The state and the reconstruction of civil society
| Date | 01 December 2017 |
| Published date | 01 December 2017 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0020852315592467 |
| Author | Taco Brandsen,Willem Trommel,Bram Verschuere |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
International Review of
Administrative Sciences
2017, Vol. 83(4) 676–693
!The Author(s) 2015
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0020852315592467
journals.sagepub.com/home/ras
International
Review of
Administrative
Sciences
Article
The state and the reconstruction
of civil society
Taco Brandsen
Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Willem Trommel
VU University Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Bram Verschuere
Ghent University, Belgium
Abstract
The current relationship between the state and civil society in Europe is a curious and
historically unique one. This is no longer a situation in which participation and associ-
ation prepare citizens for the offices of the state; rather, it is the state urging a some-
times-reluctant citizenry to engage actively in civil society. This phenomenon stems
from a combination of changes in prevailing governance paradigms and of the more
general process of social liquefaction. In the article, we analyse these two intertwining
trends and discuss the new type of relationship between the state and civil society that
may be emerging.
Points for practitioners
The article puts the current vogue for renewed state–civil society relationships in a
larger context. It shows that, however commendable many initiatives may be, there is
the risk that the desire on the part of governments for their citizens to participate and
self-organize may lead the state to take over such initiatives, leading to a manufactured
civil society that has little to do with spontaneous citizen initiatives. Another possible
consequence is that truly spontaneous citizen initiatives will shun collaboration with the
state and focus only inwards, to the detriment of broader public values. Therefore, in
this area, the state must strike a delicate balance between encouragement and restraint.
Keywords
administration and democracy, citizen participation, civil society, public administration,
public management, third sector
Corresponding author:
Taco Brandsen, Radboud University Nijmegen, Institute for Management Research, PO Box 9108, Nijmegen,
6500 HK, The Netherlands.
Email: t.brandsen@fm.ru.nl
(Governmental) Expectations towards a diverse and changing
civil society
Governments, from the local to the central level, increasingly express their desire to
engage civil society, which is regarded as instrumental in dealing with contempor-
ary societal issues. Well-known examples are the Big Society in the UK and the
‘Doe-Democratie’ in the Netherlands (Van de Wijdeven, 2012), as well as the many
efforts that local governments in a lot of countries put into participation or co-
production. Whether these intentions are politically/ideologically driven, or
whether the rationale is financial austerity, these governments all have to face
the fact that civil society is not a homogeneous artefact to deal with. Rather,
contemporary civil society is diverse and continuously changing.
A diverse and changing civil society
The current relationship between the state and civil society in Europe is a curious
and historically unique one, which will no doubt keep researchers occupied for
years to come.
1
In order to understand current state–civil society relationships, the
Tocquevillian conceptualization of civil society needs to be re-examined in the light
of contemporary developments. The bottom line of Toquevillian thinking is that
civil society should be regarded (and preserved) as a ‘self-regulating universe of
voluntary associations committed to be protected from intrusion by the state on
rights and freedoms’ (Edwards, 2004: 7). Scholars like Putnam can be situated in
this line of thought, given the value they place upon voluntary associations in
‘curbing the power of centralizing institutions, protecting pluralism, and nurturing
constructive social norms like ‘‘trust and cooperation’’’ (Edwards, 2004: 7).
Although building social capital and defending pluralism is still a valued role
played by civil society, it plays two other important societal roles (see, e.g.,
Anheier, 2005: 82–83): service delivery, mainly via private, non-profit organizations
in sectors like education and health care; and expression, via organizations that are
active in civic advocacy or stand up for a cause (like human rights or the environ-
ment), or that play a representative role (like unions or consumer organizations).
These roles are performed in a context in which traditional forms of (ideologically
or religiously driven) social organization are in a process of reorientation or, as
Bauman (2000) has argued, even decline. Various drivers behind this development
have been identified, notably, individualization, changing life patterns, and chan-
ging government–civil society relations.
Moreover, although civil society is often portrayed as an actor, it is no more
than a cover term for a heterogeneous collection of organizations and initiatives
with different roles and functions in a changing context. Evers and Laville (2004:
17) position civil society in the centre of a welfare triangle, in between the spheres
of state (public agencies), market (private firms) and community (households and
families) (see also Pestoff, 1992). Ideal-typically, civil society organizations are
private, not-for-profit and formal organizations, and can, as such, be discerned
Brandsen et al. 677
To continue reading
Request your trial