External Funds, Local Responses: Women Based and LGBTQ Coalitions and Networks

External Funds, Local Responses: Women based and LGBTQ coalitions and networks. Insights from Romania and Poland

Presented at the 12th International conference of the International Society for Third Sector Research, Ersta Sköndal University College, Stockholm, Sweden, June 28 - July 1, 2016

Andrada Nimu Dept. of Political Science, National University of Political Studies and Public Administration, Bucharest, Romania Phone: (+40) 751 139 389 E-mail: andrada.nimu. [email protected]

Abstract: This paper explores and explains networks and coalitions from Romania and Poland in which women based and LGBTQ rights NGOs take part in. A two years comparative analysis shows that networks and coalitions function on a three level basis. Firstly, they are supported by funders in their efforts to build a strong ‘voice’ for women and sexual minorities. Secondly, they function as channels for diffusion, borrowing practices and modeling as well as resistance mechanisms. Lastly, networks deal with reciprocity, barter, mutual self-help, surviving strategies or connections at the political and international level. By bridging institutionalist approaches, social movement theories and post-social studies, the paper argues that networks and coalitions are tools in which institutional norms and resistance mechanisms are intertwined. Thus, the capacity of the NGOs to bring change depends not only on socio-political contexts and financial support from funders and agencies, but also on coalitions and networks.

Key words: external aid, networks, coalitions, Romania, Poland.

Introduction

Women and sexual minorities tend to organize differently than gender-neutral organizations inside the civil sector (Bradshaw et al., 1996, Foster and Orser, 1994; Odendahl, 1994). They establish organizations that are less hierarchical (Clemens, 1999) less formal, as well as more inclusive and consensual (Bordt, 1997; Lott, 1994). Political, economic and sociocultural opportunities and constraints, as well as recruitment methods, leadership roles and management styles may exhibit gender patterning1 (Moghadam 2000, 60) in the nongovernmental (NGO) sector. Taking gender patterning into account, research (Foster and Meinhard 2004, 11) shows that women’s NGOs are more likely than gender neutral organizations to have inter-organizational relationships and collaborate inside and outside their networks. In both Romania and Poland women’s and LGBTQ organizations have been successfully building coalitions across classes, races, ethnicities, and political affiliations2 (Britton 2005; Fuchs and Hoecker 2004; Lovin and Regulska 2016). This tends to occur due to environmental changes that impact their survival on the one hand, as well as in their quest for involving in partners, even groups with distinctive agendas (Baldez 2003) on the other. This paper explores networks and coalitions from Romania and Poland in which women based and LGBTQ rights NGOs participate, in order to expand and explain the aspects underlying the cumulating factors that stand behind this cooperation. The paper doesn’t focus on a particular coalition or network at a given time-frame in the two countries. Rather, it identifies and analyses types of mechanisms that are existent in various coalitions and networks and then grasps their specificities. The following research questions are addressed: What are the particularities of inter-organizational relations inside women based and sexual minority networks and coalitions in Romania and Poland? How do these networks change over time? How do they adapt to the new economic, political and social challenges in the two countries? What are the interests, motifs and challenges that their members encounter? Distinct explanations for inter-organizational networks come from a variety of academic disciplines, such as management studies, public administration, organizational sociology, game theory, resource dependence theory, institutional theory, social movements’ theories or social network analysis. At the institutional (macro) level, the emergence of networks is studied in

2 relation with the particularities of the institutional environment, dominant social institutions and the characteristics of the society in which the network is formed (Ebers 1997, 4). At the level of relational research (micro level, such as family or friendship ties) the focus is set on links and interdependencies that exist among organizations and/or individuals (Ebers 1997, 4). Both approaches stress the influences of social and economic contexts in which actors are embedded. By taking into consideration the institutional and relational levels of focus, this article explores the overlapping nature of the factors that enhance inter-organizational networks inside women and sexual minorities’ NGOs. This attempt is made by bridging social movement, institutionalist and post-socialist approaches. Analytically, the distinction between networks, coalitions and movements is made in terms of linkages, memberships and goals; although their use is interchangeable in practice (Fox 2010, 486). Still, networks involve information and experiences exchanges and a certain degree of solidarity; they generate shared goals, mutual trust and understandings that in term can generate collaborations for certain campaigns and coalitions (Fox 2010, 487). Coordination in actions, agreement on specific joint actions are rather traits of coalitions3 and not networks; horizontal exchanges between participants are not implied by either networks or coalitions, yet coalitions rely on specific goals and joint actions and a better communication coordination (Fox 2010, 488). Identities and loyalties are linked with membership criteria inside networks, which are dependent on mutual recognition between actors; while resource mobilization and campaigning plays a much stronger role inside coalitions, rather than identities and solidarities4 (Diani and Bison 2004, 285). On the other hand, higher degrees of density and cohesion and higher standards of mutual accountability are typical for social movement organization (Fox 2010, 487). Keeping this distinction in focus, the paper is divided into four sections. The first section covers the research methodology. The second section provides an overview of women based and LGBTQ coalitions from Romania and Poland, concentrating on the ones that have been financially supported by funders. The third section shows that practices, institutional norms and resistance mechanisms are intertwined inside such coalitions. Lastly, the fourth section dwells on explaining that networks incorporate a cultural role adapted to contextual challenges5 that these organizations are facing.

Research methodology

The study is based on inductive (qualitative) research, by taking into account the fact that actors provide meaning and interpretations of context and actions that constitute their social reality (Manson 2002). The author has focused on how activists give meaning to their realties, their ideas and actions, focusing on the process (why and how things happened) rather than the outcomes (Nawaz 2015). The data from different information sources and research methods were triangulated, in order to validate the findings and test their validity (Lincoln and Guba 1985). The author has used semi-structured interviews as primary data, official secondary data on external funds channeled in Romania and Poland inside the civil society sector, as well as content analysis of official documents from funders and NGOs. The two countries have been selected following the “most different system design”. The two countries have had different levels and amounts of external funds channeled in the NGO sector, different absorption capacities of the civil society sector and contrasting historical, political, social and economic backgrounds. Women based and LGBTQ NGOs have distinctive missions, financial resources, interests and take part in different local and national coalitions, while activists have various motivations and interpretations for their motivations of working in these NGOs. The author selected this approach in order to explore weather similar patterns of inter-organizational relations emerge in different contexts6. NGOs have been chosen after consulting the official databases from Romania and Poland; their mission focusing on women and LGBTQ issues. The selection was based on the fact that both countries have experienced fluidity or an organizational overlapping (Vlad 2013, 2015) inside women and sexual minorities’ movements. Activists and staff migrate from one organization to another; work in more organizations at the same time and work together in local and national coalitions7, generally supporting each other. As one activist from Romania admits, in the feminist sphere of NGOs, the same people work everywhere (personal interview, director of ro-01 2015); while in Poland almost everyone worked in parallel within 2 types of NGOs (personal interview, president of pl-02 2015). However, these NGOs proved to be insightful units of analysis for the study of networks and coalitions. Although closely linked, they work independently and are distinct organizations with members and aims; however they have enough potential areas of convergence to render cross-sector alliances a feasible option (Diani and Bison 2004, 289), as presented in the following sections. The position

4 of the activists was taken into consideration in order to be representative for the organization as a whole. Between 2013 and 2015 thirty three semi-structured interviews were taken in Romania and Poland with formal leaders, presidents, directors and vice-presidents of women-based and LGBTQ NGOs. The names of the organizations are under pseudonyms, while the location (ro- Romania, pl-Polad) and the positions are not. The aim of the in-depth interviews was to grasp the research questions, namely, to collect qualitative data to analyze the particularities of inter-organizational relations inside women based and sexual minority networks and coalitions in Romania and Poland. The activists were asked what types of interactions they had with the other organizations locally and internationally, from personal ties, common values, resource and information exchange, joint activities and projects or sharing members; as well as the nature of networks and coalitions. Each interview session lasted approximately between one and one and a half hour. The interviewers were assured that the information is used only by academic purposes and hence it would remain confidential. The interviews were recorded, transcribed and translated manually. Atlas.ti was used to store and examine data, both from interviews and the official documents from NGOs (website, reports, public staments). Before the fieldwork, the false claim of neutrality has been taken into consideration (Fonow and Cook 1986, Harding 1987, Reinhartz 1992 in Grabowska 2009, 13). In order to overcome this issue, several modalities have been analyzed in regard to the possibility of an unequal power relation with the interviewers. Therefore, open-ended questions were used to offer the possibility of sharing the control with the respondents. Openness to the respondent’s comments was assured, even if they were not particularly referring to the main focus of the study. The interview guide was designed after the operationalization phase, addressing the research questions. Using a variable oriented cross-case analysis (Miles and Huberman, 1994) a list of codes was created prior to the fieldwork. During the transcript reading, some of the initial codes were re-coded and sub-coded, while others have been discarded due to being too abstract. The codes were arranged in a matrix display, further partitioning the data and clustering, so to enhance the contrasts between the set of cases of the interest variables (Miles and Huberman 1994, 178). The focus was on each particular case in order to understand its particularities and dynamics after preceding to the cross-case analysis, by using content analysis of NGOs’ official documents and publications, reports and mass-media coverage. Causes, effects, outcomes and their sequence have been protected throughout the analysis8 (Miles and Huberman 1994, 208).

By opting for a cross-case analysis on the attention has been paid to selected variables in the cases, not the cases as wholes (Starke 2006). Each case was initially studied separately around the research question and afterwards the variables were clustered. The qualitative information was re-checked with the quantitative data from the content analysis. The findings were used to interpret and support the explanations and conclusions of this article.

Coalitions and their support by external funders

The presence of external funders after 1989 in the Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries has been attributed to the transformation of the economy and the socio-political sphere (Balcerowicz, 1992; Sachs, 1994 in Drazkiewicz-Grodzicka 2015) and the paramount objective of building a strong civil society sector (Buchowski, 1996; Dunn & Hann, 1996 in Drazkiewicz- Grodzicka 2015, 45; Chimiak 2006, 7). The amount of external funds provided in Romania and Poland differed, as well as the donor presence. Where private foundations were involved, the amount of money was less significant, generally through grants, which were easier to access, as seen in the Polish case. Quigley (1997, 9-10) argues that the private foundations were offering support beyond the financial resources and in terms of “training, technical assistance, research and institution building”. On the other hand, where governmental aid programs were prominent, funding was more substantial and more visible within the overall financial framework of NGOs9, as in the case of Romania (Grunberg 2000, 315; Bunea 2007, 75). Despite the nature of funders, the international assistance targeted towards gender issues has had a paradoxical effect in its attempt to speed up the process of building a women’s or sexual movement (McMahon 2002, 23- 29; Miroiu 2004). In Romania, where NGOs were heavily relying on foreign funds10, the relations with local and national government institutions were difficult, due to the strong conservative tendency of the institutions. In Poland, although the government funds were present in a more visible manner, the conservatism of state institutions and the right-wing discourses marginalized these organizations (Grabowska and Regulska 2011, 145). The lack of institutional embeddedness in the local context, both in terms of cooperation with the local authorities (governments, parliaments) and the constituencies (volunteers, supporters etc.) had negative effects on these NGOs, which undermined NGOs’ credibility and resulted in loss of volunteers as well as political and symbolic resources (Nimu 2015).

Nevertheless, one of the main interventions that funders were keen on supporting was the one related to creating networks and coalitions, in an attempt to strengthen advocacy and human rights actions and the communication infrastructure between organizations (Quigley 1997; Fico 1999). This approach has prepared organizations for the European accession, in which gender and human rights agendas have been a priority in the integration of Central and Eastern European states through gender mainstreaming (Avdeyeva, 2010; Cisar and Vráblíková, 2010; Forest, 2006; Sudbery, 2010 in Buzogány 2011); powered up by the existence of policy-making and litigation-oriented advocacy groups. The complexity of these networks and coalitions have changed over the years in both countries due to numerous factors, ranging from changes in institutional settings (political – in terms of rights recognition and representation of women and sexual minorities; sociocultural in terms of public debates on gender11), accession and post- accession legislation as well as presence and absence of funders. All 33 interviewed NGOs from Romania and Poland have been taking part in all kinds of networks in the pre and post-accession period, at the local and international level; or coalitions, be them for gender equality, anti-discrimination, domestic-violence, sexual-violence (in Romania) or gay rights, equal chances, anti-discrimination, CEDAW (in Poland). In the area of women’s organizations, the most important coalitions were represented by Karat Coalition for Regional Action, Network of East West Women, East West Women’s Network, Astra and European Women’s Lobby supported by UN actors; while sexual minority organizations were supported by ILGA Europe and the Open Society Institute. By engaging in cross-border networking, transnational civil societies were also developed and sustained; while taking part in coalitions started to become a regular fact (Cockburn 2003; Dominguez 2002; Moghadam 2005 in Salih 2010, 55-6). According to Moghadam (2000, 78), transnational feminist and sexual minority movements and organizations function “to a great extent on the emotional and political commitment of their members and, especially, their staffs – many of whom volunteer a considerable amount of time”, in contrast to the local and national ones, or the ones supported by funders. Local coalitions supported by funders aimed at advocating changes in the legal and institutional frameworks, creating bonds and collective action in supporting women and sexual minority rights. At the international level their role came from sharing information and lobbying across borders; in the last years boosting with the help of communication technologies. Transnational networks have become a key feature of mobilization inside the civil society, both

