The Relationship between Government and Civil Society in the Era of COVID-19

IF 2.2 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Nonprofit Policy Forum Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.1515/npf-2021-0007
Á. Kövér
{"title":"The Relationship between Government and Civil Society in the Era of COVID-19","authors":"Á. Kövér","doi":"10.1515/npf-2021-0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract COVID-19 created an extraordinary social situation in which governments struggle to mitigate the harmful consequences of the pandemic. Challenging times show a society’s resilience and capacity for solidarity and cohesion, the government’s ability to deal with emergencies effectively, the stability and inclusiveness of political systems, and their aptitude to respect democratic values. It is particularly important to examine this period from the point of view of civil society and civil society organizations (CSOs), since civil society plays a pivotal role in the alleviation and dissipation of societal troubles associated with the epidemic, indeed a vital role in curbing the virus. The civil sector’s strength and resilience too is tested. As the studies in this Special Issue show, exploiting the potential of civil society was an option that only some countries have been able to seize - as a result of which they have effectively reduced the consequences of the calamity while increasing a sense of solidarity and belonging in their societies. Others, however, failed to recognize the importance of civil society and interpreted the situation as a “single-actor play on stage”. Neither solidarity nor cohesion play out as values in these latter cases; instead the single actor – government – grabs the opportunity to play the role of the heroic savior and the exclusive problem solver, grabbing for itself both symbolic gains and increasing concentration of power. Citizens are expected to trust no one or no organization except the charismatic leader (or party). Thereby is forged a vertical and hierarchical chain of control, rather than a horizontally linked network of trust and cooperation. The studies and commentaries in this issue cover nine countries located on an imaginary line beginning in the United Kingdom, and extending through Germany, Austria, Hungary, Turkey, Israel, India, China and South Korea, representing various socio-political and economic systems. Embedded in elaborated theoretical understandings, this introductory essay examines the research articles of this Special Issue in which authors unfold the dynamics of CSO-government relations in the context of the world pandemic. These accounts sharpen our understanding of the preexisting shape of government–CSO relations. The introduction places the countries on a scale which classifies them according to the characteristics of civil society–government relations unfolding during the pandemic. One of the endpoints is represented by those countries where the CSO’s creative and constructive responses to the social challenges were prevented or blocked by the government. In this setup, CSOs were ignored at best, and restrictions undercut their abilities to contribute to the process of mitigating the pandemic and its consequences. Meanwhile, at the opposite end of this scale, are countries where the government, both central and local, invited civil society partners in the response to COVID-19, orchestrated high-quality and multilevel cross-sectoral cooperation, and provided partners with the necessary (financial) resources. In those cases, CSOs were empowered effectively to participate in a process designed to address the epidemic and its consequences in accordance with principles of participatory democracy.","PeriodicalId":44152,"journal":{"name":"Nonprofit Policy Forum","volume":"6 1","pages":"1 - 24"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"21","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nonprofit Policy Forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/npf-2021-0007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

