Send message to Authors

Paper short abstract:

This study explores how civil society organisations in India construct their legitimacy representing marginalized groups. It addresses a fundamental condition of much advocacy by CSOs in India as elsewhere: the leadership of the CSOs often does not emerge from the marginalized groups themselves.

Paper long abstract:

In discourse on representation by civil society in the context of development, ‘True’ representation is expected from in-country civil society organisations, and especially those working at local levels. However, such claims are based on assumptions rather than research. In this study, we explore how civil society organisations (CSOs) working with marginalized groups at subnational and district level in the state of Jharkhand in India construct the legitimacy of their roles as representatives. For this study, we interviewed the leadership of 12 CSOs, and explore a fundamental condition of much advocacy by CSOs in India as elsewhere: the leadership of the CSOs often does not emerge from the marginalized groups themselves. This raises questions regarding the constructions of legitimacy associated with advocacy roles. The paper shows that the CSOs construct the legitimacy of their advocacy with reference to organizational qualities that make it possible to perform the role of an intermediary between constituencies and the state, acting for, rather than on behalf of, in solidarity. At the same time, the intermediary roles often contribute to state policy implementation rather than transformative change. Moreover, such claims to solidarity underline privilege and differentiation from groups involved; CSOs commonly exhibit little facilitation of leadership emerging from marginalized groups, or enhancement of their political agency. Constructions of legitimacy thus reinforce CSO roles, rather than support group empowerment. This raises questions regarding the viability of the concept of representation in contexts such as these where claims to legitimacy of CSO advocacy roles rest on privilege-based solidarity.