Angela M. Eikenberry

Refusing the Market A Democratic Discourse for Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations

This article extends critical and normative theorizing about the assumptions and implications of marketization for nonprofit and voluntary organizations and suggests an alternative discourse. It describes reasons for the increasing marketization of nonprofit and voluntary organizations and what the literature has shown to be problematic about marketization. It argues that one way to resist colonization by the market is for academics and practitioners of voluntary and nonprofit organizations to create and apply a democratic counterdiscourse.

A Critique of the Discourse of Marketized Philanthropy

Philanthropy has received increased attention in recent years and is an important focus for social theorists concerned with discourse. The authors argue that the transformative potential of philanthropy—its potential to represent the need for and bring about social change—is increasingly lost in the current market-based discourse of philanthropy that includes consumption of products (i.e., cause-related marketing) and consumption of media and celebrities (i.e., “charitainment”) as the basis for benevolent human relations. This marketization of philanthropy depoliticizes the relationship between the market and the negative impacts it has on human well-being, thereby making philanthropy less likely to catalyze substantive social change. In this article, the authors argue that in fast capitalism philanthropy must be distinguished from the market, narrate on behalf of the marginalized, and be rewritten independent of the necessity of the market and marginality.

Third sector research

Moving Beyond Empirical Theory.- Defining and Theorizing the Third Sector.- Sector Labels.- Social Origins.- The Civil Society Index.- Social Economy.- Volunteering.- Volunteering in Developing Countries.- Participation.- Philanthropy.- Leadership and Governance.- Nonprofit Marketing.- Social Accounting.- Corporate Social Responsibility.- Third Sector-Government Partnerships.- Social Capital.- Transforming Democracy?.- The Dark Side.- Philanthropy in an Era of Global Governance.- The Question of the Poor.- Global Environmental Engagement.- Global Civil Society.- The World Social Forum.

Giving Circles: Growing Grassroots Philanthropy

Giving circles entail individuals pooling money and other resources and then deciding together where to give these away. More than this, they educate members about community issues, engage members in voluntary efforts, provide social opportunities, and maintain independence from any particular charity. This article reports on an exploratory study of giving circles in the United States, addressing the questions: What are giving circles and their impacts and how are they unique to the new philanthropy environment? The article concludes by discussing the implications of the giving circle movement for philanthropic and nonprofit professionals.

Philanthropy, Voluntary Association, and Governance Beyond the State Giving Circles and Challenges for Democracy

There has been little discussion about the democratic impacts of new roles and expectations put on private philanthropy and voluntarism in an era of governance beyond the state. This article explores tensions philanthropic voluntary associations face in balancing their internal democratic effects of enhancing civic education and participation of members on the one hand with meeting needs and solving problems in the community on the other. This is brought into focus through an analysis of giving circles, groups that entail individuals pooling resources and then deciding together how and where to give these away. Giving circles highlight the trade-off between the grassroots independence and noncoercive collaborative action that enables voluntary associations to contribute to democratic governance and the ability for these institutions to adequately and comprehensively address community problems; a trade-off that becomes important if one is concerned with serving the public good in an era of government cutbacks and privatization.

Philanthropy in an Era of Global Governance

The contemporary emphasis on philanthropic action represents a significant shift in the locus of responsibility for human well-being. Once regarded as the province of national governments, social policy is increasingly regarded as the legitimate enterprise of non-state philanthropic actors. We contend that global governance has created space for the emergence of philanthropic governors who make social policy through the accumulation and discretionary redistribution of wealth, thus depoliticizing discourse about global governance by reducing the visibility of the market and its negative impact on human well-being. First, we demonstrate how philanthropy and social policy are related as the politics of well-being. Second, we explore how philanthropic governing capacity as the redistribution of wealth becomes depoliticized and subsequently ends vital discourse about the relationship between the market and well-being. Finally, we conclude that philanthropic governing capacity raises serious questions about who is responsible for human well-being in an era of global governance.

Symposium—Theorizing Governance Beyond the State: Introduction

There is wide agreement among scholars and practitioners that political systems around the world are transforming from hierarchically organized, unitary systems of government to more horizontally organized, relatively fragmented systems of governance (Sorensen, 2002, p. 693).1 In this governance environment, according to Sorensen, the state is increasingly becoming one of many authorities or players within a given area and thus “the responsibility for social policy is dispersed among various social actors and institutions beyond the official boundary of the state” (Eikenberry & Nickel, 2006, p. 6). This phenomenon is not completely new but it is “increasingly regarded as an effective and legitimate form of societal governance” (Sorensen & Torfing, 2005, p. 205). Given the new “legitimacy” of governance and governance networks, the call for papers for this symposium asked ATP readers to theorize what the new governance roles for institutions outside of government might mean for public administration theory and praxis, democracy, and social justice. Studies on network governance have focused primarily on how to build and manage effective networks in order to improve service delivery and increase the production of public goods, not on the effects of network governance on democracy or social justice/equity issues (O’Toole & Meier, 2004, pp. 682-683). Some governance network scholars have shown and/or argued that network governance provides individuals with greater opportunity to participate in the policy-making process (including previously marginalized individuals), build social and political capital, and build political and self-governance skills (Baiocchi, 2003; Bogason & Musso, 2006; De Rynck & Voets, 2006; Fung & Wright, 2001; Leach, 2006; Musso, Weare, Oztas, & Loges, 2006; O’Toole, 1997; Sorensen, 2002; Sorensen & Torfing, 2003). As a result, for example, Baiocchi’s (2003) findings show that network governance provided the poor people of Porto Alegre more opportunity to influence the budgetary process, and consequently, to

A Critical Case Study of Cause-Related Marketing

This article examines a critical case study of cause-related marketing (CRM) held in conjunction with a universitys United Way campaign. CRM involves the sale of products with a percentage of the price going to charity. It is positioned as part of a broader discourse about ethical consumption and the power of citizen consumers in a neoliberal market society. Drawing on data from interviews, observation, and document analysis, this research examines how CRM organizers frame their efforts and the implications for understanding the potential of ethical consumption. It shows that organizers frame CRM around engagement, brand recognition, and easy participation, but there is little that connects purchases to the end-goal of helping those in need or making the world a better place.

Social Networking, Learning, and Civic Engagement: New Relationships between Professors and Students, Public Administrators and Citizens

Social networking is increasingly ubiquitous, and there is growing demand for professors and public administrators to use social networking to engage with students and citizens in new and more collaborative ways. However, using such tools effectively poses challenges for professors and public administrators. The focus of this paper is to explore the implications of using social networking for learning, professor-student relationships, and civic engagement. Using social networking applications in public affairs classrooms may provide an opportunity for professors to connect with students in new ways to enhance student empowerment and learning and enable students to learn how to more effectively use these tools for citizen empowerment and engagement.

Extreme Philanthropy: Philanthrocapitalism, Effective Altruism, and the Discourse of Neoliberalism

© American Political Science Association, 2017 PS • January 2018 43 ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................