1 / 25

First European Conference on Citizen Initiatives for Global Solidarity Brussels , 30-31.01.2014

First European Conference on Citizen Initiatives for Global Solidarity Brussels , 30-31.01.2014. What's happening in Poland? Is Small Beautiful Again? Citizen Initiatives for Global Solidarity in Poland. dr Galia Chimiak Institute of Philosophy and Sociology

blue
Download Presentation

First European Conference on Citizen Initiatives for Global Solidarity Brussels , 30-31.01.2014

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. First European Conference on Citizen Initiatives for Global SolidarityBrussels, 30-31.01.2014 What's happening in Poland? Is Small Beautiful Again? Citizen Initiatives for Global Solidarity in Poland. dr Galia Chimiak Institute of Philosophy and Sociology PolishAcademy of Sciences

  2. Structure of the presentation Background info: • Poland’srole changes in development cooperation • Characteristics of the Polish NGO sector • PolishNGDOs and Polishaid Citizenintiatives in Poland: • strengths and limitations • challenges and opportunities • Resources available for NGDOs and CIs CIGS casestudies Conclusions: opportunitiesfor CIGS support in Poland

  3. The involvement of Poland in dev’t coop. and itsimpact on NGOs • pre-1989:Poland was a COMECON (Council for Mutual Economic Assistance) donor; • 1989-2003: official aid recipient; • post-2004: rising donor; • 2013: OECD DAC member • 1989-2004: PolishNGOsbenefitted from foreignaid, includingforeignprivatefoundations, OA and pre-accessionfunds: financialsupport and know-how • Post-2004: SomeNGOsreformulatedtheir field of activities, for example from civiceducation to globaleducation; from OA-recipients to partners in development cooperation

  4. NGOs in PL as of 2012http://civicpedia.ngo.pl/ • Somestatistics: As of 2012, thereweresome60000 activeNGOs(Associations and Foundations) in Poland • Simple associationsshouldbe establishedby at least three members. Theyhaveno legalpersonalitiesand are not obligatedto register in the Registry of Associations. Simpleassociation cannot accept donations, inheritances or use the public support. • Less than 4% of allassociationshave less than 15 members, i.e. could be simpleassociations

  5. Explaining the predominance of volunteer-based NGOs in Poland • 45% of NGOshaveno paidpersonnel. Thesearemostlyyoungand/orlocalorganisations. • 20% of NGOshavebudgetsbelow PLN 1000 • Interestingly, it was NGOsactiveabroadthathavenoted most significantincrease in paidemployment • On average, the annualincomeof PolishNGOsamounts to PLN 18000 (>EUR 4000). • It isdifficult to establish the budget of CIGS. Thistype of informationisneitherpubliclyavailable nor disclosed upon request. • NGOs’ incomeinequality: 5% of NGOsmakeuse of morethan2/3 of the financialresourcesavailable for NGOs • 2012 incomeshare by sources: 37% [(self)gov], 12% EU funds, 10% commercialactivities, 14% donations and membershipfees, 3% otherforeignfunds, and others

  6. NGOsactiveabroad in figures • As of 2012, therewere18470 NGOs (*9%) that declaredtheir field of activity as: international activity, local communities, civic activity. Less than 1% of NGOsdeclaredtheirmain field of activityisinternational one • 4863declaredthey promote and support volunteerism • increaseof importance of foreignfundssince 2004 • 27% of NGOshadcontacts with foreigninstitutions, yetonly4% of NGOs do this on a regularbasis, while 8% declaredmembrship in supranationalumbrellaorganisations

  7. PolishNGDOs’ TYPOLOGY • Developers => active in the Global South, mostlyAfrican, countries • Democratizers => implementingprojects in the EasternPartnershipcountries (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine) http://www.zagranica.org.pl/publikacje/sektor-pozarzadowy-we-wspolpracy-rozwojowej/raport-z-badan-demokracja-i-rozwoj-w

  8. Grupa Zagranica: the NGDOsumbrellaorganisation • Est. in 2001 as CI; formaliseditsactivity in 2004 • Currently61members, mostlymiddle-rangeones (paidstaff: less than 10; annualbudget: PLN 500.000) • Not allmembers of Grupa Zagranica areactive. Therefore, the NGDOs’ umbrellaorganizationisnotaimingatincreasingitsmembership IF newmembers, be themNGDOsor CIGS, would not be active. • CIGS mostlyactive in the WorkingGroup on Global Education

  9. CIGS: strengths • CIGS localembeddedness /grassrootsnature => greatercredibility re dev’ed • Enthusiastic • Innovative (some of them) • Respond to localneeds • Introducenewideas to the mainstream NGDOs (fair trade; responsibletourism; responsiblevolunteerism; degrowth) • Self-government • Volunteernature of involvement • Independence • Freedom to function in accordance with rulesestablishedwithin the initiative • Notbeingan NGO According to NGDOs: According to CIGS:

  10. CIGS: limitations • Lack of resources and lack of legalpersonalitylimitstheircapacity to takeactive part in initiativesrelevant for allNGDOs • The lackof staffcontinuity negativelyimpactstheirorganizational resilience • CIGS are not interested to take part in processesbenefitting the wholesector of NGDOs • Institutionalweakness: CIGS are not competitive • none According to NGDOs According to CIGS

  11. Challenges CIGS face (according to NGDOs) • Lack of resources to participate in consultations and workinggroups • Lack of visibility • MFA isused to informNGDOsaboutconsultationsat a shortnotice: NGDOs and CIGS outsideWarsawcan’talwaysattend • Grupa Zagranica sometimesreimbursestravel and accommodationexpenses of CIGS

