Article Preview
TopIntroduction
The pressing challenges contemporary societies face increasingly demand collaborative solutions that transcend traditional sectoral boundaries. Multi-agency partnerships, particularly between governments and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), have become instrumental in achieving shared objectives and bolstering organizational capacities (MacDonald et al., 2022; Seitanidi & Crane, 2009). However, the relationship between state and non-state actors is far more fragile and complex in developing regions. While NGOs in developed nations typically collaborate with governments as equal partners, this equilibrium is often disrupted in less developed contexts. States in these regions may assert dominance, while NGOs risk marginalization, co-optation, or outright suppression (Abbidin & Abdul, 2022). This fractured relationship, compounded by infrastructural deficiencies, political instability, and weak governance, can foster conditions conducive to corruption and inefficiency (Rosenau, 2003; Reyes & Useche, 2019; Spence et al., 2020).
Beyond surface-level cooperation, the relationship between NGOs and states is characterized by deeper power struggles shaped by historical legacies and contemporary political realities (Chaudhry, 2022). In many developing regions, governments view NGOs as foreign entities that challenge their sovereignty, mainly when NGOs are funded or influenced by external actors (Bromley et al., 2020). This perception can lead to strained relations, where states seek to reassert control over areas traditionally within their purview, such as social services and advocacy. Meanwhile, NGOs often aim to uphold global values like human rights and environmental sustainability, which may conflict with the state's immediate political or economic goals (Deshmukh et al., 2024). This tension reveals that NGOs and states are diverse in their functions and often fundamentally at odds in their priorities and agendas (Fisher, 1997).
Recent research has further highlighted the notion of “distant proximity,” wherein states prioritize localization and political independence while NGOs emphasize globalization and interdependence (Ramjit, 2019). This paradoxical relationship can create more adversarial than cooperative dynamics, particularly when political elites manipulate NGO partnerships for personal gain. The phenomenon of the “civic tournament” describes how powerful NGOs may align with incumbent governments, leveraging their resources and influence to secure benefits, often at the expense of transparency, accountability, and long-term development. Such alliances may result in short-term gains but weaken governance structures and undermine democratic processes (Farid & Song, 2020).
Furthermore, broader geopolitical forces often shape the relationship between NGOs and states. In many emerging societies, NGOs are seen as agents of global governance, representing external interests that challenge national sovereignty (Mitchell et al., 2020). This perception can lead to distrust and conflict, with governments viewing NGOs as threats to their authority. Public antagonism and politicization of these relationships can exacerbate the situation, fueling divisive and unpredictable politics and making effective crisis management increasingly difficult (Ingram, 2020). While states cannot address complex challenges independently, NGOs are also limited by their reliance on donor funding and political affiliations, which can restrict their capacity for impartiality and long-term impact (Dupuy & Prakash, 2021). These politically expedient relationships risk entrenching the status quo, delaying meaningful progress, and eroding the governance structures they are meant to support.