7 in the areas of women and sexual minorities. LGBTQ groups have benefitted from funding and expertise that was generated through such networks that have consolidated their organizational infrastructure (Nachescu 2005). Therefore, with the help of international coalitions and networks, NGOs gained financial and technical assistance, strengthened their legitimacy in the eyes of governments; which transformed them into mediators between international organizations and state governments, reinforced their capacities, expertise and connections (Avdeyeva 2015, 127). National coalitions were a form of collaboration that proved to be a useful tool in knowledge-transfer, cost-cutting, avoidance of activity overlapping, and integration of the services provided (Sharfman et al., 1991, Guo, Acar 2005 in Kaim, 2014, 1). However, coalitions have other roles, beyond those analyzed by the majority of researchers in the region. The next section explains how practices, institutional norms and resistance mechanisms are intertwined inside coalitions that are supported by funders. This aspect is quite interesting, since dissemination of such practices is sometimes in conflict with funder’s agendas.

Coalitions as channels for borrowing practices and resistance mechanisms

This section highlights some mechanisms identified in numerous local and national coalitions and to some extent, in international networks. This approach delimits itself from the broader study of women’s and sexual minorities’ social movements12 and instead analyzes the organizational and individual processes within interactions inside coalitions. However, social movement’s theory proves insightful by emphasizing the presence of conflictual orientation, dense or sparse informal exchanges between individuals and strong or weak collective identity between members (Diani and Bison 2004, 282-283). The paper argues that the conflictual orientation comes from the formalities imposed by external funding. However, in this process both conflictual and consensual dynamics are found. The consensual dynamics are present in regard to mutual benefits and collective actions provided by the space they create. For example, activists that work in more mature and formalized NGOs and those who work in smaller and less institutionalized ones support each other and exchange information and advice. Coalitions also influence activists to model their organization on other organizations, borrow practices or diffuse ideas and strategies. Modeling (DiMaggio and Powell 1983) occurs when organizations are

8 perceived as having more experience, good relations with funding agencies, governing institutions or greater impact. This strategy improves legitimacy of organizations, helps in cutting risks and generally improving the organization’s perception by funders or other actors. There were these contests, call for proposals organized by one of the feminist NGOs in Poland in 2006 and with the support with another LGBT organization from Krakow we asked them to be our representatives, to help us with formalities so to help us to develop projects (president of pl-16) (…) for example, ro-12…they work 8 hours, the only feminist NGO that does that they are a model for us. We always ask them, when it comes to documents and paperwork… (president of ro-01). Both networks and coalitions provide the opportunity of connecting and asking advice from other organizations, sharing information and creating spaces for supportive and collective action (Plastrik and Taylor 2004). Some organizations were established at the beginning as informal networks, for example an LGBT NGO from Romania (ro-7) first emerged as an informal group of people. Then it has formalized and continued to work with other NGOs on human rights and (…) as an informal coalition, which self-named as the Anti-discrimination Coalition. In Poland, two organizations (pl-04 and pl-10) are key network players when it comes to women based and LGBT rights NGOs. When in uncertainty, or when they need help, other NGOs turn to these organizations, even though “the modeled organization may be unaware of the modeling or may have no desire to be copied; it merely serves as a convenient source of practices that the borrowing organization may use” (DiMaggio and Powell 1983, 151). As one activist suggests, I know people from pl-10 and I talk to them and consult with them and if the case is very big and complex, I ask their help. The director of pl-10, an NGO that deals with anti- discrimination measures, such as legal assistance, strategic litigation or legal analysis agrees that the benefits of cooperation serve all organizations, even those who are more experienced. With his colleagues, they set up a coalition for equal opportunities which brings 62 different equality NGOs. Another organization in Romania, that initiated a similar collation over 10 years before the one in Poland admitted that through an international network they invited their Polish colleagues in a visit of experience exchange. The visit will have as one topic how to enhance flexibility and learn new procedures and tactics from each other. These are just few examples of how diffusion, borrowing practices and advice are channeled at the local and international level.

However, participating in networks and coalitions also enhances some resistance mechanisms that activists use in order to buffer the pressure from funders. This conflictual dynamics is highlighted by diffused strategies such as decoupling, symbolic conformity or “fake conformism” which are enhanced through such networks. Decoupling refers to a process that entails compliance with external expectations, but in a symbolic and not substantive manner. Thus, relations and norms inside organizations remain unchanged (Fiss and Zajac 2006, 1175). This strategy allows a level of independence over the organizations actions and goals (Arvidson and Lyon 2014, 871). Decoupling is a concept that describes how organizations ‘make visible, public commitments to satisfy the demands of their external environment’ while the organization’s internal operations can follow different trajectories (Turco 2012, 386). Some of the activists use this strategy to resist external monitoring (Levay and Waks, 2009) combined with the desire to gain legitimacy from the very same external context. For example, some of the ideas that are diffused inside networks and coalitions are using strategic persons to communicate with funders, or interpreting some technical requirements in their advantage. Moreover, as highlighted by Ebrahim (2005, 99) some NGOs attract and hire professionals not only as a response from funder pressures, but as instruments of resistance from funders. Professionals act as “spokespersons in defense of their organization”, being less prone to criticism and smoothening communication – due to the common language that both funders and professionals entail. As many activists admitted, they use specific people that deal with funder communication and smooth their interactions, as an instrument of resistance. Generating information such as reports or data for symbolic purposes (Ebrahim 2005, 102) and strategic use of some people in specific areas of communication and management to achieve legitimacy are seen as compliance mechanisms form the outside, but in fact represent rather subtle forms of resistance. This strategy has been named by one activist as ‘fake conformation’, which entails that NGO representatives purposely meet the terms of the funders, but at the same time manage their own activities in parallel: It looks like we comply with the requests of funders. Professionals help; they speak the same language with them. Each time we have a visit from funders, our colleagues who withstand the bureaucratic bombing are in charge. Each time we write a grant proposal, they help. On the other hand, we do our activities our way. We manage to do this better each time. Other organizations do it too, we advise each other on these issues.

