Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Civil Society Organizations: the Site of Legitimizing the Common Good—a Literature Review

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The concept of legitimacy—i.e., being regarded as “lawful, admissible, and justified” (Edwards in NGO rights and responsibilities: a new deal for global governance, The Foreign Policy Center, London, 2000)—is pivotal within civil society research. Recently, the concept has applied to wider notions concerning the civil sphere and civic action. The introductory article of this special issue aims to provide an overview of conceptualizations of legitimacy within civil society research and to point at new avenues for future research. We depart from Suddaby et al.’s (Acad Manag Ann 11(1):451–478, 2017) configurations of legitimacy within management literature: as property, perception, and process. While these configurations are also reflected in civil society literature, with legitimacy as property being prominent, they do not capture the full scope of civil society literature on legitimacy, given its multidisciplinary nature, its inclusion of multiple levels of analysis, and the presence of complementary conceptualizations of legitimacy. We posit that the legitimacy-as-relations-in-processes perspective is valuable for advancing research in civil society organizations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abzug, R., & Galaskiewicz, J. (2001). Nonprofit boards: Crucibles of expertise or symbols of local identities? Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,30(1), 51–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aksartova, S. (2003). In search of legitimacy: Peace grant making of U.S. philanthropic foundations, 1988–1996. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,32(1), 25–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, J. C. (2006). The civil sphere. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Angell, O. (2008). From market to state networking: The case of a Norwegian voluntary organization. Official Journal of the International Society for Third-Sector Research,19(3), 296–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Apostol, O. M. (2015). A project for Romania? The role of the civil society’s counter-accounts in facilitating democratic change in society. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal,28(2), 210–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appe, S. (2011). Civil society mappings by government: A comparison of Ecuadorian and Colombian cases. Journal of Civil Society,7(2), 157–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appe, S. (2016). NGO networks, the diffusion and adaptation of NGO managerialism, and NGO legitimacy in Latin America. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,27(1), 187–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arato, A. (1981). Civil society against the state: Poland 1980–1981. Telos,1981(47), 23–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arato, A., & Cohen, J. (1988). Civil society and social theory. Thesis Eleven,21(1), 40–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arenas, D., Lozano, J., & Albareda, L. (2009). The role of NGOs in CSR: Mutual perceptions among stakeholders. Journal of Business Ethics,88(1), 175–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arvidson, M., & Lyon, F. (2014). Social impact measurement and non-profit organisations: compliance, resistance, and promotion. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,25(4), 869–886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avritzer, L. (2008). Civil society, participatory institutions, and representation: From authorization to the legitimacy of action. Dados,4(SE), 0.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barman, E. A. (2002). Asserting difference: The strategic response of nonprofit organizations to competition. Social Forces,80(4), 1191–1222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barman, E. (2007). What is the bottom line for nonprofit organizations? A history of measurement in the British voluntary sector. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,18(2), 101–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benjamin, L. M. (2008). Account space: How accountability requirements shape nonprofit practice. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,37(2), 201–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blessing, A. (2015). Public, private, or in-between? The legitimacy of social enterprises in the housing market. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,26(1), 198–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bode, I. (2006). Disorganized welfare mixes: Voluntary agencies and new governance regimes in Western Europe. Journal of European Social Policy,16(4), 346–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolduc, V. L. (1980). Representation and legitimacy in neighborhood organizations: A case study. Journal of Voluntary Action Research,9(1–4), 165–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boltanski, L., & Thévenot, L. (2006). On justification: Economies of worth. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borchgrevink, K. (2017). NGOization of Islamic charity: Claiming legitimacy in changing institutional contexts. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 1–23.

