groups should be built through partnership in setting the goals of cooperation, in planning the project, in identifying the ways it will be executed, and in the evaluation and follow-up phases. The responsibilities in all those stages are common to both sides and partnership cannot succeed if any of the partners did not commit to their responsibilities . MoSA helped in disseminating the partnership approach to other ministries, such as the ministries of environment and health.
However, several obstacles face this partnership and reflect upon the weaknesses of both the Ministry and the civil society groups. MoSA deals with various kinds of service providers and finds a need to organize the way it is dealing with various groups and building partnerships. The ministry tried to work on guidelines for organizing its relationship with civil society partners. However, it was faced with a law suit from civil society groups that refused the proposition and considered it an attempt to control and restrict their roles.
It is important to note that guidelines set through a participatory process could mean support and protection to the rights and responsibilities of civil society groups and at the same time a commitment from their side to the partnership with MoSA. It could also present a means for dialogue between both parties and better understanding of the nature of concerns of each side.
In 2004, MoSA passed guidelines for the identification of groups and constituencies that are benefiting from social services provided through its partner civil society groups. These steps reflect the Ministry’s concern regarding the capacities and specialization of partner groups. It was noted by the former Director General of MoSA that often the Ministry deals with applications from groups that do not have enough skills and capacities to identify the goals they are working for and prepare proposals that represent their vision and objectives. Accordingly, identification of adequate guidelines could be means for better resource management and clearer responsibilities from both parties.
Yet, civil society groups are also often concerned regarding the bureaucracy of the Ministry and the sustainability of its policy regarding partnerships with them. One of major concerns is the inefficiency of the committee that follows all matters related to civil society groups in the Ministry. This reality makes the policies and approaches to partnership related to individuals and not institutionalized. It is worth noting that the relation between civil society and MoSA is mainly limited to service provision. It does not extend to cover the debate and the need to develop a comprehensive vision and strategies to face various social challenges.
Between Civil Society and Funding Agencies
Funding is one of the main determinants in the development of civil society’s activities; it determines the life of the programs and their sustainability. Funding is related to various groups that could be governmental or non-governmental, as well as local or foreign.
Funding processes have developed with the change in concepts and approaches to development, whereby development was incorporated as a basic right through the Convention on the Right to Development in 1984. Funding evolved from basic philanthropy or charity directed from the rich to the poor, to a more institutionalized processes. Moreover, the change in funding approaches from missionary to more developmental approaches, made it inadequate to directly deal with populations and constituencies in the developing countries. Several barriers including language, cultural differences, as well lack of information about the local communities made it necessary for funding agencies to work more closely with local NGOs and CSOs . This created a closer relation between the two groups, whereby more equal roles between the CSOs and funding groups were needed for the success of this relation.
Partnership became a key element for achieving development through funding programs. It is not limited to the procedure of flow of funds but is linked to common causes and built on an understanding of each organization’s values, beliefs, goals, objectives and constraints. It also includes a shared responsibility for attaining the negotiated goals, objectives, and stated outcomes. It is worth noting that the new approaches of partnership adopted by funding agencies lead them to prefer working with organizations that have a development vision and not just service provision strategy for the sake of the sustainability, efficiency and effectiveness of the funds’ impact . Yet, in Lebanon, the majority of organizations are still limited to service provision while a few have a long-term developmental vision.
The position of the Canadian Council for International Cooperation (CCIC), which is an active funding agency in Lebanon, could shed light on the perception of partnership for funding agencies today. The Council perceives that the strength and efficiency of a partnership necessitates addressing inequalities due to power imbalances, sharing information transparently, respecting differences including cultural, religious, socio-economic and political differences, conducting regular and open communications, giving credit to their partners’ contributions, respecting intellectual property rights, and evaluating the efficiency and affectivity of the partnership.
Yet, the new procedures and types of relationship and associated requirements between funding agencies and CSOs imposes more challenges on the latter in reaching foreign funding sources without impacting their national strategies and priorities. Often, funding groups tend to impose new processes of work and policies that do not align with the targets and priorities of the CSOs and their constituencies. In addition, funding agencies impose managerial and organizational criteria, which often lead to an increase in the amounts of the funds that are allocated for covering these managerial procedures. This is why many funding agencies prefer to partner with well established organizations that can handle financial and reporting procedures easier than small inexperienced groups. However, the value added of partnership with smaller groups and the potential transfer of skills and building of capacities could be much higher with smaller organizations. It is important to note that strong structures and networks of civil society groups could serve as intermediary agencies that can contribute in the skill and capacity building of the small local groups and facilitate their collaboration with funding agencies.
