Are the leaders of civil society idealists who have emerged from grassroots movements, or careerists with close ties to politics and business? Researchers at Lund University and the University of Gothenburg have mapped the power elites within civil society in four European countries and found significant national differences.
Civil society is founded on ideals of inclusion and popular participation, so the idea of elites within civil society can seem paradoxical. But these elites do exist, and it is important to understand how power works. This is the view of researchers Malin Arvidson and Roberto Scaramuzzino, who, together with Niklas Altermark and Jayeon Lee, have published a book on what these elites look like in various European countries.
"For better or for worse, we are seeing increasing professionalisation of civil society organisations. On the one hand, professionalisation strengthens the organisations' voice. On the other hand, there is a risk that leaders will become part of an elite that distances itself from the grassroots activists who originally started the movement," says Malin Arvidson.
Gap widest in the UK
Of the countries studied by the researchers - Sweden, the UK, Italy and Poland - the UK is by far the country in which the gap between grassroots activists and those in power within organisations is the widest.
"There is a revolving door between those in positions of power in civil society and leaders in business and politics, and many have attended the same elite schools, such as Eton, Oxford and Cambridge," says Malin Arvidson.
Philanthropy, or charity, has historically been an important political issue in the UK. The classical liberal view of philanthropy holds that a good citizen takes responsibility by engaging in charitable work. As a result, the charity sector in the UK is closely intertwined with well-established elite groups from the worlds of politics and business. This gives the sector the opportunity to exert direct influence over those in power. According to the researchers, the downside could be a problem of legitimacy: that civil society's leaders risk having more in common with other social elites than with the groups they claim to represent.
Poland has the least elitist civil society
Poland is the opposite of the UK when it comes to the governance of civil society organisations. According to the researchers, it is evident that Poland is a new democracy with a short history of independent civil society following the fall of communism. There are many small, new organisations in Poland, but few large professional ones. This means that civil society has few points of contact with the state and the business community, and that its integration with society's elites is very limited.
"In Poland, therefore, it does not seem to be an issue that the leaders of these organisations become too closely linked to political power or the business elite. On the other hand, it can cause problems in terms of influence, as relations with those in positions of power in society are weak," says Roberto Scaramuzzino.
Similarities between Sweden and Italy
Sweden and Italy have several similarities - but also differences - when it comes to the structure of civil society organisations. Above all, the similarities relate to the organisational structure, which in Sweden is characterised by social movements based on membership and the principle of working one's way up through the organisation. The same is true in Italy.
As regards the degree of elitism in Swedish and Italian civil society, it lies somewhere between that of Poland and the UK: the elites are integrated into politics but are not as distant from their members as they are in the United Kingdom.
The differences between Italy and Sweden relate primarily to the focus of civil society. Whilst in Sweden the focus is primarily on shaping public opinion, representing members and exercising democratic influence, Italy's civil society is more focused on services and welfare.
"There are advantages and disadvantages to the extent to which civil society leaders are part of an elite. It's about how important it is to have roots in the movement you represent, as opposed to how important it is to have the right political contacts in order to be able to push issues forward. There might not be a clear-cut answer to the question. But the first step towards understanding how this affects things is to map out what the reality looks like," concludes Roberto Scaramuzzino.