  12. Opportunities for CIGS • NGDOs and CIGS canapply for funding not specificallyaimedat development/globalsolidarity; example: under monitoring • CIGS areable to accessfunding and participate in NGDO sectoralactivitiesindirectly, i.e. viaregistered, localNGOs (example: the CIGS at Klamra Foundation in Żywiec) or=>

  13. GROWL – Learningmore GROWingLessproject • The projectiscurrentlyimplementedby Culturesof the World Foundation (Fundacja Kultury Świata) Partner CIGS: • Grupa postwzrost: degrowthgrouphttp://postwzrost.wordpress.com/ • Kooperatywa Spożywcza Dobrze Communityfood co-op: http://www.dobrze.waw.pl/ • Grupa Rolnictwo Wspierane przez Społeczność Świerże Panki Producer-ledCommunitySupportedAgriculturehttp://www.rws.waw.pl/

  14. Nationalresourcesavailable for NGDOs and CIs • MFA fundsNGDOsprojects from PLN 20000 to PLN 4.000.000 • MFA => FED regrantingproject (globaleducation) • National Fund for CivicInitiatives (FIO) • Batory Foundation => for exampleunder monitoring (Citizens for democracyprogramme) • The Catholic Church supportsChurch-basedorganisations => whicharepatronisingtowardstheirpartners from the Global South and do charityratherthancooperationbased on partnership • The localgovernment: yes, ifNGDOscanpresenttheirprojects as relevant to the prioritylocalgovernmentswants to support, i.e. anti-discrimination

  15. PolishNGOs as subcontractors of Polish Aid (according to the 2012 Polishaid report) • Polish ODA: 0.09% GNI in 2012 • 25% of Polish ODA aredistributedbilaterally • 17% of bilateralPolishaid(37.000.000 PLN, about 9mln EUR) havebeensubcontracted to PolishNGDOs • Goodgovernanceand educationremain the mainfocus of Polishaid • PLN 2.400.000 (EUR 600000) wereearmarked for globaleducationprojects in 2012

  16. The Education for Democracy Foundation (FED) • Global education 2013. Re-granting for NGOsprogrammesupportedsmallerNGOsinvolved in development cooperation • FED providestraining for beginners in dev’ed via theirprogrammeRITAfinanced by the Polish-American Freedom Foundation • In 2013 maximum grant amounts for individual projects: up to PLN 12,000 (EUR 3000) orPLN 20,000-25,000 (EUR 5000-6000). • 16 grants and 8 small grantsweregiven in 2012 to support small NGOs

  17. ProgrammeFund for Civic Initiatives (FIO) 2014-2020administered by the Ministry of Labour and Social Policyhttp://www.pozytek.gov.pl/P,FIO,2014-2020,1189.html • FIO is a national fund to supportPolishNGOs • The 2014-2020 editionof FIO isaimedspecificallyat small, young, localNGOs, includingcitizeninititatives

  18. ProgrammeFund for Civic Initiatives (FIO) 2014-2020http://www.pozytek.gov.pl/P,FIO,2014-2020,1189.html FIO annualdisbursement Priority% of allocationsAllocations in PLN 1. Small Initiatives17 10 200 000 2. Active Society50 30 000 000 3. Active Citizens20 12 000 000 4. StrongNGOs9 5 400 000 5. Technical Assistance 4 2 400 000 TOTAL 100 60 000 000 PLN : EUR => 4:1

  19. Case studies of CIGS: postwzrosthttp://postwzrost.wordpress.com/kim-jestesmy/ Degrowthgroup Décroissancepo polsku

  20. WarsawCommunity Food Co-ophttps://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=232944246887520&set=a.128923693956243.1073741825.122929004555712&type=1&theater

  21. Przychodnia Skłot (communitycentersquat)https://www.facebook.com/przychodniasquat

  22. Report on VolunteersReturnees’ Involvement in Global Education in Poland (http://www.polskapomoc.gov.pl/files/Aktualnosci2013/raport%20-wolontariusze%20-%20tresc.PDF accessed 26.12.2013). Main findings of the report which studied 19 out of the 42 NGDOs involved in sending out volunteers abroad: • About 400 Poles per year take part in volunteering abroad schemes.Major destinations: Africaand the former USSR countries • Whereas bigger and medium NGOs continue their cooperation with no more than one-third of the volunteers they sent abroad, the small, volunteers-based NGOs can boast continuous cooperation with their volunteers after their return • Small, volunteer-based NGOs (which send out less than ten volunteers) and bigger church-based NGOs (which send out about 20-50 volunteers) do not limit themselves to training their volunteers before sending them abroad, but also engage them in their activities before their mission abroad

  23. Implications for CIGS and donors: • Addedvalue of returningvolunteers: greatercredibility in globaleducation • Returningvolunteersrecharge the sendingorganisation => Supportreadaptation of returningvolunteers • Volunteering abroad can best serve global education if the volunteering experience is a stage in the professional career of the volunteer

  24. Conclusions: opportunities for supporting CIGS/small Polish NDGOs • Need of a policy and specificprogrammetargeted to CIGS to overcometheir(perceived as) self-limitingstrategy • Or, leave CIGS be… • Acc. to NGDOs, CIGS needatleast one (paid) person amongtheirmembers; thiscouldensuretheirvisibility and givethem a chance to survive and grow • Resourcesto guarantee CIGS’ long-term functioning • Existingsupportschemesshouldforeseesupport fot the sustainability of CIGS activities

  25. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATENTIONgchimiak@ifispan.waw.pl

More Related