Accordingly, it is important to note that true partnership between funding agencies and CSOs necessitates a consultative process between both. It is important in order to avoid imposing additional restrictive burdens on CSOs that could impact the efficiency of their role and programs. Also, a balanced and fair relation between the two necessitate that CSOs respect ethical codes for good governance, transparency, accountability, and reporting measures with the funding groups.
Between Civil Society Organizations and United Nations Agencies
The United Nations agencies have a highly significant role in disseminating the conception of partnership among various sectors; government, civil society, and private sectors. The United Nations has advocated and promoted a concept of development that is interlinked with human rights and processes of peace and security. In alignment, UN agencies worked on enhancing the trust relation between CSOs and government. In his Programme for UN Reform, released in July 1997, the Secretary-General, Mr. Kofi Annan, stressed that civil society is “spurring the United Nations system and other intergovernmental structures towards greater transparency and accountability and closer linkages between national and international levels of decision-making….”
For example, UNDP has developed over 10 years a policy of partnership with the donors, NGOs, and the private sector. UNDP perceives that CSOs have a major role in the three areas it works on in Lebanon including environment, poverty, and governance . In addition, partnership is a factor used in the evaluations and internal reporting of UNDP on various projects. UNDP's partnership with civil society pursues three principal objectives, notably :
- Promoting dialogue among governments, civil society, and the private sector to help define policies that support sustainable human development;
- Meeting critical needs of civil society for training and capacity-building and seeking additional program resources for such activities; and
- Strengthening UNDP's own capacity and operations through increasing the involvement of CSOs in the design, implementation and monitoring of UNDP programs and projects.
The UNDP tries to involve CSOs’ in various areas of its work including poverty eradication, gender equality, natural resource management and sound governance, as well as policy formulation, advocacy, and information sharing. For those purposes, UNDP introduced several mechanisms to facilitate partnership, including Information Disclosure Policy and Extensive Guidelines on NGO Execution of UNDP Programs and Projects. Representatives of civil society groups are often gathered with representatives from government, private sector, and various UN agencies to enhance dialogue between the groups and advocate for effective development cooperation.
UNDP usually uses an internal assessment tool to guide work with NGOs, however in Lebanon this tool is not used given the structure of relations and the nature of society in Lebanon. Credible NGOs are usually well known and easy to identify, while using strict assessment tools could limit the scope of partnerships.
The private sector is considered by UNDP in Lebanon as a prepared sector for successful cooperation. UNDP tries to enhance the cooperation between CSOs and the private sector through common projects, although both sectors remain hesitant in their common endeavors. One example of successful common project was the IT Legal Advice for Women, which was one of UNDP’s projects that was implemented in partnership with Lebanese NGOs and Microsoft. However, partnership has often faced several obstacles including;
- The dominance of the welfare culture at the private sector level; this is why the private sector in Lebanon, as well as in most of the Arab and Islamic countries, is a donor for charity and for the hardship social cases; what is called in Islam “Zakat and Khoms.
- The hesitation of civil society to deal with the private sector before adopting the principles of social and environmental responsibility that makes the private sector institutions socially responsible, transparent, and accountable.
- The limitation of the capacities of CSOs, which could allow them to be involved and follow partnership projects with other sectors
- The lack of consistency and sustainability of the efforts invested by all partners
- The lack of a clear mandate and division of roles in a partnership with the United Nations and other partners
- The selection criteria of representative civil society groups, which is often restricted to certain groups and has limited outreach
- The bureaucracy procedures related to various UN agencies and programs that often hinders cooperation efforts, especially with civil society groups
- The limited channels of communication between civil society and UN agencies and the one way selection and initiation of cooperation, often coming from the side of the UN
- The lack of interest from civil society groups in taking on challenging advocacy and policy impacting roles. This factor was clearly reflected in the lack of interest and follow-up from the side of CSOs to UNDP’s initiative to bring together government, UN agencies, and civil society groups to discuss and elaborate common national work plans for the MDGs in Lebanon.
Between Civil Society and the Private Sector
The Lebanese economy is liberal and the private sector has a well-developed role in the Lebanese society and it receives major investment attention on the national level. It also plays a significant role in providing social services, particularly in the areas of education, health services, media, and cultural programs. However, the private sector organizations have not developed a vision for cooperation and partnership with other sectors, especially with civil society groups. The latter have also been cautious regarding working closely with the private sector and thus have not identified common grounds and mechanisms for shared work. Civil society groups stress the necessity of social awareness and responsibility in the work of the private sector, and they perceive that it is their role to push in that direction.