Therefore, this section has highlighted how coalitions supported by funders produce outcomes beyond what they have formally proposed. When in uncertainty, in regard to technical or administrative issues, manners of communicating with funders or other actors, activists ask advice, borrow practices or model their organization on others. These practices and strategies are used to improve the organizational practices both in the eyes of funders and governments, as well as a mechanism to keep the organizational identity and goals. Even if they are supported by funders, they produce outcomes that can contradict with what funders are demanding. On the other hand, networks stand beyond the spaces that enhance collective action and organizational autonomy. The identified mechanisms inside networks differ from those inside coalitions on two levels. The first has to do with the nature of diffused mechanisms and practices, in this case coping and surviving strategies. The second has its roots in historical and cultural legacies existent in Romania and Poland. These legacies have been transformed and adapted to the current issues inside the civil society sector. The next section explains the nature of networks in which activists are involved in, as well as the way they have adapted to their needs.

Networks of reciprocity, barter and surviving strategies

When dealing with networks of reciprocity, researchers point out to the complexity of resources that organizations have, pursue or want to exchange, from material to moral, cultural, social-organizational or human resources (Edwards and McCarthy 2004, 117). Other approaches (Tsasis 2009) focus on relations between NGO’s other non-economic variables such as values, trust, interpersonal relations and domain consensus. This section highlights why activists participate in coalitions beyond those supported by funders, or that aim policy changes, collective problems, redressing injustices, achieving public goods or tackling sources of grievances (Diani and Bison 2004). Drawing on historical-cultural factors, it explains how informal exchanges between activists have changed throughout economic, political, and social challenges. It shows that previous informal networks that existed in the socialist and post- socialist period still influence people’s survival strategies in the civil society sector in Romania and Poland. In both countries, informal networks had various roles, from dealing collectively with problems, (Tilly 2005), sites of resistance (Scott 1990), rebellion against foreign occupation

(Peterses 2001), ethnic mobilization (Varshney 2002; Kubik 2013, 61) or survival strategies (Kilngman 1988). The systemic shortages generated by the official socialist economy pushed to a “society-wide participation in second economies”, creating an informal system of mutual dependencies and patron-and-client networks (Kornai 1992, Seleny 2006 in Kubik 2013, 38). The informal economic networks made possible surviving socialism, while at the same time informality contributed to the system’s demise through anti-regime movements13 (Evans and Letki 2005, 518). Beyond the role of anti-politics, these networks had other important functions, such as creating safety nets, mutual help, emotional support, assistance for needs, a sense of a private solidarity, in which members of the families or close friends have exposed themselves to risks so to offer help; from illegal abortion performing in Romania, to goods’ redistributions, or all types of services, food or cloths in Poland (Klingman 1998; Ledeneva 2008, 66-67). After 1989, Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries underwent “a plurality of transitions” (Stark 1992, 18). Romania adopted a gradualist approach to economic reforms (Stoica 2012), while Poland turned to shock therapy (Bozena 2008). Gradualism favored allowing the state to dispose of its property more slowly, to intervene to maintain employment levels and to restrict or delay the influx of foreign capital; while shock therapy involved full and immediate privatization of state assets and the imposition of 'hard' budgets for all economic actors (Hann and Hart 2011, 131). Central planning was replaced in the CEE countries not by a market mechanism, but by barter transactions mediated by new forms of patronage and corruption, in which former elites were empowered (Stark and Bruszt 1998). The other part of the population created coping mechanism that enabled their survival in times of drastic economic changes14 (Ledeneva 2008), institutions and lifestyles (Rose 2001), along with the endorsement of patriarchal, nationalist, and chauvinistic attitudes towards women, ethnic minorities and LGBTQ communities in the region (Lovin and Regulska 2016, 1). Coping mechanisms and persistency of such networks is understood prior to the social and economic transformations that affected people, in the struggle for resources. These economic practices can be seen as the ‘survival strategies’ of the poor, but also as complex cultural and socio-economic phenomena (Smith and Stenning, 2004; Smith 2004, 7) or networks of interest of the rich (Pasti 2003). In this key, informal networks can be seen as both a response to the precarious conditions during transition, but also a reflection of the national and cultural communist condition (Rose 1998, 12). The existence of two networks in both the communist and the transformation period, i.e. the

12 networks of influence and power, and the networks of reciprocity and survival (Pasti 2003), articulated and adjusted to each other in the CEE countries15. The strength of the power networks was weakened due to European pressures, legislations, policies and practices. The quality and the quantity of rules has grown once these state took part in various regional and global institutions that were responsible for setting standards and rules (Bruszt and Holzhacker, 2009, 2). In this way formal arbitrariness were limited by coercive and democratic forces. Western advisers, externally funded projects, IMF or World Bank were helping these states transform into a more democratic and capitalist system. At the same time, networks of power and of survival still managed to co-exist. Moreover, the global economic crisis, along with austerity measures and the minimization of the public sector have reinforced the roles of networks and coalitions in both countries. Domestic funding available in CEE countries for the civil society sector has been severely reduced by the economic crisis (Forbig 2011, 27), as well as shrinking business revenues, drops in employment or wage cuts. Romania witnessed one of the most drastic austerity measures (Todor 2014), while Poland reportedly had very few economic repercussions. However, in 2012 and 2013 the Polish economic viability had dropped, local financial support deteriorated, and the revenues from taxpayers and the central budget was reduced (2013 NGO Sustainability Index for Central and Eastern Europe and Eurasia 2014, 161). In Romania, NGOs were forced to revise their funding strategies, the sector financial stability and human resources decreased, organizations operating with EU Structural Funds faced serious problems due to poor management and the lack of administrative capacity (NGO Sustainability Index for Central and Eastern Europe and Eurasia 2013, 161). Thus, alternative sources of income and different models for survival had to be developed by these NGOs. Throughout time, activists turned to informal economic practices inside the networks they were taking part in. Informal economic practices can be defined as “services that are licit in every sense other than that they are unregistered by of hidden from the state for tax, benefit and/or labor law purposes” (EU Commission 1998, 2007; Grabiner 2000; ILO 2002; Thomas 1992; Williams and Widebank, 1998 in Polse and Rodgers 2011, 614). They are present inside women based and LGBT rights’ NGOs networks, in a more legal manner, such as mutual self- help and reciprocity. Informal relations occur between members of NGOs that, having to deal in a context with scarce resources, due to the global economic crisis, state budgets and in the ensuing competition for funding, rely on each other for different types of services and by