  • Botetzagias, I., & Koutiva, E. (2014). Financial giving of foundations and businesses to environmental NGOs: The role of grantee’s legitimacy. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,25(2), 281–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braunstein, R., Fulton, B. R., & Wood, R. L. (2014). The role of bridging cultural practices in racially and socioeconomically diverse civic organizations. American Sociological Review,79(4), 705–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brinkerhoff, J. M. (2002). Government–nonprofit partnership: A defining framework. Public Administration and Development: The International Journal of Management Research and Practice,22(1), 19–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, L. D., & Moore, M. H. (2001). Accountability, strategy, and international nongovernmental organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,30(3), 569–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryson, J. M., Gibbons, M. J., & Shaye, G. (2001). Enterprise schemes for nonprofit survival, growth, and effectiveness. Nonprofit Management and Leadership,11(3), 271–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burdsey, D. (2015). Un/making the British Asian male athlete: Race, legibility and the state. Sociological Research Online,20(3), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carman, J. G. (2010). The accountability movement. What’s wrong with this theory of change? Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,39(2), 256–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castelló, I., Morsing, M., & Schultz, F. (2013). Introduction: Communicative dynamics and the polyphony of corporate social responsibility in the network society. Journal of Business Ethics,118(4), 683–694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cederström, C., & Fleming, P. (2016). On bandit organizations and their (IL) legitimacy: Concept development and illustration. Organization Studies,37(11), 1575–1594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, S., & Kopstein, J. (2001). Bad civil society. Political Theory,29(6), 837–865.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaskin, R. J. (2003). Fostering neighborhood democracy: Legitimacy and accountability within loosely coupled systems. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,32(2), 161–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clemens, E. S. (2010). From city club to nation state: Business networks in American political development. Theory and Society,39(3), 377–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clemens, E. S. (2015). Organizing powers in eventful times. Social Science History,39(1), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clemens, E. S., & Guthrie, D. (Eds.). (2010). Politics and partnerships: The role of voluntary associations in America’s political past and present. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J., & Arato, A. (1992). Civil society and political theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colomy, P. (1998). Neofunctionalism and neoinstitutionalism: Human agency and interest in institutional change. Official Journal of the Eastern Sociological Society,13(2), 265–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, S. M., & Owen, D. L. (2007). Corporate social reporting and stakeholder accountability: The missing link. Accounting, Organizations and Society,32(7–8), 649–667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornwall, A., & Nyamu-Musembi, C. (2004). Putting the “rights-based approach” to development into perspective. Third World Quarterly,25(8), 1415–1437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costa, E., Ramus, T., & Andreaus, M. (2011). Accountability as a managerial tool in non-profit organizations: Evidence from Italian CSVs. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,22(3), 470–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Alisa, G., Demaria, F., & Cattaneo, C. (2013). Civil and uncivil actors for a degrowth society. Journal of Civil Society,9(2), 212–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dart, R. (2004). The legitimacy of social enterprise. Nonprofit Management and Leadership,14(4), 411–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dean, M. (1994). The genealogy of the gift in antiquity. The Australian Journal of Anthropology,5(1–2), 320–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dekker, P. (2014). Tocqueville did not write about soccer clubs: Participation in voluntary associations and political involvement. In Modernizing democracy (pp. 45–57). New York, NY: Springer.

  • Dépelteau, F. (Ed.). (2018). The Palgrave handbook of relational sociology. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1939/2011). La formation des valeurs. Paris, La Découverte, textes de 1918 à 1944 traduits par Bidet A., Quéré L. et Truc G.