The United Nations, through its international initiative the Global Compact www.unglobalcompact.org, has been trying to bring companies together with UN agencies, labor and civil society groups to support universal environmental and social principles. The Global Compact’s operational phase was launched at the UN Headquarters in New York on 26 July 2000, and today, many hundreds of companies from all regions of the world, international labor and CSOs are engaged in it.
For example, the international company TetraPack signed on to Global Compact in 2003, and as a result massive changes were made from the corporate head office in Lausanne all the way down to local offices. It took the company three years to join Global Compact, because it was necessary to ensure that it would be able to fulfill the ten core values of the Compact in the areas of human rights, labour standards, the environment, and anti-corruption. TetraPack’s way of contributing to poverty eradication in rural areas was reflected in the program that it adopted under the name “From the Stable to the Table”. This example reflects how some of the private sector institutions are tackling social responsibility. The company realized that cooperation is necessary to achieve the MDGs and that the role of the private sector is essential in the process. The key issue in the contribution of the private sector is job creation. Without the private sector, the essential factors of commercial mechanisms (markets, jobs, and money/capital), which are necessary to eradicate poverty, are missing. TetraPack initiated the Food for Development project in Lebanon; now it became a used model world-wide. Through this program, TetraPack is presently feeding 50,000 school children in Lebanon, in addition to assisting NGOs with their proposal submission to USAID for a dairy development project, where it is hoped that there will be 200 satellite farms in Lebanon .
However, CSOs had serious reservations about endorsing the proposal of incorporating the Global Compact into the proposed UN Office of Constituency Engagement and Partnerships, which would bring CSOs and private sector under the same umbrella in the UN. CSOs mistrust the commitment of corporations to human rights, especially labor rights, environmental sustainability, and social responsibility. Accordingly, the UN’s initiative “Global Compact”, should secure an efficient implementation of corporate social responsibility in order to develop the relation and trust between CSOs and the private sector.
Among Civil Society Organizations
Networking and partnership among CSOs is a means to strengthen their independence, agendas, capacities, voice, impact, and overall role in society. It is a way towards strengthening their partnership with other sectors; for partnership is built on respect, exchange, balanced relations, and independence of involved parties. Moreover, networks could ease the burdens of dealing with fundraising procedures and make resources more available and sustainable for small NGOs. The flexibility of networks could help in limiting expenses spent on managerial and structural procedures. It could make more funds available for projects and activities, and could lead to better resource management.
Networking between CSOs helps in exchanging information and setting common understandings of development approaches. It helps groups to build common visions and to limit duplication, and thus use resources more efficiently. It is also a means to move from service provision to advocacy and lobbying roles. Proper networking can be means for capacity building and skills sharing. Accordingly, it is a way towards achieving a more coherent and stronger role for civil society groups, whereby competition between them will be limited, while the complimentary would flourish.
Through successful networks, CSOs could reach out their voice to regional and international foras where global development policies are being formulated. They can also elaborate practical and effective alternatives which they can advocate at the policy making level, given that they will be backed up by the support of all their partner organizations. In Lebanon, strong networks of civil society would have a primary role of strengthening citizenship and national dialogue as means for facing the threat of confessional divisions.
There were several experiences for networking among CSOs in Lebanon. Among them were the General Confederation of Labor Unions, the Lebanese Women Council, the Collective of Voluntary Organizations in Lebanon, Gathering of Humanitarian organizations, National Union of Organizations Contracted with the Ministry of Social Affairs , the Lebanese Gathering for Environment, and others. However, the expected role and sustainable impact from these bodies was weak. The culture of networking and partnership has a lot of potential among civil society groups in Lebanon. However, there is a need to review these experiences and invest in enhancing their mandates and clarifying their weak and strong points. The factor of competition between groups, which is increasing as a result of the limitations on available resources, is hindering opportunities for successful networking . Also, the ownership of common projects needs to be addressed since it is one of the most significant determinants of successful partnerships.
Looking into Some Examples of Partnerships in Lebanon; Challenges and Prospects
The NGO Resource and Support Unit
The NGO Resource and Support Unit is a component of the project “Capacity Building for Poverty Reduction”, which is a joint collaboration between the Ministry of Social Affairs and the UNDP. It is guided by a technical committee with representatives from the Ministry, NGOs, UNDP, and experts. The unit aims at making resources, experiences, and development materials accessible to the NGO community in Lebanon. It also aims at assisting in enhancing the capacities of NGOs in order to help them to improve the quality of services in addition to become strong lobby groups capable of advocating development policies at the national level.
