How Do NGOs Succeed (or Fail)?

Abstract

The literature on NGOs tends to focus on the successes of this new form of moral activism. Yet few authors discuss the multiple meanings of success, and even fewer ask whether we should take the desirability of NGO successes for granted. First of all, it is notoriously difficult to define success in politics. One reason is that successes can be deceptive. Policymakers including activists have all too often celebrated the signing of treaties and protocols as major successes only to find out later that those treaties and protocols did not achieve anything.¹ Conversely, a defeat can turn out to energize a movement and thus increase its power and influence over the long term. Defeats can pave the way for eventual victory. The other reason for the elusiveness of success has to do with the fact that there is always a gap between the ideals we formulate and the progress we can make in realizing those ideals. In war there is “no substitute for victory,” as General Douglas MacArthur once famously declared; but in politics, actors are considered pretty successful even if they do not achieve all of their previously articulated policy goals. Furthermore, certain events count as successes only in the light of ideals, which can easily be adjusted so as to make given achievements look better. The undying allure of opportunism has its root in that it allows people to appear always successful and on the winner’s side simply by switching goals and commitments.