  • Dewey, J., & Bentley, A. (1949). Knowing and the known. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P., & Anheier, H. K. (1990). The sociology of nonprofit organizations and sectors. Annual Review of Sociology,16, 137–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahim, A. (2002). Information struggles: The role of information in the reproduction of NGO-funder relationships. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,31(1), 84–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahim, A. (2003). Accountability in practice: Mechanisms for NGOs. World Development,31(5), 813–829.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahim, A. (2005). Accountability myopia: Losing sight of organizational learning. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,34(1), 56–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahim, A., Battilana, J., & Mair, J. (2014). The governance of social enterprises: Mission drift and accountability challenges in hybrid organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior,34, 81–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, M. (2000). NGO rights and responsibilities: A new deal for global governance. London: The Foreign Policy Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, M., & Hulme, D. (1996). Too close for comfort? The impact of official aid on nongovernmental organizations. World Development,24(6), 961–973.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eikenberry, A. M., & Kluver, J. D. (2004). The marketization of the nonprofit sector: Civil society at risk? Public Administration Review,64(2), 132–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eliasoph, N. (2012). The politics of volunteering. Malden, MA: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emirbayer, M. (1997). Manifesto for a relational sociology. American Journal of Sociology,103(2), 281–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Enjolras, B. (2009). Between market and civic governance regimes: Civicness in the governance of social services in Europe. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,20(3), 274–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, M. S. (2012). Who wants a deliberative public sphere? 1. In Sociological forum (Vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 872–895). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

  • Evers, A. (2009). Civicness and civility: Their meanings for social services. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,20(3), 239–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Follett, M. P. (1925/2003). Power. In H. C. Metcalf & L. Urwick (Eds.), Dynamic administration. The collected papers of Mary Parker Follett (pp. 95–116). London & New York: Routledge.

  • Forbes, D. P. (1998). Measuring the unmeasurable: Empirical studies of nonprofit organization effectiveness from 1977 to 1997. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,27(2), 183–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frantz, C., & Fuchs, D. (2014). The impact of civil society on sustainable development. In Modernizing democracy (pp. 83–96). New York, NY: Springer.

  • Fraser, N. (2007). Special section: Transnational public sphere: Transnationalizing the public sphere: On the legitimacy and efficacy of public opinion in a post-Westphalian world. Theory, Culture & Society,24(4), 7–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Froelich, K. A. (1999). Diversification of revenue strategies: Evolving resource dependence in nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,28(3), 246–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fung, A. (2003). Associations and democracy: Between theories, hopes, and realities. Annual Review of Sociology,29(1), 515–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardberg, N. A., & Fombrun, C. J. (2006). Corporate citizenship: Creating intangible assets across institutional environments. The Academy of Management Review,31(2), 329–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gill, R., & Wells, C. C. (2014). Welcome to the “Hunger Games” an exploration of the rhetorical construction of legitimacy for one US-based nonprofit organization. Management Communication Quarterly,28(1), 26–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gouldner, Alvin Ward. (1980). The two marxisms: Contradictions and anomalies in the development of theory. New York, NY: Seabury Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Graddy, E., & Wang, L. (2009). Community foundation development and social capital. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,38(3), 392–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks of Antonio Gramsci. London: Lawrence and Wishart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R., Bebbington, J., & Collison, D. (2006). NGOs, civil society and accountability: making the people accountable to capital. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal,19(3), 319–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greiling, D., & Stötzer, S. (2015). Performance accountability as a driver for changes in nonprofit–government relationships: An empirical insight from Austria. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,26(5), 1690–1717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guo, C., & Musso, J. A. (2007). Representation in nonprofit and voluntary organizations: A conceptual framework. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,36(2), 308–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, M. (2014). Evaluation logics in the third sector. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,25(2), 307–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, M., & O’Dwyer, B. (2017). Accounting, non-governmental organizations and civil society: The importance of nonprofit organizations to understanding accounting, organizations and society. Accounting, Organizations and Society,63, 1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haynes, K. E., Gifford, J. L., & Pelletiere, D. (2005). Sustainable transportation institutions and regional evolution: Global and local perspectives. Journal of Transport Geography,13(3), 207–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herlin, H. (2015). Better safe than sorry: Nonprofit organizational legitimacy and cross-sector partnerships. Business and Society,54(6), 822–858.