DISSERTATION Titel der Dissertation Associations and Pressure for Democratic Governance: The Case of Cameroon Verfasser Mag. Julius N. Lambi angestrebter akademischer Grad Doktor der Philosophie (Dr. Phil.) Wien, 2011 Studienkennzahl lt. Studienblatt: A 092 300 Dissertationsgebiet lt. Studienblatt: Politikwissenschaft Betreuer 1: Univ.-Prof. Dr. Herbert Gottweis Betreuer 2: Univ.-Prof. Dr. Werner Zips If power holders were poets they would write: Oh power, So sweet to my heart, Is thy nectar, That losing thee, Is the stab of a dagger. ii ABSTRACT The progress of democracy in any society hinges on pressure from civil society. Given the widely accepted premise that democratic governance is crucial for development efforts to succeed, international donors have since the late 80s, allocated high amounts of funding to civil society organizations (CSOs) in developing countries. Robert Putnam’s (1993: 185) argument that associations promote social capital, which “is the key to making democracy work” has greatly contributed in promoting the expectation that international donor support to civil society organizations in the developing world will result in more democratic and better performing governments. Taking the association-rich North West Region of Cameroon as a case, this research examines the extent to which CSOs in a sub- Saharan African context possess capacities to pressure for democratic governance. It also analyses how the institutional context – regulations, norms and cultural values – affect the democracy pressure capacities of Cameroon’s civil society organizations. The research shows that on average, CSO pressure for democracy (bottom-up pressure) is low in North West Cameroon, despite the high density of development association in the region. On the one hand, CSOs in the case study exhibit high social capital, in the form of inter-association networking, and collaboration with stakeholder communities. On the other hand, political capital, as well as resource capacity is low among these civil society organizations. The association boom in Cameroon has not produced anticipated improvements in governance, because unlike Putnam’s thesis suggests, a high level of social capital is not sufficient for associations to have a positive effect on state administration. The study demonstrates that Putnam’s assumption that high political capital invariably accompanies high social capital is not convincing. To effectively promote democratic governance, efforts aimed at strengthening civil society organizations in Africa must directly challenge the regulatory, normative and cultural institutions that constrain political capital and resources capacity in these associations. Civil society organizations in Africa are more likely to break institutional constraints to democracy when they actively replicate those interventions that have yielded results in their given contexts; and when they make their advocacy efforts consistent or continuous over a period of time, as opposed to intermittent or discontinuous . i ii DEDICATION To Prof. Cornelius M. Lambi, and Mr. David Ntuchu iii iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I am grateful to several organizations and people whose support, advice, cooperation and encouragement have brought me to a successful completion of this PhD thesis. My greatest appreciation goes to the University of Vienna, which through the Vienna School of Governance (ViGo) provided the financial resources, the high quality work environment, and research counsel that allowed my ideas to take form. I deeply thank my supervisors, Prof. Herbert Gottweis and Prof. Werner Zips whose comments, questions and critiques at different stages of the work helped me to take a step back and rethink my approaches. I am indebted to Prof. Josef Melchior, Prof. Rüdiger Frank, Prof. Gerda Falkner and the ViGo Faculty members for the insights they offered in dissertation workshops. I give special thanks to the members of many civil society organizations (CSO) in the North West Region of Cameroon who provided valuable information through interviews and questionnaires, and who facilitated the data collection in various ways. I will forever be indebted to Mr. Ngang Eric, the Coordinator of the North West Association of Development Organizations (NWADO) for the tremendous research cooperation which he and the members of the CSO network mobilized on my behalf. I am grateful to Mr. Gaby Ambo, Mr. Ndi Richard Tanto, Mr. Nkwenti Simon, Yvonne Freenue, Limen Florence, Mbuh Rene, Divine Mbiydzemyury and many other CSO workers who made data collection in the North West Region of Cameroon an enjoyable experience. I would also like to thank H.E. Abakar Ahamat (Governor of the North West Region), Mr. Adams Ibrahim, and Mr. Samuel Chemuta whose support helped me to gain access to government data. I also express thanks to my colleagues in the Vienna School of Governance (ViGo), who as discussants, drew my attention to interesting alternative perspectives. I owe a great deal to my friend and colleague, Violeda Umali who was a fountain of motivation whenever the work seemed overwhelming. I am grateful to Loveline v Folefac and Kometa Divine who devotedly transcribed my interviews. I cannot find enough words to thank my dearest friend, Frida Lyonga, for the sacrifices she has made for me over the past 3.5 years, and for the painstaking editorial comments which helped me to improve the quality of the thesis. Finally, my heartfelt appreciation goes to my wonderful parents and to my brothers and sisters who supported me at different stages of this project, and who in diverse ways spared no breath in cheering me on with the reminder: “J, the PhD is not a lifetime career.” vi TABLE OF CONTENT 1. ASSOCIATIONS AND THE PROMISE OF DEMOCRACY IN AFRICA ........... 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 1 1.2 CIVIL SOCIETY IN AFRICA AND PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY ............ 3 1.3 RESEARCH FOCUS: THE ASSOCIATIONS-DEMOCRACY EQUATION ....... 9 1.4 THE RESEARCH PUZZLE ................................................................................... 12 1.5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND OBJECTIVES .................................................. 15 1.5.1 Research Questions ........................................................................................... 15 1.5.2 Research Objectives ......................................................................................... 16 1.6 RESEARCH HYPOTHESES ................................................................................. 16 1.7 DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS ............................................................................ 18 1.8 OVERVIEW OF THESIS ....................................................................................... 21 2. CONSTRUCTING A TOOL FOR ASSESSING BOTTOM-UP PRESSURE: THE POWER FRAMEWORK ................................................................................ 27 ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... 27 2.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 27 2.2 PARTICIPATORY GOVERNANCE AND THE NEGLECT OF POWER .......... 31 2.3 DOMINATION AND THE DIMENSIONS OF POWER ..................................... 35 2.4 POWER: ATTRIBUTES OF EFFECTIVE BOTTOM-UP PRESSURE ............... 40 2.5 THE POWER FRAMEWORK AS A METHODOLOGICAL TOOL ................... 50 2.6 SUMMING UP ....................................................................................................... 51 3. METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................... 53 ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... 53 3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN ............................................................................................ 53 3.1.1 The Case Study ................................................................................................ 54 3.1.2 The Unit of Analysis in the Case Study ........................................................... 57 3.2 RESEARCH PARAMETERS ................................................................................ 60 3.2.1 The Cause-Parameter: ‘Institutional Context’ ................................................. 60 3.2.2 The Effect-Parameter: ‘Bottom-Up Pressure’ ................................................. 62 3.3 DESIGN OF THE DATA SAMPLE ...................................................................... 62 3.4 METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION ................................................................. 65 3.4.1 Quantitative Data Collection Methods .............................................................. 65 3.4.2 Qualitative Data Collection Methods ............................................................... 74 3.5 DATA ANALYSIS ................................................................................................. 77 3.5.1 The Logic for Drawing Causal Interpretation ................................................... 78 3.5.2 Correspondence Analysis .................................................................................. 80 3.5.3 Process Tracing ................................................................................................. 81 3.6 SUMMING UP ....................................................................................................... 82 4. CASE STUDY: ASSOCIATIONS