The paper proposes to discuss the issue of civicness in the governance of social services by analyzing policy changes relative to the regulation and governance of social services in Europe. The empirical analysis is structured around the concept of “governance regime.” The paper shows that modernization processes within the field of social services in Europe develop along two radically different regulative conceptions reflected into two different governance regimes: market-based or competitive governance vs civic-based or partnership governance. The governance of social services in Europe appears to take place within a mix between two ideal-typical governance regimes: the market-based and partnership-based governance regimes.

Food pantries typically operate in a partnership structure where they are primarily supported by a larger food bank. However, the ability to execute that mission through cooperative arrangements greatly depends upon accountability, a key dynamic that ensures partners are fulfilling expectations and key roles. This exploratory study utilizes qualitative interview data (n = 61) from a large food bank network to understand the extent to which a lead agency (i.e., a large food bank) meets expectations of accountability among partners. The interview results demonstrate that the extent to which expectations are met relate to different types of relationships between the lead agency and partner members. Furthermore, the ways in which partners assess the strengths or weaknesses of the food bank’s accountability reveal different types of relationships within the network, namely that of supplier–customer, supporter–customer, and supporter–collaborator.

Present day welfare societies rely on a complex mix of different providers ranging from the state, markets, family, and non-profit organizations to unions, grassroots organizations, and informal networks. At the same time changing welfare discourses have opened up space for new partnerships, divisions of labor, and responsibilities between these actors. For nonprofit organizations this means that they operate in complex institutional environments where different institutions and logics compete with each other. In this special issue we have collected a number of articles that analyze how organizations and organizational fields adjust to a new environment that is increasingly dominated by the logic of the market, and how in particular nonprofit organizations, as hybrids by definition, are able to cope with new demands, funding structures, and control mechanism.

This article illustrates the development of government–nonprofit collaboration in the Netherlands. It first gives an overview of the scope and structure of the nonprofit sector and voluntary work and then explains the crucial steps in the evolution of the partnership arrangement between the public sector and nonprofit institutions. The article describes the past significance of so-called pillarization on the development of the nonprofit sector and its collaboration with the state. In accommodating a broad diversity of nonprofit organizations with different religious and social backgrounds, the Netherlands created an elaborate mechanism for government–nonprofit collaboration in which nonprofit organizations fulfill functions in service delivery and policy formation. However, the sector is now fundamentally fragmented and has little shared identity left today. Paradoxically, its past success also makes it less likely that the Dutch nonprofit sector will be regarded as a solution to current social problems.

Partnerships between international and local NGOs (INGOs and LNGOs) have often been analysed using principal–agent theory, where INGOs treat LNGOs as implementing agents and control their actions. The paper examines how LNGOs can improve their agency in these relationships to create more equal partnerships and thus greater local ownership. We propose a framework in which LNGOs can draw on material, organizational and ideational sources of power to improve their agency. The framework is applied to a case of a peacebuilding project in Nigeria’s farmer–herder conflict. The project was run by an INGO in partnership with two Nigerian LNGOs. The LNGOs had rather different experiences of the partnership. The paper argues that these are explained by differences in their organizational power and how this power was enhanced by ideational power. Material power mattered, but did not play a central role. The findings show that LNGOs can enhance their positions in partnerships if they have effective internal policies and procedures, local and contextual knowledge, and can frame these strategically.

Area-based initiatives are central government strategies for community development in particularly deprived urban areas. A core strategy in ABIs is to involve third-sector organizations through co-production. In these areas, the organized civil society is weak, and the public sector has special interests and a willingness to use resources. We ask: if and how can co-production be developed in areas with such power assymetries? Through documents and qualitative interviews, we examined seven ABIs in Norway. We find that managerial ability and coordination, autonomy of action, and, especially, the possession of resources are important dimensions for understanding the development of a co-productive relationship. In the ABIs, we find considerable interdependence between TSO and municipalities as both actors lack resources needed to fulfill their respective goals. This interdependence facilitated co-production.

In Italy, the development of the human social service field has been grounded in a peculiar type of government–third sector partnership. This article identifies the main features of such partnership and reconstructs its evolution in a long-term perspective. The main argument is that in Italy this partnership, historically based on particularism and political patronage, has gradually shifted towards a model combining market logic and participatory orientation. State regulation has been paradoxically strengthened in order to allow more transparency, freedom of choice, and effective joint planning. However, the lack of financial and technical resources exposes this new system to old style local arrangements.

Power asymmetries within partnerships between Northern and Southern NGOs are thought to be undesirable. Based on a comparative case study of the partnerships between three Northern NGOs and their Southern partners in Ghana, India and Nicaragua, this study examines how the partnerships’ institutional design affects local partners’ room to manoeuvre. It is demonstrated that (1) the Northern agencies unilaterally set the rules that govern the partnerships, based on their own norms, values and beliefs; (2) similarities and differences between the rules of the three agencies can, above all, be attributed to the corresponding and diverging nature of their norms, values and beliefs; and (3) informal rules allow more flexibility in their use. Whether this is beneficial for the Southern partners’ room to manoeuvre depends on individual project officers, who are responsible for interpreting and applying the rules, and the partners’ ability to conduct negotiations.

