Online from: 1981
Subject Area: Industry and Public Sector Management
Options: To add Favourites and Table of Contents Alerts please take a Emerald profile
|Title:||Civil society as a contested field of meanings|
|Author(s):||Sandrine Roginsky, (CELSA-PARIS IV Sorbonne, Paris, France), Sally Shortall, (School of Sociology, Social Policy and Social Work, Queens University Belfast, Belfast, UK)|
|Citation:||Sandrine Roginsky, Sally Shortall, (2009) "Civil society as a contested field of meanings", International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, Vol. 29 Iss: 9/10, pp.473 - 487|
|Keywords:||Citizen participation, Citizenship, Language, National cultures, Society|
|Article type:||Research paper|
|DOI:||10.1108/01443330910986261 (Permanent URL)|
|Publisher:||Emerald Group Publishing Limited|
Purpose – During recent years, the concept of civil society, particularly global civil society, has come to the fore in both academia and policy circles. A key component of recent theoretical and policy research is the attempt to do international comparative research on the meaning of civil society. The purpose of this paper is to argue that the language and the terminology used to describe the agents of civil society are reflective of cultural and historical contexts of societies, have distinct meanings and cannot be used interchangeably.
Design/methodology/approach – In different national contexts, the key agents of civil society are referred to differently; nonprofit sector, voluntary and community sector, third sector and social economy. In comparative studies, scholars often list these concepts to indicate that they recognise that the agents of civil society are referred to differently in different societies. The article offers a socio-historical analysis of each concept. It is concluded that teasing out the differences, as well as the similarities, between the nonprofit sector, voluntary and community sector, third sector and social economy, is crucial to robust comparative research on civil society.
Findings – This paper exposes a number of limitations of each of the terminologies used to describe civil society. They all present a much more limiting notion of civil society than that proposed by the founding fathers. None seem to capture the range of civil associations in any society. Yet, assumptions are made that the terminologies used have similar meanings rather than attempting to clarify and define exactly what is being written or described. This is exacerbated by the interchangeable usage of nonprofit/third sector/community and voluntary sector/social economy. In order to progress beyond culturally specific understandings of civil society, it is necessary to examine the terminology used and how it emanates from a specific cultural and political context. Having a clear understanding of the language used and what it signifies is crucial to robust cross-national comparative research.
Originality/value – This paper examines context specific understandings of civil society and the terminology used to define it; a question not previously addressed. It is hoped that this article will generate much needed further debate on cross-national meanings of civil society.
To purchase this item please login or register.
Complete and print this form to request this document from your librarian