13 extension, return the services back through the same or different forms. Such services represent turning to people who have expertise in some domains where an organization is lacking such know-how; giving space for other organizations so they can meet; providing space in other events or conferences; helping with sponsorships; or through short-term jobs in the projects that one organization wins. Thus, reciprocity can be understood not necessarily implying symmetry of positions between partners, but as a form of exchange based on interpersonal relations (Lomnitz 1977, 133 in Nazpary 2002, 63). It entails the fact that partners have a minimal knowledge of each other, they exchange commitment relationships, or in regard to trust or obligations, sometimes involving a minimal level of rites and ceremonies associated with the personal level (Nazpary 2002, 63). For example, two organizations have developed connections that involve meeting outside the NGO, at weddings or parties: We have weddings, christenings together and so on. And other relations that got beyond the work team, or the business sector… (president of ro-05). (…) but we also visit each other in our homes, there are parties that usually everyone is invited to, so there is a lot of things going on…for instance, two people who work here are siblings, two sisters, one is a volunteer and the other one is our employee (president of pl-07). These types of connections reinforce personal relations and ties and strengthen the composition of informal networks. In both countries, women NGOs have supported the causes of LGBTQ organizations and the other way around. For example, their presence at marches and events in both countries is seen as an issue of friendship, rather than a ‘political’ act in a classical sense (Binnie and Klesse 2014, 4). Thus, reciprocity can take various forms, depending on the needs of the organizations. For example, when an NGO wins a project, members from other organizations are offered a job in the project, partly as a ‘pay-off’ for previous services, partly because people work in more than one organization at the same time. A nuance has to be made, in the sense that networks provide the space for surviving, but not as a main web of securing economic services or resources like presented in the communist and post-communist period. In this space, rather some activities or resources are exchanged that are necessary for an organization in that particular time (either to have access to some grants, or to be visible, or to

14 get support for specific actions or services, or with volunteers or help with legal issues). This trait is visible both in the Romanian and Polish context, as the quotes below demonstrate: We barter and through networking (…) and the financial management, although we didn’t provide a corresponding salary with the market requirements, we managed to get some help through networking (president of ro-06). Well, we’re a big group….we’re much more than a group of friends, I might say. If we need something those people appeared, how or why, I don’t know…and they are more and more…we started with 5 people at the beginning, one year ago…and now we have 50 people who did something for us without any zloty (president of pl-01). You cannot create change on your own and if your resources are limited and you want to create a visible change in a large area, you have to work in several places at the same time and that is the easiest thing to do when working in a network (president of pl-16). Reciprocity takes various forms: in the first example, the president of a Romanian NGO suggested that funding comes and goes and sometimes they cannot afford to pay some activists for some specific tasks. Therefore, a certain kind of barter is made inside such networks. This type of relation is enhanced in the need for some help, and as a sign of reciprocity, other services are returned in exchange. The mechanism is described as: We got to the situation in which we work in a barter system, it’s a sort of “do it yourself”, it happens in Romania, it happens in the NGO sector. You get inside a network of people who have different specializations and expertize, it’s very important to learn from the outside, so to understand and ask if you don’t know some things, and in times of despair, you call your friends and ask: don’t you know a financial manager that can help us? But we don’t have the money to pay him/her, but opportunities could develop in the future (laughing). You have to find really good people that are open to pro bono jobs, but you still have to pay them back, but you’re not sure what to give them back, it’s very very challenging (president of ro-01). Barter is seen here as encompassing an economical trait, but in the sense that the person who has received a service is not obliged to return that service immediately, but rather the receiver is “expected to assist other members of the network in a similar situation” (Grabher 1993, 109). Mutual support is very challenging, due to unstable economic resources that work in this sector entails. Some NGOs appeal to their status or prestige to return the favors back.

Redistribution through reciprocity and mutual mechanisms are much easier in the NGO sector, especially inside those organizations which are not that professionalized and prone on informal relations, and these types of connections and bonds that have a self-help trait can occur both inside an organization and outside it. Some forms of reciprocity inside consists of finding solutions in some difficult situations, collaborations (pl-17) or partnerships (ro-05): for example, if one of the members organize some events with its association or firm, she always offers us some space in that event so to come with something if we want to), offers (ro-05): This happened with one of our members who has a publishing house, and organized a festival called “books and arts” and more than that, more than just events, we get sponsorships from companies, the same woman offered us books so we can, at our turn, offer packages, offered us books for adults, for our events. Sometimes help materializes in actions like helping with the PR of the organization (ro-13): one of our members is specialized in PR, but because she works in many other projects and in our organization is only a volunteer, she helps us from time to time when we ask her, sending activists to some important trainings (ro-03): at first, ro-14 helped me at the beginning and sent me to seminars, trainings and a big conference) which can be seen also as a strategy of motivating people when there aren’t any financial resources to offer; and as ro-14 representatives enhances, help reflects what we can, assistance, volunteers (…) we support them, we helped them with people who had some expertize, or in case of advocacy when they needed (…) we always respond positively when we are asked to support some organizations, in so far as we have resources and potential, ro-14). Website or IT support (pl-01), offering spaces where NGOs that don’t have an office can meet (pl-11) or even offering their own houses so the organization can have an office (ro-11; pl-09; pl-16), helping in issues in regards to documents (pl-12), helping with obtaining the 2% income tax (ro-04): And our mothers and fathers’ salaries, husbands and so on…this is how it works; ro-08: our friends, people who know us, help us with the 2%. Generally, family ties support the organization by making small donations and sponsorships that go along with the donations made by the members themselves. Informal networks also exist at international level. President of ro-11, an NGO that offers services to women surviving domestic violence remembers that the NGO was going through some difficulties when implementing an EU-funded projects and she wanted to close it down but, the partners with whom I was working didn’t let me give up. They didn’t let me. Another NGO from Romania was helped by a funder from the Netherlands with small sums of money,

16 but enough to keep it alive and on track before other sources of funding were obtained (ro-15). A president of an organization from Poland that deals with gender equality issues suggests that: We survived thanks to the women solidarity, at the international level, they helped me to…they recommended me to some foundations, private foundations from Great Britain, and we received from them the institutional grant…it was not a big amount of funds, but it allowed us somehow to the have the basis and then to look for other funds slowly … (president of pl-03). Surviving strategies, bartering for goods and services, mutual self-help, information sharing, cooperation, reciprocity and close relations represent types of informal cultural institutions that will not change immediately in reaction to changes in the formal rules, leading to a “tension between altered formal rules and the persisting informal constraints” (North 1990, 45). These types of networks of reciprocity existed before the requirements of externally funded projects, that to some extent try to formalize and institutionalize collective action, overlapping with the more informal self-help mechanisms: (…) basically this project (of coalition building) came as a need that we have felt because we were collaborating anyhow before and this was an opportunity to meet in a more structured way and to settle a strategy and some instruments that we could use in our public actions (ro-12).