There have been three major analytical reviews that have examined the voluntary- statutory relationship during the 1990s, one undertaken by government in 1990 and the other two independently in 1993 and 1996. This article suggests that an historical understanding of this relationship (especially in terms of its sociopolitical dimensions) is crucial, but was missing from the 1990 review and misrepresented by the 1993 review. The 1996 document has been subjected to harsh criticism, but it was arguably sounder in its understanding of this fundamental issue. The national compact between representatives of the voluntary sector and the state, launched at the end of 1998, has built upon the arguments put forward in 1996. However, the paper suggests that given the vexed history of “partnership” between the sectors and the extent to which the statutory sector has become the dominant partner at the end of the 20th century, it would be premature to be overly optimistic. The paper examines three major shifts in the voluntary-statutory relationship during the 20th century, before reviewing the 1990s’ documents in more detail.

The paper explores donors’ efforts to promote government-NGO partnership for the purpose of improving public services. Following a brief discussion of partnership, two illustrations support a relative definition of partnership and its added value. The examples represent alternative approaches to improving public services through partnership work, the choice of which may depend on (1) the will of the partners to change—particularly government, (2) the preexistence of effective public services, and (3) depth of mobilization and social capital sought. The examples similarly reveal alternative approaches to addressing partnership challenges either bureaucratically or through behavioral norms and organization culture. Implications of donors’ participation in such partnerships are highlighted.

Indigenous NGOs in Uganda are a key stakeholder in the development process. Unfortunately, their impact on the ground has over the years been affected by their poor credibility. Until this research, no empirical research had been done to explore this terrain in Uganda. It is in the wake of this that this research was undertaken. This work was undertaken under the Swedish International Development Agency/Swedish Department for Research Cooperation grant for capacity-building for Makerere University. It was carried out on 100 NGOs selected randomly from some purposively selected districts. A total of 783 respondents responded to a questionnaire whereas some 100 key informants were also involved. The study employed both qualitative and quantitative approaches. Factor analysis with loadings above 0.4 established that several variables affect each of the factors, with the highest randomly selected loading in each factor being as follows: in accountability (0.61291), transparency (−0.66958), legitimacy (0.43661) partnership/networking (0.48110), ICT (−0.42610) and effectiveness (−0.77667). The beta (β) column under the standardised coefficients shows that the beta for legitimacy = 0.236; efficiency = 0.171; transparency = 0.153; accountability = 0.141; partnership = 0.120 and ICT = 0.080 and that all are significant at 0.001 level. The coefficients show that legitimacy is the most predictive factor for credibility and that the least predictive factor is ICT. All in all, it was established that the credibility of the NGOs is just average. The level of credibility was found to be insufficient for the badly needed effective service delivery and poverty eradication in a country where 24.5% of the population still live in absolute poverty. It is recommended that in practice, for NGOs to effectively participate in poverty eradication and enhance their credibility, they should invest in the above factors in proportion to their predictive power. Theoretically, more research needs to be done in order to develop a robust theory on the NGOs’ credibility. However, it was noted that these key factors could still provide guidelines for the theoretical explanation of the NGOs’ credibility in Uganda.

To add to the growing body of literature on university–community engagement, this case study describes a 2-year partnership between a University and 11 nonprofit organizations that was formed as part of a grant funded Nonprofit Capacity Building Program. The article describes and analyzes a significant challenge that emerged between the parties involved in this particular relationship, respectively, the clear disconnect between the expectations of the partnership versus the reality. We argue that these differences were created by and often led to power imbalances. In addition, the formal structures of the grant acted as a sensemaking device for some of the nonprofits but were challenged by others. Negotiation over aspects to the program occurred continuously throughout the program. Despite the disconnect observed between expectations and realities, the expected capacity building outcomes were, for the most part, realized in the end. Specific examples of the expectations versus realities are analyzed and discussed.

While there is consensus about the combined relevance of liberal regime policies and gendered employment and family trajectories in adulthood, for shaping employment in later life, so far there is no single cross-national study simultaneously addressing these dimensions. Drawing on exceptionally rich, harmonised life history data, we explore the association between employment and family patterns in adulthood, and the prevalence, duration and diversity of extended working lives beyond full pension age, among men and women in four predominantly liberal countries: two from Europe (England and Switzerland) and two from the Americas (the United States and Chile). Our findings indicate that employment trajectories – unlike partnership and fertility trajectories – play a significant role in shaping the prevalence, duration and diversity of later-life employment across the four countries examined. Furthermore, gender differences in later-life employment patterns are particularly notable in England and Chile. Our comparative perspective reveals that while liberal regimes share certain characteristics, they also exhibit significant diversity in how extended working lives manifest and are influenced by lifecourse trajectories.

Actively engaging community health centers (CHCs) in research is necessary to ensure evidence-based practices are relevant to all communities and get us closer to closing the health equity gap. We report here on the Boston HealthNet Research Collaborative, a partnership between health centers, Boston HealthNet and the Boston University Clinical, and Translational Science Institute with the explicit goal of supporting research partnerships early in the planning phase of the study lifecycle. We used the principles of community engagement guided by a collective impact framework to codesign, pilot, and evaluate a process for facilitating research partnerships. Accomplishments in the first 2 years include a web-based Toolkit with a step-by-step guide and an active learning collaborative with health center representatives to support research capacity building. The process resulted in 81 new research project partnerships across 50 individual research projects. Most research partnership requests were made later in the research lifecycle, after the planning phase. Partnership acceptance was largely driven by the Collaborative’s pre-defined Guiding Principles and Rules of Engagement. These lessons drive an iterative process to improve the longitudinal relationship between our translational research program and our CHC partners.