1. ‘The Accidental Aid Worker’ A Mapping of Citizen Initiatives for Global Solidarity in Europe

2. Overview presentation  Subject & rationale  How it was approached  Main findings –Concept & characteristics –Governmental policy –Funding of CIs –Support of CIs –Representation & monitoring of CIs  Conclusions & way forward

3. What? Working definition of CI  “Small-scale initiatives or projects, set up by private persons in the North, aiming at improvement of standards of living of people in the South, and not sorting under other known classic or new development actors (bilateral & multilateral agencies, established NGDOs, corporations, societal institutions)”  Entry point for mapping

4. Why this study?  New players in the field of development aid  Mainstreaming & socialisation  Passive and active role of the citizen  Studied in Netherlands & Belgium – but what about elsewhere in Europe?

5. How? The approach  Gathering facts & contacts  First step / incomplete  Countries representative for EU & Europe  Observation grid (concept, taxonomy, policy, funding, support…)  Sources: interviews, documents, research work

6. Where?  EU or/and OECD-DAC  ODA figure  Pragmatism  17 countries

7. Common concept, common category?  Concept, labels & names  Legal status  Size  Volunteers only?  Non-specialists?  NGDOs-in-the making or voluntary sector for the South?

8. How many?  Databases  Counts, extrapolations & estimate  Overall second order estimate: 100.000 to 200.000 citizen initiatives

9. CI characteristics  Different roots  Type of projects: DEAR & tangible projects  Target groups: children, vulnerable groups  Life cycle

10. Governmental policy: input  Hind-laying goals: public support, diversification  Implementation level: decentralised and local  Instruments: –financial support (sub-granting) –nonfinancial support (training, capacity building) –fiscal policy

11. Government policy: limiting factors  Aid budget  Considerations: aid effectiveness, scale of operation, right-based approach, ownership  Promotion of alternative deployment of citizen engagement (volunteering)

12. Private funding  Most important (diversified) source of income  Informal networks  Dependent on giving behaviour attitudes  Churches / parishes  Foundations  Specialised (funding) organisations  NGDO support

13. Public funding  Strict criteria  Registration / partnerships / co-funding  South- and DEAR activities mixed  Focus on professionalisation, not pluralism  Provided at different government levels

14. National public funding  Least common level  Many schemes abolished  Aimed at supporting established NGDOs –Effectiveness discussion –Transaction costs  Sub-granting system  Tax system –Donations tax deductable –1%

15. Regional and local public funding  Extent depends on degree of self-government  Criteria /conditions vary per region  Coexisting with national funding windows  Small (symbolic) amounts  Funding reduced substantially over the years  Increasing focus on private sources

16. Nonfinancial support  Many umbrella organisations, but; –Focus on established NGDOs –Not many CIs are member  Regionally organised  Specialised organisations  Also by NGDOs  Focus on training, capacity building, DEAR  Combination with financial support

17. Representation & monitoring  Representation almost non-existent; –CIs not a distinct category –Ad hoc nature of CIs  (Central) data monitoring absent  Monitoring fundraising: seal of approval  CI project databases in few countries  Scientific research limited

18. Conclusions  CIs are common but different  Focus on tangible projects  Strong local embedding  Variety of policies facilitates CI activities  Public funding difficult to get access to for CIs  Nonfinancial support emerging  Research still in its infancy

19. Which way forward?  Active, prominent citizens: part of the aid landscape  Need for recognition of CIs –Added value: weaknesses and strengths –Mutual learning –Scientific research

20. Thank you Ignace Pollet HIVA - KU Leuven Ignace.Pollet@kuleuven.be Rik Habraken CIDIN - Radboud University Nijmegen R.Habraken@maw.ru.nl