The authors develop a clear definition of civil society that is presented in the context of it relation to fostering democratic stability and performance. Civil society is viewed to consist of 'the public space between the state and the individual citizen' which has an 'organized and collective form' based upon 'bonds of affinity and cooperation'. Civil society then expresses itself whenever people join together to pursue common objectives. While external factors shape the organizations as they are formed, the initial impetus to organize is an internal process based upon 'the evolution of cooperation and trust among citizens', which differs widely among groups. The creation of groups can set into motion a self-reinforcing process of expanding social networks both in terms of numbers of organizations and in scope of missions and purposes. The relation of civil society to political democracy is supported when it exhibits the following characteristics: 'organizational plurality and autonomy, a democratic structure, a broad popular base, and an open recruitment of membership.' The authors discuss in turn the organization of civil society, its relations to the state and its relations to donors interested in strengthening it. Finally conclusions are presented as well as recommendations for providing support to organizations in the civil society sector. Concepts of 'social energy' as developed by Hirschman are aligned with Coleman's 'social capital' to help analyze ways in which civil society can be assisted. Hirschman notes that even failures to organize provides an increased likelihood that future attempts will be successful. Success then breeds more success an increased expansion of the social area which is covered by organizations and activities of collective action. The skills and norms necessary for cooperation are practiced and reinforced which in turn increases the general level of trust and sense of community, thus increasing social capital stocks. The role of social capital as it exists within organizations, existing social structures, and primary groups and kinship is examined as to who it impacts internal structure of groups and how it affects group performance. A typology of civil society state relations is detailed to show not only how civil society is impacted by political regimes but also to identify the ways in which civil society can be constructively engaged and supported under various situations. A large number of diverse examples of the interplay of civil society and the state are presented. Donor roles are examined in light of these various relations. Both sections focus on the difficulties inherent in supporting civil society organizations in such a way that the characteristics which make them both unique and valuable such as their democratic structure, plurality and autonomy are maintained. Narayan and Pritchett construct a measure of "social capital" in rural Tanzania, using data from the Tanzania Social Capital and Poverty Survey (SCPS), a large scale survey of 5, 000 households, that asked individuals about the extent and characteristics of their associational activity and their trust in various institutions and individuals. They matched this measure of social capital with data on household income in the same villages (both from the SCPS and from an earlier household survey, the Human Resources Development Survey). In doing so, they show that "social capital" is indeed both capital (in that it raises incomes) and social (in that household incomes depend on village, not just household, social capital). The authors found that the magnitude of social capital's effect on incomes is impressive: a one standard deviation increase in village social capital increases a household proxy for income by at least 20 to 30 percent.
Bibliography: July 1997 1-41 Policy Research Working Paper