Conclusions

Activists from Romania and Poland working on women’s and LGBTQ’s rights were involved in initiatives, election alliances or campaigns that generated public consciousness, placed issues on the public agenda, created new frames and discourses, forged connections to new constituents, and recreated ties with other types of networks, coalition organizations, leaders, and other civically engaged citizens (Fico 1999; Staggenborg and Lecomte, 2009). This article analyzed the nature and roles of coalitions and networks inside women based and LGBTQ NGOs from Romania and Poland. It focused on the particularities of inter-organizational relations shaped by funders, political and socioeconomic environments and by their members. The first part described the role of funders in supporting anti-discrimination and equal rights coalitions between NGOs in the two countries. The second part looked at micro-practices of exchange inside coalitions. It analyzed how members borrow practices, transfer knowledge and

17 information or use modeling strategies to symbolically legitimize their organization. Foreign and transnational donors played a crucial role in shaping movement agendas and mobilization in the CEE region and have become particularly important in the absence of regular sustained state funding and a tradition of charity and voluntary work in the two countries (Roth 2007, Johnson 2009, Irvine 2013 in Kriztan and Popa 2015, 90). Therefore, funders have supported organizations in creating coalitions that would change and challenge legislations and institutions in regard to women’s and LGBTQ rights. Collaboration, communication and participation in coalitions also helped adapting transnational phenomena (such as aid to civil society, project- based approaches) to the local level, within different frameworks. However, in their struggle to maintain autonomy inside their organization when dealing with pressures from funders, activists exchange practices and strategies inside coalitions that can contradict with the demands of funders. The third part of the article focused on networks in the two countries, in which goals and boundaries are less unfolded; while trust, shared identities and informal exchanges are met in a higher degree than in coalitions. The nature of collaboration differentiates coalitions from networks by types of exchange. Networks are more prone to solidarity links and long term coping mechanisms, while coalitions are oriented towards small, but efficient practices of overcoming pressures and difficulties. In both cases, memberships in different coalitions and networks have enabled activists to improve their cooperation and alliances across different boundaries (such as ethnicity, sexual orientation, political views); it has influenced the institutionalization of women’s and sexual minority movement through strategies of bargaining lobbying, litigation or consultations with the state (Kriztan and Popa 2015, 91); as well as contributed to their survival and persistence in the civil society sector. Thus, coalitions and networks are key variables in sustaining civil society organizations and enhancing their growth when donors and governments reduce or withdraw aid. By enhancing their cooperation and growth, through political support and diffused mechanisms that enhance organizations’ autonomy, coalitions and networks have great implication for the future of NGOs. Future research could offer more insights on what strategies activists undertake in situations where funding from external funders or governments withdraws and to what extend they use coping strategies that involve informal economic practices. Differences regarding inter- organizational relations in coalitions, networks and other broader social movements could also

18 contribute to the understanding of the civil society sector, in the case of neutral-based organizations. Weather shared identities (re)create political action inside networks, or short-term cooperation in coalitions can influence resource mobilization remains to be further studied. Boundaries between networks and coalitions, as well as between interpersonal and inter- organizational networks should be better grasped in order to identify specific types of processes that they generate. Also, to what extend do networks differ from the ones in other CEE countries? What other factors, besides personal ties, shared identities or scarce resources could enhance solidarity between activists?

1 Gender patterning may occur in gender-explicit or gender-neutral practices, through concrete organizational activities. Its processes have class and racial implications (Acker 1990, 421). Researchers point out to gender pattering of jobs, wages and hierarchies, power and subordination (Kanter 1977). Organizations are are sites of symbolic productions, despite their claim of being neuter and neutral (Gheradi 1995, 4). 2 Women’s mobilizations have numerously intersected with other alliances and coalitions from the LGBT movements, and activists that fought for ethnic and racial justice, such as Romani women and their local and transnational mobilization (Vincze 2009; Lovin and Regulska 2016, 1) 3 Downs (2008 in Fox 2010, 486) offers a more precise deﬁnition of coalition: “when two or more political groups or actors agree to pursue some common objective(s), pool resources…and actively communicate during joint action”. 4 A particular common trait of coalitions is that they tend to end when a certain issue has been resolved (Diani and Bison 2004, 285). 5 For example, relying on survival networks could prove to be a surviving strategy in the case of Poland, especially since the Ministry of Justice has recently denied financial support to several centers for women's rights who have been supporting victims and survivals of domestic and sexual violence. For more information, see http://lodz.wyborcza.pl/lodz/1,35153,20051591,resort-zbigniewa-ziobry-nie-dal-pieniedzy-kobiety-na-bruk.html 6 However, in both Romania and Poland the empowerment of minority groups (LGBTQ, Roma) has collided with historically deep-seated norms and moral standards held by large parts of the population (Buzogány 2011, 1) as well as the Polish Catholic Church and the Romanian Orthodox Church. 7 In Romania women based NGOs have participated in national coalitions for gender equality and against domestic violence and anti-discrimination (established by an organization dealing with LGBTQ issues - Acccept). In Poland, women based NGOs have allied in coalitions regarding reproductive rights, gender equality and unemployment, while LGBTQ NGOs have participated in coalitions for civil partnerships and equality. However, women’s NGOs have been initially reluctant to participate in large formal coalition and any idea of centralization or of furthering the formal structuring of their activities (Matynia 1995). This reluctance is explained by the negative legacy of national women’s organizations during the communist perios (Fico 1999, 3). 8 In this process, a particular attention has been given also to age; number of staff, accession of different types of funds as well as participation in various networks and coalitions are important elements that affect the results of the data analysis. 9 The most important private and public external funders in the early 1990s were Humboldt Foundation, Bosch Schtiftung, Foundation de Pologne and Soros Foundation (which established the Stefan Bathory Foundation in 1988 in Poland and the Foundation for an Open Society in 1990 in Romania), National Endowment for Democracy, PHARE and US AID (Carothers 1996, 56). After 1995, both countries experienced a shift in funding, due to EU accession preparations, whilst EU funds, such as PHARE Civil Society Development Program, PHARE for Democracy, PHARE LIEN and the PHARE for Partnership were more present. After the EU accession and along with EU funders, two other important funders have been developing programs and actions in both countries, the EEA Grants and Norway Grants (Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway) and the Swiss-Romanian Cooperation Programme.

