Rajesh Tandon: In defence of NGOs

That there are some fake NGOs does not justify sweeping and unsubstantiated generalisations about them in the country

Several recent articles in Business Standard have been criticising NGOs vociferously (in particular, TCA Srinivasa-Raghavan's "Of, by,and for NGOs", September 24/25, and Surjit Bhalla's "Dishonest about development", October 1/2).

There are several other reports in the paper that make tangential and caustic comments related to the roles and contributions of NGOs in India. This article is intended to clarify some of the confusion surrounding such interpretations.

Many such articles and news stories talk about NGOs while referring to the National Advisory Council (NAC) headed by Sonia Gandhi. NAC is not an NGO; it is a committee formally set up by the government of India with its notification dated May 31, 2004; it is serviced by the PMO, and is intended to advise the prime minister in respect of "inputs to policy formulation" and "monitoring the implementation" of the National Common Minimum Programme of the UPA government at the centre.

Its chairperson is appointed by the prime minister, and has the rank of a Cabinet minister. The members of NAC are appointed in individual capacity and currently comprise of retired government officers, academics, professionals, politicians and a few working with some NGOs.

In this respect, NAC is a government-appointed committee or council, not different from other such councils appointed by the government from time to time. Some recent ones are Council of Economic Advisors, Trade Advisory Council, Manufacturing Advisory Council and so on.

Therefore, any imputation that NAC is an NGO is far from truth. The opinions expressed by NAC may not be to the liking of some professionals and journalists, but the same situation may arise with respect to any other council or committee set up by any ministry of the Central or state government. Disagreements with opinions and recommendations of any government-appointed council/committee does not make that body an NGO.

Another confusion being perpetuated is to call World Bank and UNDP NGOs. World Bank is an inter-governmental body, "owned" by several national governments, including India. UNDP is part of the system of United Nations, clearly an inter-governmental body. If some opinions, reports or studies done by these bodies are different from those of the authors, it surely cannot make these bodies NGOs?

So, what is the reality of NGOs in India today? A recent study (Participatory Research in Asia, 2003) released by the prime minister (then leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha) Manmohan Singh, concluded, on the basis of large-scale sample survey, that there are 1.2 million such non-profit organisations in the country today.

They range from small community groups (like women's self-help groups) to voluntary organisations, service-delivery agencies and professional associations. Such organisations are engaged in providing services to the poor and the needy in areas of education; health care; drinking water and sanitation; housing and livelihood creation and so on.

Many such voluntary organisations also undertake research and policy advocacy, in addition to social mobilisation and community empowerment. The study shows that such organisations had a combined annual turnover of Rs 20,000 crore in 2002; only 7.5 per cent of that is foreign funds from international agencies (many of which also fund government programmes) such as the UNDP, World Bank, DFID, SIDA and so on.

These organisations provided 2.7 million full-time equivalent paid jobs in 2002, a figure equal to nearly four-fifths of the Central government employees. If we examine the roles played by such organisations in the developmental history of India since independence, several features become obvious.

First, such organisations have been in the forefront of relief and rehabilitation "" from the Bihar famine to Bhopal gas disaster to earthquakes in Latur, Uttarkashi and Kutch to Orissa cyclones and now, the tsunami.

Second, innovative pilot projects carried out by such voluntary organisations have resulted in national programmes by the Central government "" India Mark II Handpump, National Adult Education Programme (1978), National Primary Health Care Policy (1979), Women's Livelihoods DWCRA, Bio-gas/non-conventional energy, SHGs/micro-finance, social/community forestry, wasteland development, watershed, ICDS and so on.

Third, sustained public advocacy by such organisations have resulted in appropriate policy development in such areas as tribal rights, violence against women, human rights, air and water pollution, electoral reforms, decentralisation to local bodies, right to information and so on.

The essential point to be noted is that such non-governmental initiatives have made a valuable and demonstrated contribution to socio-economic development in the country through such exemplary means. That there are some "fake" or "paper" NGOs is neither denied nor a justification for sweeping and unsubstantiated generalisations about NGOs in the country.

If a similar logic was to be applied to the private sector and market institutions, then one could wipe out the contribution of business organisations on the basis of a few "fake" or "dishonest" entrepreneurs and enterprises, what with some business organisations manipulating their own shares, many thousands of them not paying back to public sector banks the tens of thousands of crores of public funds borrowed and misutilised fraudulently.

I think it is important to recognise that healthy development of democratic societies require an efficient and responsive government, productive and efficient businesses, and civic associations and NGOs that are vigilant and engaged with pressing issues of injustice, inequity, exclusion and marginalisation in society. India can be truly proud of such an emerging balance in society.

The writer is Founder and Director, Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA)