The early organizational formation, however, is only one part of the story of networking with particular focus on welfare agencies. Alan G. Alegre (1996) presented a comprehensive discussion of the factors that contributed to the growth and development of networking in the Philippine NGOs in his book Trends and Traditions; Challenges and Choices. This observation is complemented by a chronological presentation of the formation of nine mainstream national networks after NCSD in From the Present Looking Back: A History of Philippine NGO by Karina David (1998). Hence, the history of networking in the Philippine is better understood in the context of historical evolution of NGOs in the country.

The story of Philippine NGOs generally follows the trend of the world history of NGOs- from relief and welfare endeavors to social reformation which eventually led to the transformation approach. Alegre (1996) divided the history of NGOs into six distinct phases rooted in key points in the country’s recent past, as follows:

American Colonial Period to Post WWII: Relief, Rehabilitation and Welfare

This period witnessed the emergence of voluntary, private initiatives that engaged mainly in relief and reconstruction work to support a war-ravaged country. Considered to be the first NGOs, their welfare endeavors continued even after normalization. Eventually, the welfare work was geared toward social reform, colored with anti- communist motivation, which concentrated on the problems in the countryside. The environment led to the setting up of the pioneer NGOs in the country: the Institute of Social Order in 1947 and the Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement in 1952.

The Deepening Social Crisis and the Rise of New Social Movements (1965-1972).

A conglomeration of events shaped the global and national sociopolitical landscape which affected the history of NGOs in the Philippines. On the one hand, there was a worldwide questioning of the previous development approach; an emergence of new theories of underdevelopment; highlight on revolutionary anti-colonial struggles; and change in the social directions of the Catholic Church which played a key role in this stage of development.

On the other hand, as the Philippine social situation was rapidly deteriorating, there was a resurgence of nationalism and student activism and a groundswell of public outrage, which culminated in the First Quarter Storm. At this period, grassroots organizing dominated the NGOs directions.

Two NGO networks were established during this time: the National Secretariat for Social Action (NASSA) and the Philippine Business for Social Progress (PBSP) in 1967 and 1971, respectively. NASSA served as a clearinghouse and coordinating mechanism for the Philippine Catholic Church’s social involvement, while PBSP established itself as a network among business corporations and NGOs they supported.

This period also witnessed the emergence of the community organization approach as an alternative to the limitations of community development. This approach led to the establishment of the Philippine Ecumenical Council for Community Organization (PECCO) in 1971. As a result, many NGOs were organized bearing the new orientation/approach.
In 1972, after a series of informal meetings, ten NGOs with more traditional business and family foundations came together to form another network, the Association of Foundations (AF).

Coping with Repression, Carving a Niche (1972-1978).

When the late President Marcos used a hard line stance to establish a New Society, the NGO community was included in a systematic crack down on opposition groups. All legal attempts at organizing for popular empowerment were paralyzed. NGOs responded to the situation in various ways. While some went underground to wage armed struggle, others were either coopted or forced to lie low. After an initial wave of repression, those that did not join the underground movement continued with their commitment through institutional work, which eventually came to be known as NGO work.

Three significant developments in the networking took place during this period. In 1974, the National Council of Churches in the Philippines (NCCP) came together and adopted a statement defining the priorities and strategies of the development work of the church and its related organization. This development resulted to the formation of a body similar to NASSA- the Commission on Development and Social Concerns. Four years after, as an offshoot of the split of PECCO, a fellowship of pastors and lay workers to assist churches in development efforts was organized into a network known as the Ecumenical Center for Development (ECD).

In 1977, a network among cooperatives came into existence as a response to the government’s attempt to regulate the cooperatives. Known as National Association of Training Center of Cooperatives (NATCCO), the network was later renamed National Confederation of Cooperatives, Inc. It was observed that these church-related networks were more political compared to the first three networks established earlier, namely: National Council of Social Development, Philippine Business for Social Progress and Association of Foundations.

