Urban community organizations and local government: Exploring relationships and roles
| Date | 01 July 1986 |
| Author | Louise G. White |
| Published date | 01 July 1986 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1002/pad.4230060304 |
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT, Vol. 6,239-253
Urban community organizations and local government:
exploring relationships and roles
LOUISE
G.
WHITE
George
Mason
University
SUMMARY
There is an increasing interest in using local community organizations
to
assist in the
development process. Observers who evaluate
the
contribution of such groups frequently
classify them into two clusters: those which are closely
tied
to
the government and focus on
service delivery, and those which guard their autonomy and engage
in
development rather
than service delivery. This dichotomy, however, downplays the developmental
role
of
groups
allied with local governments and obscures some important contributions
they
can
offer.
Three different models are proposed and two case studies
of
service-oriented groups in Cairo
are presented. The cases suggest that an important criterion in assessing voluntary groups is
the extent to which their service delivery role enables them to develop an organization. From
this perspective their role is potentially much broader than expediting government services.
MODELS
OF
COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS
Donors and Third World governments are increasingly looking to private voluntary
associations to assist them in channelling assistance to the poor. This interest
naturally generates
a
variety
of
questions about their effectiveness and their
willingness
to
work with the poorest members
of
the society. Several observers
distinguish between two types
of
associations according to their relationship to the
government and the role they play.’ One type maintains relatively close ties to the
government and emphasizes providing welfare or services to the community. The
other remains more independent
of
the government and emphasizes mobilizing the
community
to
define and deal with its problems (Alliband, 1983; Van Heck, 1979;
Cheema, 1983,
p.
209). The dichotomy is used to suggest that service-oriented
groups linked to the government are less apt to involve the poor in the community,
more
apt
to
be dominated by elites, and less committed to change.
There are several reasons for questioning whether the dichotomy is
a
useful one,
however. First, it
does
not
do
justice
to
the variety
of
roles the government plays.
In
her analysis
of
private voluntary organizations (PVOs), Tendler agrees that their
relationship
to
the government is an important dimension, but argues that
a
distinction between government-related and non-governmental groups obscures
Louise White is Associate Professor at George Mason University,
4400
University Drive, Fairfax,
Virginia 22030, USA.
’
There are a variety
of
ways to classify community associations: according
to
their roles (Wanasinghe,
1979;
Uphoff and Esman,
1974);
their ‘basis
of
recruitment’ and ‘specificity
of
purpose’ (Ralston,
Anderson and Colson,
1981);
whether they are production-
or
service-oriented (Cheema, 1983;
p.
208);
whether they represent the local community (Tendler, 1982,
p.
15). See the review in Cheema, 1983.
027 1-2075/86/030239- 15$07.50
0
1986
by
John Wiley
&
Sons,
Ltd.
To continue reading
Request your trial