U.S. NGOs versus French Associations

Recently, I was asked about the difficulty of finding information about NGOs in France by a student in the States. In preparing my answer for her, I realized that the answer is kind of complicated but very interesting nonetheless... so, I decided to share it with all.

In France, organizations involved in humanitarian work rarely fall in to the category of NGO. Actually, most all of them lie in the grey area in between government-sponsored and private. France, a social State, upholds a system of solidarity. This means State monies (coming from taxation mostly on families and businesses) are set aside specifically to help those in need.

The government has also gone through a process of decentralization so that these government funds are accessible at all levels… regional, departmental and municipal. Therefore, each community can see what their specific needs are and finance projects/missions in those areas. By in large, it is associations who apply for these funds by presenting their service (offre de service) to either the mayor or a general council. There are associations that operate nationally such as l’ASSFAM, whose basic mission is to anticipate problems specific to new immigrants and take proactive measures to help resolve them (individually and collectively). Offices are located in several departments in France but are linked to the central headquarters in Paris. There are associations who operate internationally, such as l’AFVP who recruits volunteers in universities and technical institutions to participate in development projects all over the world. And there are a MULTITUDE of associations acting independently on the local level, people of a neighborhood joining together for a common goal. Associations can be religious in nature, sportive, cultural, charitable, political, etc. There are quite a few associations considered “militant”, meaning they actively fight for a specific cause: women's rights, immigrant's rights, etc. Associative life in France is the backbone of their system of solidarity, their belief that everyone should share in the responsibility of caring for the disadvantaged (poor, handicapped, elderly, minorities) and defending individuals’ rights.

Since most of the associations funds come from government aid, usually in the form of contracts renewed yearly, some of their autonomy is taken away. For example, l’ASSFAM had to completely reframe their mission in their 2006 proposal because of the political current of toughening up on immigration policy. However, a positive to this close tie with elected officials (in all levels of government) is that it makes it necessary for an association’s projects to stay transparent. This then lends to efficiency and accountability. It also allows for great collaboration amongst organizations and people of the community. L’ASSFAM has a whole list of partnerships they’ve developed within their individual localities to help accomplish their goals. This visibility and coordination makes it much easier to effectively tackle problems.

Now, coming back to the American conception of NGOs. Basically, in the US, where a capitalistic, privatized system rules the day, NGOs take the place of government supported structures to fill socio-economic gaps. Some NGOs and/or our famous 501(c)s get government subsidies but to a much greater extent, they exist due to the financial contributions coming from private sources. The most important donors are usually foundations (Gates, Guggenheim, Heinz, Ford foundation). Yes, it is often times excessively rich companies and individuals who decide who gets the money and thereby what humanitarian efforts are worthy of support. That is why, in the States, grant writing has become an extremely important profession. As is tradition in the good ol’ US of A, the procedure is very competitive and often times political. NGO’s needing sponsorship must learn how to sell themselves, to network, and to present their service as a product.

On the one hand, this probably raises standards globally. Organization must really make the case that their cause is important and that they are capable of making changes. Also, since sums come from the private sector (and not directly tied to public demands), there is less constraints on a NGOs activities. This probably encourages people to get involved in humanitarian work. But on the other hand, foundations act as separate entities, giving their support to who they will, and thereby fragment efforts. And, unfortunately, small players, those with the closest ties to local communities don’t make it in the running. To secure funding is to have influence. All these negatives are why in a country as wealthy as the US, we have an astonishingly high rate of poverty, illiteracy, troubled teens, gangs, etc. Communities that most need resources have no outlet. In France, financing of associations is adapted specifically to each communities needs. Granted, France has its share of problems, but considering the very high employment rate and the huge immigrant population, they make out o.k. In my master’s thesis I am going to try to show (I only have statistics proving it for a couple city’s right now) that banlieus with greater presence of associations correlated with less violence during the recent rioting.

Voila for now… Please, I encourage your feedback… any and all comments are welcome.

Afterthought: Private sectors contributing to NGOs are often times tax write-offs so it would appear that in the end the US government largely finances the aid sector like in France... So the only big difference is, in the US those who have capital choose who will get the monies, in France elected officials in each community have a budget for financial aid and can distribute it according to need. hhhmmmmm.....