As seen by *Soliman (1990), this period witnessed the birth of secular NGOs established by activists who had been working within the church umbrella wanting to institutionalize social development work outside the church. Their endeavors concentrated on uplifting the conditions of the people through cooperatives and provision of start-up capital for income-generating projects. In the words of Alegre (1996), “the intersection of three efforts – the church reaching out, the growing needs of POs, and the development concerns of secular NGOs – gave birth to creative programs that showed NGOs coping amidst repression.”

The situation also became favorable to groups and organizations with political and ideological leanings directly opposing the martial law regime. With their relatively advanced coping mechanism, these groups became influential in the NGO movement. They even set up different NGOs and exerted a considerable influence in the programs and projects of existing ones to become more effective in the latter part of this period

Expansion and Innovation (1978-1983).

Learning from the past experiences, NGOs refined their strategies. This effort resulted to qualitative increase in the organized mass movement, as reflected in the formation of more alliances and federations of people organizations. The NGO movement itself experienced tremendous increase in numbers. Human rights advocacy was broadened to include other areas of concern like indigenous people’s rights, ecology/environment problems, and women rights. As a result, more NGOs were organized bannering on respective sectoral issues.

This period also witnessed the utilization of new approaches and tools for development like the micromedia, participatory action research, popular education, alternative medicine, and appropriate technology.
Following the increased unpopularity and isolation of the Marcos regime in the international scene, foreign funds flowed freely in support of development work. Many Northern NGOs and funding agencies even went to the extent of setting up their Philippine desk making the country their base of operations in Asia because of the bulk of projects being supported here. Repression in various forms, however, was also intensified.

As NGOs grew in number, networking as a strategy became attractive because of its effectiveness in lobbying and advocacy work. More regional and national networks were formed during this period, e.g., Philippine Partnership for the Development of Human Resources in Rural Areas (PHILDHRRA) which was established in 1983. Moreover, the other regional and provincial NGOs were integrated into new networks. With these developments, NGOs have become “key players in the country’s sociopolitical landscape.”

NGO Support to the Surging Mass Movement (1983-1986)

The Aquino assassination in 1983 became a rallying point of growing opposition and outrages which gave birth to the “parliament of the streets.” It was a period of multi- sectoral organizing and alliance building as regional and national federations and alliances of POs were formed with NGO support. Similarly, NGOs strengthened their existing networks and formed new ones to share resources and find security in their numbers amidst continuing military harassment. NGOs’ support to the surging of mass movement culminated in their participation in the Snap Election and the subsequent EDSA Revolt.

*Corazon “Dinky” Soliman is the current Secretary of the Department of Social Development.

(To be continued)

The historical evolution of Northern NGOs is better understood when viewed according to the six schools formulated by Clark (1990), as follows:

Relief and Welfare Agencies

The first Northern NGOs emerged after the First World War, with relief and rehabilitation as their focus. After World War II, this type of approach was strengthened primarily in war-ravaged Europe. Pioneers of this relief work include, among others, the Catholic Church-based CARITAS, Save the Children Fund, Catholic Relief Services, and Cooperative for American Relief Everywhere (CARE). Shifting their attention to the Third World, they broadened their services with welfare endeavors as an additional feature.

Technical Innovation Organizations

Clark (1990) pointed out another development took place during the 1950s and 1960s when northern NGOs flourished with a new focus or direction. From welfare activities, they shifted to development endeavors. NGOs realized that relief work was palliative. It only dealt with symptoms, not root causes of the problem. Hence, they redirected their institutional work to community based projects. NGOs managed their own projects to pioneer new or improved approaches to problems, which tend to remain specialized in their chosen field. This approach has further opened the eyes of Northern NGOs to the full reality of poverty. In the first locations the symptoms of poverty are apparent, in the second, its root causes.

Public Service Contractors

NGOs at this period followed the conventional model of helping poor communities to become more like Northern societies by importing northern ideas, technology and expertise, unmindful of their local counterpart and other indigenous structures. NGOs set up their own projects, with their own staff to make poor communities a replica of northern societies. Funded mostly by northern governments, they worked closely with Southern governments and official aid agencies.

Popular Development Agencies

It did not take long when NGOs acknowledged and consequently criticized the weaknesses of the traditional development model. Seriously questioning their contribution to it, they started to shift to a new role, that of providing service to the popular grassroots organization and self –help movements. Landim (1987), as cited in Clark (1990) believed that this work was characterized by its small scale, its local (or at least national) leadership and its support for economic and political independence of the poor. Such change of direction, coupled with the increased funding opportunities from northern voluntary sources, led to mushrooming of southern NGOs. Many of these grew rapidly to become “national-level institutions which served as intermediate organizations, channeling assistance from the Northern NGO to the grassroots level.”

According to Broadhead (1988) as cited in Clark (1990), a conglomeration of events further introduced changes in the NGOs’ direction. New political concepts emerging from the Third World intellectuals, such as theology of liberation, generally influenced NGO thinking during this period. Development theory once dominated by northern practitioners, was becoming an indigenous process led by the people themselves. Such development has broken the homogeneity among NGOs. While some remained with their traditional activities, others progressed to new activities and analyses at different rates. Southern NGOs started to become assertive. Thus, the NGO community has become increasingly a shared ground, initially shared with southern NGOs created by their northern “partners.”

Grassroots Development Organization

In the 1970s, another leap took place in the NGO community. Many NGOs realized the limitation of self-help endeavors especially when dominated by the vested interests of the political and economic elite. Development perspective has also changed during this time. It was viewed as a liberating process for the poor, both from their physical oppressors and from their own resignation to poverty.

Consequently, new approaches were tried, e.g., the Brazilian “conscientization approach” which traces its roots from Paolo Freire. A combination of political education, social organization, and grassroots development, this approach was designed not only to improve the living condition of the poor. It also traces the root causes of the problem and offer opportunities to fight out exploitation through mass organization. This new approach became prevalent among NGOs in the Third World during this time resulting to grassroots organizations characterized by militancy.

Advocacy group and networks

The changing perspective on development, as well as the view regarding poverty being political in nature, gave birth to another phenomenon in the NGO community, i.e., and advocacy. NGOs began programs of development education, public campaigning, and parliamentary lobbying in pursuit of political changes. It was during this period when NGOs, particularly those who were dependent on government or conservative constituency for funding, faced a dilemma because the culprits that victimized the poor were most often Western based.

The NGOs who continued with advocacy work for the poor suffered a declining support when they opened up to their supporters. Those who continued advocacy but made little effort to communicate the dilemma to their supporters, have lived with the contradiction ever since.
An important leap in advocacy work happened in the 1980s. Influenced by their staff, some of the Northern NGOs with overseas programs became expressive and active in their advocacy work. Likewise, Third World advocacy groups started to make waves. As a result, North-South networks of advocacy groups started to take shape and to gain authenticity, strength, and power that made them a force to reckon with.

The first network to make a name was the International Baby Foods Action Network. Set up in 1979 by seven NGOs, it grew to about 150 NGOs from all parts of the world and led the successful campaign for international governmental agreement on a code of marketing for baby foods.

The more progressive Northern NGOs with Third World program have supported the evolution of these networks, have often funded them, but have tended to take a backseat role. This is partly because, according the Clark (1990), of a residual concern about their public image and legal status, partly because they have a few staff strong on the skills needed for advocacy and networking and partly – in spite of the rhetoric- because of an organizational half heartedness.

Follow this link for access to my thesis on Networking as a Development Strategy of NGOs.

As viewed through the systems theory, networking is both a relationship among systems and a sub – system in itself. In this sense, it affects the development of each system while it is also being affected by other sub systems that compose the whole. In like manner, networks and member NGOs work as a system operating collaboratively in order to address the pressing issues and concerns related to development of people. Each NGO, therefore, works as a “component unit” and, as such, affects each other, so that a modification of one NGO will stimulate corresponding change on other NGOs and the network, in general.

Relating this theory to any NGO network, we find the network and its member NGOs are working collaboratively to strengthen one another and to improve the delivery of services to the clients. Any development or underdevelopment that takes place in the process surely affects each system. If and when the network fails in its programs and services, the failure will have a bearing on the organizational life of member organizations. Any change or modification in the direction of a particular NGO member will surely affect the other members and the whole network. The interaction, however, is not limited to the network and member NGOs.

As pointed out by the system theorists, the interaction is not only limited to the internal structure, but is also closely related to its environment. The environment may refer to society in general which may affect the performance of the network as NGOs mobilize resources and energy from external sources and funnel back resources to their clientele, beneficiaries or partners in the community. Studies have shown how the socio-political landscape has affected the growth and development of NGOs and corresponding networks.

Such relationship both in the internal structure, as well as the outside environment results to overlapping among the basic systems. This is best described in the book written by Allen Pincus and Anne Minahan in 1973 entitled Social Work Practice: Model and Method.
The authors theorize that there are four basic systems in social work practice: (1) a change agent system, (2) a client system, (3) a target system, and (4) an action system. In the Pincus and Minahan model, the four basic systems are not mutually exclusive, but can and do overlap in many cases.

Following the Pincus and Minahan framework there is overlapping among the basic systems in the process of development of NGOs and the network as a whole. This means that a member NGO, which may be considered a client system may also become a target system, a change agent or even an action system just like the processes, experienced by other systems. The same is true with the network. Although it is considered basically a change agent, it may at times become a client system, i.e., when member NGOs contribute to its development. In the same way that it will become a target system or an action system.

The government and other networks in the community, which are considered action system, may also become a target system or a change agent system or even a client system, as the need arises. While other NGOs, outside the network that are considered a target system, may in certain conditions become a client, an action or a change agent. Each system, therefore, is a contributor to and recipient of development which is the by-product of the whole interaction processes and relationships between and among NGOs and the network and their environment. Networking in a larger sense enhances development.

*Aldaba, Fernando. “The Role of NGOs in the Philippine Rural Transformation.” Philippine Politics and Society

Much of the systems theory grew out of the business management literature. According to Cleland and King (1972), several factors have contributed to the development of the systems theory and the system analysis into a distinct field. These factors included new ways of viewing cost efficiency, new management techniques, and the era of the computer. Consequently, a new phenomenon has emerged in business management, i.e., systems analysts. Their work focuses on viewing “the relationships between divisions in companies or organizations in order to obtain the most efficient mechanism for communication, management, planning, and development.” This work includes designing and utilizing sophisticated computer programs with emphasis on data processing and analysis of relationship. The last aspect makes systems analysis useful to social work, particularly social administration.

The key concepts of the systems theory are wholeness, relationship, and homeostasis. Wholeness implies that the product of interaction by the elements within the system is greater than the additive sums of the separate parts. The concept of relationship asserts the importance of the pattern and structure of elements in the system, equally important as the elements themselves. Homeostasis, which is the tendency of the physiological system of higher animals to maintain an environment of organized stability even when its natural function or condition has been disrupted, suggests that most living systems seek a balance to maintain and preserve the system.

Sharma (as cited in Philippine Journal of Public Administration Vol. XXXIV No. 1 January 1990) noted that the systems approach emphasizes wholeness first, then moves to the consideration of parts, including interaction among them, and between them and the whole. The systems theory, with its emphasis on holism, offers the promise of being an effective guide to management practice.

The systems theory focuses on communication patterns and the transactions and relationships among parts. As pointed out by Hartman (1970), the relationship among parts and the whole are of prime interest when considering the structure of a social system, This relationship is relatively stable. Sometimes, the relationship between systems is referred to as network.

Ann Hartman (1970), as cited in Johnson (1995), noted that the systems theory is useful to social workers and for that matter other helping profession or vocation that minister to the needy. For it gives a means for conceptualizing linkages and relationships among seemingly different entities: individuals, families, small groups, agencies, communities, and societies. It notes similarities and differences among different classifications of systems. It aids social workers in considering both private troubles and public issues within the nurturing system and the sustaining system of a situation they are assessing.