The Unit identifies its overall objective as the strengthening of NGOs’ capacities to effectively improve their contribution to the development process in Lebanon through:
- Promoting networking and collaboration among NGOs and between NGOs, governmental institutions, and donors
- Serving as a “space of knowledge” for sharing information and experience for and about NGOs in Lebanon
- Providing training and developing skills of NGOs on a demand-driven basis, and acting as a facilitator to access training from different sources
The Unit tries to complement rather than duplicate the efforts done by other partners working in the field of capacity building and training in Lebanon. It provides three main kinds of services:
1. Skills-development workshops on advocacy and lobbying, training on NGO organizational development including internal governance, financial management, strategic planning, project design and implementation, as well as resource mobilization and other thematic training as needed.
2. Information and advisory services including access to information on international organizations and other local and international NGO networks and government institutions, access to thematic resources, e-libraries, and thematic discussion groups, databases on different issues such as listings of NGOs, procedures of approaching governments and donor agencies, advisory services on legal, financial, and organizational issues, in addition to facilitation of meetings with donor representatives.
3. Other services like providing office and internet services, physical space, and conference facilities for a reduced fee.
Advantages and Challenges;
The Resource Unit received support from the Ministry and UNDP in the first stages. Its establishment tried to demonstrate an example of real partnership between equals. It was an answer to a need for building capacities of CSOs, which both institutions recognized and agreed on. The Unit was established under the umbrella of the poverty reduction project and in the training center of the Ministry of Social Affairs in order to be sustained even if any of the partners backed out of the project.
The mission of the Unit was based upon a consultative process with several civil society figures in Lebanon. Upon that, the Unit saw that its value added would be in offering capacity building and training on internal governance, networking, and advocacy that civil society groups needed. The aim was to offer networking opportunities between organizations, and between them and donor agencies and governments. The Unit realizes that collaboration takes place between more developed NGOs in Lebanon, while small groups do not know each other and are often in competition for resources. Accordingly, opportunities for networking and transfer of skills and knowledge remains very limited among various groups .
Based on its identified mission, the Unit collaborated with civil society experts to produce a reference book on internal governance. The Unit distributed the book while trying to raise funds for the production of the training manual. The book was used as a networking tool, whereby discussion sessions were organized around it in various regions and this helped the Unit in reaching out to civil society groups and building focal points in various regions.
Another project that the Unit conducted was the NGO summer school courses, which tackled strategic planning, human resources management, leadership, governance, and fundraising. The Unit tried to fundraise on a small scale through the trainings, whereby it charged limited charges per course to cover up the expenses. The trainings were executed in collaboration with a private consultancy.
The Unit has achieved significant success on a small scale level among the civil society community in Lebanon. However there are several challenges that threaten its sustainability and impact. The lack of a well defined mandate that clarifies the relationships between various partners and the responsibilities of each one, had a negative impact on the sustainability of support from both partners. Accordingly, the support and flow of information and resources between the partners and the Unit is dependent on individual will and not on institutionalized structures. The support of the UNDP was significant regarding the access to information and resources; however the Unit did not receive support in visibility and national presence from neither of the partners. For example, one cannot find information about the Unit on the links related to the Ministry or the UNDP. Also, participation in the common technical committee has been inconsistent.
The Unit is funded by both the Ministry of Social Affairs and the UNDP. But since it is not clear in a mandate, the budget has not been consistent and stable. Accordingly, the Unit had to take membership fees in return for renting conference rooms. Its work plan is not associated with a sustainable budget, which limits their capability of implementing it.
Moreover, since its establishment, the Unit did not undergo an evaluation of its projects and work plans. The Unit produces an annual report; however it does not have specific indicators upon which it measures its success. This could reflect on its ability to develop its work, including both structural organization and performance. The lack of documentation will lead to an inability to accumulate on the experience that the unit is building.
Accordingly, the lack of consistent support from the Ministry and UNDP led to a limited presence for the Unit at the macro level, whereby it is unable to build a strong name on the national level. However, given the limited resources, the Unit directed its efforts to networking with groups at the community level and has succeeded in building credibility among the local NGOs in various regions. Currently, the Unit serves as a reference and resource for several of those groups.
The Unit perceives that proper management procedures and internal governance are essential for the sustainability of the organizations they are serving. They offer these trainings to various Lebanese NGOs while they are still struggling with problems in the same field, which could threaten their sustainability and progress in the future.
Development in Lebanon: Poverty Eradication, Gender Equity, and Youth Participation; the Role of NGOs, Civil Society and Other Actors
This ongoing project is a partnership between Oxfam Quebec, the Canadian Fund for Social Development, and the Arab NGO Network for Development (ANND). It aims at contributing to raising awareness of civil soci