Abstract

Abstract COVID-19 created an extraordinary social situation in which governments struggle to mitigate the harmful consequences of the pandemic. Challenging times show a society’s resilience and capacity for solidarity and cohesion, the government’s ability to deal with emergencies effectively, the stability and inclusiveness of political systems, and their aptitude to respect democratic values. It is particularly important to examine this period from the point of view of civil society and civil society organizations (CSOs), since civil society plays a pivotal role in the alleviation and dissipation of societal troubles associated with the epidemic, indeed a vital role in curbing the virus. The civil sector’s strength and resilience too is tested. As the studies in this Special Issue show, exploiting the potential of civil society was an option that only some countries have been able to seize - as a result of which they have effectively reduced the consequences of the calamity while increasing a sense of solidarity and belonging in their societies. Others, however, failed to recognize the importance of civil society and interpreted the situation as a “single-actor play on stage”. Neither solidarity nor cohesion play out as values in these latter cases; instead the single actor – government – grabs the opportunity to play the role of the heroic savior and the exclusive problem solver, grabbing for itself both symbolic gains and increasing concentration of power. Citizens are expected to trust no one or no organization except the charismatic leader (or party). Thereby is forged a vertical and hierarchical chain of control, rather than a horizontally linked network of trust and cooperation. The studies and commentaries in this issue cover nine countries located on an imaginary line beginning in the United Kingdom, and extending through Germany, Austria, Hungary, Turkey, Israel, India, China and South Korea, representing various socio-political and economic systems. Embedded in elaborated theoretical understandings, this introductory essay examines the research articles of this Special Issue in which authors unfold the dynamics of CSO-government relations in the context of the world pandemic. These accounts sharpen our understanding of the preexisting shape of government–CSO relations. The introduction places the countries on a scale which classifies them according to the characteristics of civil society–government relations unfolding during the pandemic. One of the endpoints is represented by those countries where the CSO’s creative and constructive responses to the social challenges were prevented or blocked by the government. In this setup, CSOs were ignored at best, and restrictions undercut their abilities to contribute to the process of mitigating the pandemic and its consequences. Meanwhile, at the opposite end of this scale, are countries where the government, both central and local, invited civil society partners in the response to COVID-19, orchestrated high-quality and multilevel cross-sectoral cooperation, and provided partners with the necessary (financial) resources. In those cases, CSOs were empowered effectively to participate in a process designed to address the epidemic and its consequences in accordance with principles of participatory democracy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
新冠肺炎时代政府与公民社会的关系
2019冠状病毒病造成了一种特殊的社会局面,各国政府都在努力减轻疫情的有害后果。充满挑战的时代显示出一个社会的韧性和团结和凝聚力,政府有效应对紧急情况的能力,政治制度的稳定性和包容性,以及他们尊重民主价值观的能力。特别重要的是,从民间社会和民间社会组织的角度审视这一时期,因为民间社会在减轻和消除与这一流行病有关的社会问题方面发挥着关键作用,实际上在遏制这一病毒方面发挥着至关重要的作用。民间部门的实力和韧性也受到了考验。正如本期特刊的研究表明的那样,利用民间社会的潜力是只有一些国家能够抓住的一个选择- -因此,它们有效地减少了灾难的后果,同时增加了社会的团结和归属感。然而,其他人没有认识到民间社会的重要性,并将这种情况解释为“舞台上的单人戏”。在后一种情况下,团结和凝聚力都不能作为价值观发挥作用;相反,唯一的行动者——政府——抓住机会扮演英勇的救世主和唯一的问题解决者的角色,为自己攫取象征性的利益和日益集中的权力。除了有魅力的领导人(或政党),公民不应该相信任何人或任何组织。因此,形成了一个垂直和分层的控制链,而不是一个水平连接的信任和合作网络。本期的研究和评论涵盖了九个国家,它们位于一条假想的线上,从英国开始,延伸到德国、奥地利、匈牙利、土耳其、以色列、印度、中国和韩国,代表了不同的社会政治和经济制度。在详细阐述的理论理解中,这篇介绍性文章审查了本期特刊的研究文章,其中作者揭示了在世界大流行背景下公民社会与政府关系的动态。这些叙述加深了我们对政府-公民社会组织关系的原有形态的理解。导言部分根据疫情期间民间社会与政府关系的特点对这些国家进行了分类。其中一个端点代表的是那些公民社会组织对社会挑战的创造性和建设性反应被政府阻止或阻止的国家。在这种情况下,民间社会组织充其量被忽视,限制削弱了它们为减轻大流行病及其后果的进程作出贡献的能力。与此同时,在这一规模的另一端,有些国家的中央和地方政府邀请民间社会合作伙伴参与应对COVID-19,组织开展高质量、多层次的跨部门合作,并向合作伙伴提供必要的(财政)资源。在这些情况下,公民社会组织被有效地授权参与旨在根据参与式民主原则处理这一流行病及其后果的进程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Nonprofit Policy Forum
Nonprofit Policy Forum PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
18.80%
发文量
23
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊最新文献
Avoiding Burnout with Compassionate Accompaniment: A Novel Approach to Training, Selecting, Managing, and Regulating Frontline Workers Nonprofit Disaster Response and Climate Change: Who Responds? Who Plans? The Rise of Learning Pods: Civil Society’s Expanding Role in K-12 Education in the United States Rereading Salamon: Why Voluntary Failure Theory is Not (Really) About Voluntary Failures Frontmatter
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1