The beauty of systems theory and its application in networking is represented by the rainbow. While there are only three primary colors (red, yellow, blue) there is a multiplication of colors when these link, interact, and overlap. Try to separate one from the other, and the beauty of rainbow is gone.

The overlapping of various systems makes relationship complex. Since the systems theory gives prime importance to relationship, such overlap contributes to the dynamism of networking. Defined as development and maintenance of communication and ways of working together among people of diverse interests and orientations (Johnson, 1995), networking is a form of coordination. Thus, it is important to social administration. As part of the administrative function, Aldaba (1990) states, networking is necessary for the formation of a broad consensus and the promotion of collective action so that social transformation and genuine development can occur.

As viewed through the systems theory, networking is both a relationship among systems and a sub – system in itself. In this sense, it affects the development of each system while it is also being affected by other sub systems that compose the whole. In like manner, networks and member organizations work as a system operating collaboratively in order to address the pressing issues and concerns related to development of people. Each member, therefore, works as a “component unit” and, as such, affects each other, so that a modification of one organization will stimulate corresponding change on other organizations and the network, in general.

Follow this link for access to the thesis on Networking as Development Strategy of NGOs

Faced with such problems and threats to their credibility, NGOs have seen the need to establish linkages and networks among themselves and with other sectors of society. Melgrito (1994) has defined networking as coordination among people, groups or organizations of various interests and orientation, working together as in a chain so as to function in a specific manner. It takes place when organizations link up together and make concerted efforts for mutual advantage and greater effectiveness towards the achievement of a common goal.

As a strategy, networking has been used by many sectors in pursuing development endeavors. Networks link local efforts for more effective lobbying and advocacy and provide venues for the exchange of experiences and resources between similar NGOs. A proper coordination of NGO activities, in networking, helps prevent unnecessary duplication or overlapping of development effort. NGOs are also protected from any form of threat because of their collective nature, while they police their own ranks through common code of conduct.

Networks are defined as units, institutions, agencies or organizations united for a free flow of information and resources between members without any established hierarchy or structure (Third World Studies Center, 1990). Forming networks and umbrella organizations is advantageous to NGOs for varied reasons. Aldaba (1990) cites six benefits in this regard, namely: (1) Greater economic and political impact; (2) Access to and sharing of resources; (3) Sector Protection; (4) Effective relations with governments; (5) Establishing sector standard; and (6) Linkage with other sectors for social transformation.

Alegre (1996) cites the following strategic concerns addressed by establishing networks: (1) Sharing and exchange of resources, such as information, funds, technology, and expertise; (2) The coordination and complementation of programs and projects; (3) The formulation of common agenda or plans of action for purposes of advocacy, participation in governance, and resource mobilization; (4) Consciousness raising and development education, especially on the relations between developed and developing countries and between the NGO and PO communities in these countries.

Clark (1990) noted that networking offers a lot of advantages to NGOs. These advantages apply equally to international lobbying endeavors. In addition to mutual fortification and mutual protection, networking or lobbying provides the possibility for NGOs to specialize in areas in which they have individual advantage. According to Clark, NGOs can also lobby their own government on their intentions, replication and mainstreaming of initiatives of member NGOs. Networks can engage in wide scale consortium projects covering larger areas. Political impact through issue advocacy is strengthened and more effective when there is a collective effort to lobby and mobilize.

Networks are better able than an individual NGO to tap resources internally among members and externally from the government, donor agencies, and other NGOs. Similarly, they can facilitate resource accessing for individual NGOs since the former can guarantee the track record of the latter.

Follow this link for access to the thesis on Networking as Development Strategy of NGOs as requirement for my Master of Social Work degree from University of the Philippines-Diliman.

This blog is open to well-meaning individuals, groups and organizations that have a heart for service to humanity.