10 The development of the Romanian civil society sector was achieved “without significant and direct support from the state” (NGO Stock-Taking in Romania, The World Bank Resident Mission in Romania 1998, 45), but rather from foreign funders, an issues that would affect the sustainability of this sector and create unbalanced relationships, such as dependency upon funders (Regulska 1999, 68-9).

11 For example, LGBTQ struggles against criminalization, decriminalization and homophobia have led to essential sociocultural transformations throughout the region; either in terms of challenging the institutional and cultural practices (Lovin and Regulska 2016, 7). 12 Mobilization in coalitions and in larger social movements is attributed to financial and organizational resources (McCarthy and Zald 1977), cultural framing (such as ideas, beliefs and discourses (Benford and Snow 2000) as well as political opportunities (Baldez 2000). 13 Practices of food production and reciprocal exchange of labor and goods constituted a form of ‘anti-politics’, in “a system in which political and economic forms of participation were largely determined by the state, it was not uncommon for citizens opposed to such enforced formalization to retreat to the private sphere of household, home, family plot and close inter-family relations” (Smith 2004, 15016). 14 In this sense, “individuals, communities and entire regions were still locked in the preexisting system of state socialist social and economic relations in the 1990s, unable suddenly to break away from state socialism. As a result, the state socialist social practices and attitudes were mixed with the post socialist present to create a hybrid14 that represented neither state socialism nor capitalism” (Pavlinek 2003, 87). 15 The networks of power and influence were less inclusive to certain social categories of people (Kuehnast and Dudwick 2004) during the communist regime and in the post-communist period they became more monetary-based, less accessible for the poor and spread at the local and national level (Miller, Grodeland and Koshechkina 2001; Grodeland 2007; Dobovsek and Mesko 2008 in Ledeneva 2004, 10).

References

Acker, J. (1990). Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: A theory of gendered organizations. Gender and Society, 4, 139–158. Avdeyeva, O. (2010). States' compliance with international requirements: Gender equality in EU enlargement countries. Political Research Quarterly, 63, 203-223. Bordt, R.L. (1997). The structure of women’s nonprofit organizations, Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis Bozena, L. (2008). Poland's transition and new Opportunities for women, Feminist Economics 14, 123-136. Bradshaw, P., Murray, V., and Wolpin, J. (1996). Women on boards of nonprofits: What differences do they make?, Nonprofit Management and Leadership 6, 241-254. Bruszt, L. and Holzhacker R. (eds.) (2009). The Transnationalization of Economies, States, and Civil Societies. New Challenges for Governance in Europe, Springer, New York. Bunea, A. (2007). Civil society as “Mushrooming” NGOs? Western assistance and the re- building of civic sphere in post-communist Romania and Poland, Unpublished manuscript, Central European University.

Buzogany A. (2011). Swimming against the tide. Contested norms and anti-discrimination advocacy in Central and Eastern Europe. In Lombardo E. and Forest, M. (eds.).The Europeanization of Gender Equality Policies. A Discursive-sociological Approach, Palgrave MacMillan: London. Carothers, T. (1996). Assessing Democracy Assistance: The Case of Romania, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Washington D.C. Chavance, B. (2008), Institutional Economics, Routledge, London and New York. Chimiak, G. (2006). How Individualists Make Solidarity Work, Ministerstwo Pracy i Polityki Spolecznej, Warszawa. Clemens, E.S. (1999). Securing political returns to social capital: women’s associations in the United States, 1880s – 1920s. Journal of Interdisciplinary History 29 (4) 613-639. Cyert, R. and March J. (1963). A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall. David, P.A. (1994). Why are institutions the “carriers of history? Path dependence and the evolution of conventions, organizations and institutions, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 5(2), 205–220. Diani M. and Bison I. (2004). Organizations, coalitions, and movements. Theory and Society, 33, 281-309. DiMaggio, P. and Powell W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review 82, 147- 60 . Drazkiewicz-Grodzicka E. (2015) Poland: attempts at defining aid by solidarity, democracy and development. In O. Horký-Hluchan and S. Lightfoot (eds.), Development Cooperation of the ‘New’ EU Member States Beyond Europeanization, Palgrave Macmillan, New York. Ebers, M. (1997). Explaining Inter-Organizational Network Formation. In Ebers M. (ed.) The Formation of Inter-organizational Networks. Oxford University Press: New York. Fox, J. (2010). Coalitions and networks. In Anheier H.C., Toepler S. and List R. (eds). International Encyclopedia of Civil Society. Springer: New York. Gheradi, S.(1995). Gender, Symbolism and Organizational Cultures. London: Sage. Edwards B. and McCarthy J. D., (2004). Resources and social movement mobilization, in D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule, H. Kriesi, The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements, Oxford.

Edwards, M., and Hulme, D. (1996b). Too close for comfort? The impact of official aid on nongovernmental organizations. World Development 24(6), 961–973. Edwards, M., and Hulme, D. (Eds.) (1996a). Beyond the magic bullet: NGO performance and accountability in the post-Cold War World. West, Kumarian Press, Hartford, CT. Einhorn, B. (1993) Cinderella goes to market: citizenship, gender and women's movements in East Central Europe.Verso, Oxford. Foster M. K., Meinhard Agnes G. (2002). A Regression model explaining predisposition to collaborate. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 31, 549-564; Foster, M. K. and Meinhard A. G. (2004). Women’s voluntary organizations: bridgers, bonders or both, International Society for Third Sector Research (ISTR) Sixth International Conference at Ryerson University, Toronto. Foster, M.K. and Orser, B.J. (1994). A marketing perspective on women in management: An Exploratory Study”, Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 11(4), 339-345. Grabher G. (1993). Rediscovering the social in the economics of interfirm relations. In G. Grabher, (ed.), The Embedded Firm: On the Socioeconomics of Industrial Networks Routledge, London and New York. Grabowska, M. and Joanna R. (2011). Redefining well-being through actions: women's activism and the Polish state. In A. E. Woodward, J. Bonvin and M. Renom, (eds) Transforming Gendered Well-Being in Europe: The Impact of Social Movements, Ashgate, United Kingdom. Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness, American Journal of Sociology 91, 481-51 Grunberg, L. (2000a). NGO-ization of feminism in Romania: the failure of a success. AnAlize: Journal of Feminist Studies 7, 14-19 Grunberg, L. (2000b). Women’s NGOs in Romania. In S. Gal, G. Klingman (eds.) Reproducing Reproducing Gender: Politics, Publics, and Everyday Life After Socialism, Princeton University Press, New Jersey. Hann, C. and Hart K. (2011). Economic Anthropology, History, Ethnography, Critique, Polity, Cambridge. Herbst, J., Przewłocka J. (2011). Podstawowe fakty o organizacjach pozarządowych. Raport z badania 2010” [Basic facts on NGOs. 2010 study report. Stowarzyszenie Klon/Jawor, Warszawa.

Ivasiuc, Ana. (2014). Empowering the Roma. Lessons from the development practice. Unpublished PhD. dissertation, S.N.S.P.A Kaim, A. (2014). Public grants and the relations between NGOs: the Case of Poland. Presented at International Society for Third Sector Research, 11th International Conference, Muenster. Kligman, G. (1998). The Politics of Duplicity, Controlling Reproduction in Ceausescu’s Romania, University of California Press, London. Kriztan, A. and Popa, R. (2015). Comparing women’s movements’ influence on domestic violence policy: A model of critical institutionalization. In I. Vlad and K. Fabian, Democratization through Social Activism. Gender and Environmental Issues in Post-Communist Societies, Tritonic, Bucuresti. Kubik, J. (2013). From transitology to contextual holism: a theoretical trajectory of postcommunist studies. In J. Kubik and A. Linch (eds.), Postcommunism from Within: Social Justice, Mobilization, and Hegemony, Social Science Research Council and New York University Press, New York. Ledeneva, A. V. (2008). “Informal networks in post-communist economies. a “topographical map”. In T. Lahusen, P. H. Solomon Jr. (ed.), What is Soviet Now? Identities, Legacies, Memories, Lit Verlag Dr. Hopf, Berlin Leiter, J. (2005). Structural isomorphism in Australian non-profit organizations. Working Paper No. CPNS 28, CWK Gleerup, Centre of Philanthropy an Nonprofit Studies, 1-38. Letki E. and Evans G. (2005). Endogenizing social trust: democratization in East-Central Europe. British Journal of Political Science 35, 515-529. Lott, J.T. (1994). Women, changing demographics and the redefinition of power. In T. Odendahl and M. O’Neill (eds.), Women and power in the nonprofit sector, Jossey- Bass, San Francisco. Mahoney, J. (2000). Path dependence in historical sociology, Theory and Society 29(4), 507– 548. McMahon, P. C. (2002). International Actors and Women’s NGOs in Poland and Hungary. In Mendelson, Sarah E., Glenn John K. (eds.) The Power and Limits of NGOs, Columbia University Press, New York. Mendelson, S. E., Glenn J. K., (2000). Democracy Assistance and NGO Strategies in Post- communist Societies. Democracy and Rule of Law Program, Global Policy Program 8, 1-75.

Miroiu Mihaela (ed.) (2015) Mișcări feministe și ecologiste în România (1990-2014). Polirom, Iasi. Miroiu, Mihaela. (2004). Drumul catre autonomie. Iasi: Polirom Moghadam, V. M. (2005). Globalizing Women: Transnational Feminist Networks, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. Moghadam, V.M. (2000). Transnational feminist networks. Collective action in an era of globalization, International Sociology 15 (1), 57-85. Nazpary, J.(2002) Post-Soviet Chaos: Violence and Dispossession in Kasakhstan. Pluto Press, London. Nimu, A. (2015). The mobilization of women in Central and Eastern European countries: how contextual elements shaped women's NGOs from Romania and Poland, AnAlize – Journal of Gender and Feminist Studies 5 (15), 79-79. North, D. C,( 1997). The process of economic change, Research Paper 128, World Institute for Development Economics Research. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions. Institutional Change, and Economic Performance, Cambridge University Press , New York. Odendahl, T. (1994). Women’s power, nonprofits and the future. In T. Odendahl and M. O’Neill (eds.), Women and Power in the Nonprofit Sector, Jossey Bass Nonprofit & Public Management Series, Wiley, New York. Oliver, Christine. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review 16 (1), 145-179. Quigley, K. F. F. (1997). For Democracy’s Sake: Foundations and Democracy Assistance in Central Europe, The Woodrow Wilson Centre Press, Washington D.C. Pavlínek, P. (2003). Transformation of the Czech automotive components industry through foreign direct investment, Eurasian Geography and Economics 44 (3), 186-209. Plastrik P. and Taylor M. (2004).Network power for philanthropy and nonprofits and “lawrence communityworks: using the power of networks to restore a city, available at www.barrfoundation.or

Regulska Joanna. (1999) NGOs and their vulnerabilities during the time of transition: The Case of Poland, Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations 10(1), 61- 71. Rose, R. (2001). Getting things done in anti-modern society: social capital network in Russia. In P. Dasgupta, I. Serageldin, Social Capital: A Multifaceted Perspective, World Bank, Washington D.C. Salih, R. (2010). Transnational public spheres from ‘above’ and from ‘below’. Feminist networks across the Middle East and Europe, Anthropology of the Middle East 5(1) Smith, A. (2004). Informal work and the diverse economies of ‘post-socialist’ Europe”, available at http://www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/socialexclusion/pdf/informaleconomies.pdf Smith, A. and Stenning, A. (2004). Beyond household economies: articulations and spaces of economic practice in post-socialism’, paper presented at the ESRC-funded workshop on ‘Rethinking “Economy” in Post-Socialism, Queen Mary, University of London. Stark, D. (1992). Path dependence and privatization in East Central Europe. East European Politics and Societies 6(1), 17-54. Stark, D. and Bruszt L. (1998). Postsocialist Pathways. Transforming Politics and Property in East Central Europe. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Stoica, C. (2012). Capitalism from below: an exploratory analysis of small entrepreneurship in Hungary, Poland, And Romania, Romanian Journal of Society and Politics, 7 (1), 71-102. Takahashi, L. M., Smutny G. (2002) Collaborative windows and organizational governance: exploring the formation and demise of social service partnerships, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 31, 165-185. Zabelina, T. (1996). Sexual Violence towards Women. In H. Pilkington (ed.) Gender, Generation and Identity in Contemporary Russia, Routledge, Lodon and New York.

Reports NGO-Stock Taking in Romania. (1998) The World Bank Resident Mission in Romania, available at http://www.icnl.org/knowledge.librabry/index.php NGO Sustainability Index for Central and Eastern Europe and Eurasia (2010). United States Agency for International Development Bureau for Europe and Eurasia Office of Democracy,

Governance and Social Transition, available at: http://nvo.lv/site/attachments/18/01/2012/complete_document_1.pdf NGO Sustainability Index for Central and Eastern Europe and Eurasia (2014). United States Agency for International Development Bureau for Europe and Eurasia Office of Democracy, Governance and Social Transition, available at: https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1863/E%26E%202013%20CSOSI%20Final %2010-29-14.pdf