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heylen, F., Fraussen, B., & Beyers, J. (2018). Live to fight another day? Organizational maintenance and mortality anxiety of civil society organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,47(6), 1249–1270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, H., & Powell, W. W. (2009). The rationalization of charity: The influences of professionalism in the nonprofit sector. Administrative Science Quarterly,54(2), 268–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, R. N., & Sobieraj, S. (2007). Narrative and legitimacy: US congressional debates about the nonprofit sector. Sociological Theory,25(1), 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jepson, P. (2005). Governance and accountability of environmental NGOs. Environmental Science & Policy,8(5), 515–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson, H., & Lee, J. (2014). Bridging the gap: How do EU-based civil society organisations acquire their internal representation? VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,25(2), 405–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson, N., & Metzger, J. (2016). Experimentalizing the organization of objects: Re-enacting mines and landfills. Organization,23(6), 840–863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jung, K., & Moon, M. J. (2007). The double-edged sword of public-resource dependence: The impact of public resources on autonomy and legitimacy in Korean cultural nonprofit organizations. Policy Studies Journal,35(2), 205–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaldor, M. (2003). Civil society and accountability. Journal of Human Development,4(1), 5–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamali, M. (2001). Civil society and Islam: A sociological perspective. European Journal of Sociology,42(3), 457–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamali, M. (2007). Multiple modernities and Islamism in Iran. Social Compass,54(3), 373–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keane, J. (1988). Democracy and civil society. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kocka, J. (2004). Civil society from a historical perspective. European Review,12(1), 65–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koopmans, R. (2004). Movements and media: Selection processes and evolutionary dynamics in the public sphere. Renewal and Critique in Social Theory,33(3), 367–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kopecký, P., & Mudde, C. (2003). Uncivil society? Contentious politics in post-communist Europe. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuosmanen, J. (2014). Care provision, empowerment, and market forces: The art of establishing legitimacy for Work Integration Social Enterprises (WISEs). VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,25(1), 248–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kutay, A. (2015). A critical transnational public sphere: Bringing back common good and social ontology in context. Globalizations,13(1), 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehman, G. (2007). The accountability of NGOs in civil society and its public spheres. Critical Perspectives on Accounting,18, 645–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy, D. L., & Egan, D. (2003). A neo-Gramscian approach to corporate political strategy: Conflict and accommodation in the climate change negotiations. Journal of Management Studies,40(4), 803–829.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lichterman, P., & Eliasoph, N. (2014). Civic action. American Journal of Sociology,120(3), 798–863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lilja, E. (2015). A new ecology of civil society II. Journal of Civil Society,11(4), 402–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipset, S. M. (1994). The social requisites of democracy revisited: 1993 presidential address. American Sociological Review,59(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipset, S. M., & Lakin, J. H. (2004). The democratic century. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, G., Eng, T. Y., & Sekhon, Y. K. (2014). Managing branding and legitimacy: A study of charity retail sector. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,43(4), 629–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lorino, P. (2018). Pragmatism and organization studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lucea, R. (2010). How we see them versus how they see themselves: A cognitive perspective of firm—NGO relationships. Business and Society,49(1), 116–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luke, B., Barraket, J., & Eversole, R. (2013). Measurement as legitimacy versus legitimacy of measures—performance evaluation of social enterprise. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management,10(3/4), 234–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luyckx, J., & Janssens, M. (2016). Discursive legitimation of a contested actor over time: The multinational corporation as a historical case (1964–2012). Organization Studies,37(11), 1595–1619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maier, F., Meyer, M., & Steinbereithner, M. (2016). Nonprofit organizations becoming business-like: A systematic review. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,45(1), 64–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maier, F., Schober, C., Simsa, R., & Millner, R. (2015). SROI as a method for evaluation research: Understanding merits and limitations. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,26(5), 1805–1830.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manetti, G. (2014). The role of blended value accounting in the evaluation of socio-economic impact of social enterprises. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,25(2), 443–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marberg, A., van Kranenburg, H., & Korzilius, H. (2016). NGOs in the news: The road to taken-for-grantedness. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,27(6), 2734–2763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinez, S. E., & Cooper, D. J. (2017). Assembling international development: Accountability and the disarticulation of a social movement. Accounting, Organizations and Society,63, 6–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messner, M. (2009). The limits of accountability. Accounting, Organizations and Society,34(8), 918–938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M., Buber, R., & Aghamanoukjan, A. (2013). In search of legitimacy: Managerialism and legitimation in civil society organizations. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,24(1), 167–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M., & Simsa, R. (2014). Developments in the third sector: The last decade and a cautious view into the future. In M. Freise & T. Hallmann (Eds.), Modernizing democracy? Associations and associating in the 21st century (pp. 203–216). New York, NY: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Moog, S., Spicer, A., & Böhm, S. (2015). The politics of multi-stakeholder initiatives: The crisis of the forest stewardship council. Journal of Business Ethics,128(3), 469–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mosley, J. E., & Galaskiewicz, J. (2015). The relationship between philanthropic foundation funding and state-level policy in the era of welfare reform. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,44(6), 1225–1254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moxham, C. (2010). Help or hindrance? Examining the role of performance measurement in UK nonprofit organisations. Public Performance & Management Review,33(3), 342–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulgan, R. (2000). ‘Accountability’: An ever-expanding concept? Public Administration,78(3), 555–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Najam, A. (1996). NGO accountability: A conceptual framework. Development Policy Review,14, 339–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nevile, A. (2009). Values and the legitimacy of third sector service delivery organizations: Evidence from Australia. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,20(1), 71–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls, A. (2009). ‘We do good things, don’t we?’: ‘Blended Value Accounting’ in social entrepreneurship. Accounting, Organizations and Society,34(6–7), 755–769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls, A. (2010). The legitimacy of social entrepreneurship: Reflexive isomorphism in a pre-paradigmatic field. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,34(4), 611–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien, T. (2010). Stuck in the middle: Maintaining the organizational legitimacy of the Regional Environmental Center. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,21(3), 339–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien, N., & Evans, S. (2017). Civil society partnerships: Power imbalance and mutual dependence in NGO partnerships. Official Journal of the International Society for Third-Sector Research,28(4), 1399–1421.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Leary, S. (2017). Grassroots accountability promises in rights-based approaches to development: the role of transformative monitoring and evaluation in NGOs. Accounting, Organizations and Society,63, 21–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Sullivan, N., & O’Dwyer, B. (2009). Stakeholder perspectives on a financial sector legitimation process: The case of NGOs and the equator principles. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal,22(4), 553–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oser, J. L. (2010). Between atomistic and participatory democracy: Leverage, leadership, and legitimacy in Israeli civil society. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,39(3), 429–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ospina, S., Diaz, W., & O’Sullivan, J. F. (2002). Negotiating accountability: Managerial lessons from identity-based nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quaterly,31(1), 5–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ossewaarde, R., Nijhof, A., & Heyse, L. (2008). Dynamics of NGO legitimacy: How organising betrays core missions of INGOs. Public Administration and Development: The International Journal of Management Research and Practice,28(1), 42–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pallas, C. L., Gethings, D., & Harris, M. (2015). Do the right thing: The impact of INGO legitimacy standards on stakeholder input. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,26(4), 1261–1287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pardo, I. (1995). Morals of legitimacy in Naples: Streetwise about legality, semi-legality and crime. European Journal of Sociology,36(1), 44–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Díaz, V. (2002). From civil war to civil society: Social capital in Spain from the 1930s to the1990s. In R. Putnam (Ed.), Democracies in flux. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Díaz, V. (2014). Civil society: A multi-layered concept. Current Sociology Review,62(6), 812–830.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pilgrim, S., & Harvey, M. (2010). Battles over biofuels in Europe: NGOs and the politics of markets. Sociological Research Online,15(3), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popielarz, P. A. (2018). Moral dividends: Freemasonry and finance capitalism in early-nineteenth-century America. Business History,60(5), 655–676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popplewell, R. (2018). Civil society, legitimacy and political space: Why some organisations are more vulnerable to restrictions than others in violent and divided contexts. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,29(2), 388–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pousadela, I. (2016). Social mobilization and political representation: The women’s movement’s struggle for legal abortion in Uruguay. Official Journal of the International Society for Third-Sector Research,27(1), 125–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puljek-Shank, R. (2018). Civic agency in governance: The role of legitimacy with citizens versus donors. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,29(4), 870–883.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J. (1991). The possibilities of accountability. Accounting, Organizations and Society,16(4), 355–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenblum, N. L., Post, R. C., & Post, R. (Eds.). (2002). Civil society and government. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubenstein, J. (2007). Accountability in an unequal world. The Journal of Politics,69(3), 616–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salamon, L. M., & Anheier, H. K. (1992). In search of the non-profit sector II: The problem of classification. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,3(3), 267–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salamon, L. M., & Anheier, H. K. (1998a). The third route: Government–nonprofit collaboration in Germany and the United States. In E. S. Clemens (Ed.), Private action and the public good (pp. 151–176). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salamon, L. M., & Anheier, H. K. (1998b). Social origins of civil society: Explaining the nonprofit sector cross-nationally. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,9(3), 213–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salamon, L., Sokolowski, W., & List, R. (2003). Global civil society: An overview. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Center for Civil Society Studies, Institute for Policy Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlesinger, M., Mitchell, S., & Gray, B. H. (2004). Restoring public legitimacy to the nonprofit sector: A survey experiment using descriptions of nonprofit ownership. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,33(4), 673–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silber, I. (1998). Modern philanthropy: Reassessing the viability of a Maussian perspective. In W. James, M. Mauss, & N. J. Allen (Eds.), Marcel Mauss: A centenary tribute (Vol. 1). Oxford, New York: Berghahn Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silber, I. F. (2001). The gift-relationship in an era of ‘loose’ solidarities. In E. Ben-Rafael (Ed.), Identity, culture and globalization. The Annals of the International Sociology Institute (n.s.), Vol. 8. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, pp. 384–400.

  • Silber, I. F. (2011). Emotions as regime of justification? The case of civic anger. European Journal of Social Theory,14(3), 301–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silber, I. F. (2013). Neither Mauss, nor Veyne: Peter Brown’s interpretative path to the gift. In M. Satlow (Ed.), The gift in antiquity. Studies in the ancient world: Comparative histories. London: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 202–220.

  • Silber, I. F. (2014). Boltanski and the gift: Beyond love, beyond suspicion…? In S. Susen & B.S. Turner (Eds.), The spirit of Luc Boltanski: Essays in thePragmatic Sociology of Critique” (pp. 485–500). London, New York: Anthem Press.

  • Silver, I. (1997). Constructing “Social Change” through philanthropy: Boundary framing and the articulation of vocabularies of motives for social movement participation. Sociological Inquiry,67(4), 488–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silver, I. (1998). Buying an activist identity: Reproducing class through social movement philanthropy. Sociological Perspectives,41(2), 303–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silver, I. (2001). Strategically legitimizing philanthropists’ identity claims: Community organizations as key players in the making of corporate social responsibility. Sociological Perspectives,44(2), 233–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair, A. (1995). The chameleon of accountability: Forms and discourses. Accounting, Organizations and Society,20(2–3), 219–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suárez, D. F. (2012). Grant making as advocacy: The emergence of social justice philanthropy. Nonprofit Management and Leadership,22(3), 259–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. The Academy of Management Review,20(3), 571–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suddaby, R., Bitektine, A., & Haack, P. (2017). Legitimacy. Academy of Management Annals,11(1), 451–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suráez, D., & Gugerty, M. (2016). Funding civil society? Bilateral government support for development NGOs. Official Journal of the International Society for Third-Sector Research,27(6), 2617–2640.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, M., & Warburton, D. (2003). Legitimacy and the role of UK third sector organizations in the policy process. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,14(3), 321–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, E. T., & McCarthy, J. D. (2010). Legitimacy, strategy, and resources in the survival of community-based organizations. Social Problems,57(3), 315–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walton, O. E., Davies, T., Thrandardottir, E., & Keating, V. C. (2016). Understanding contemporary challenges to INGO legitimacy: Integrating top-down and bottom-up perspectives. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,27(6), 2764–2786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wen, Z., & Chong, A. (2014). Legitimate deficit: Competitive bidding in a residual and semi-democratic welfare society. Official Journal of the International Society for Third-Sector Research,25(5), 1214–1234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, H., & Ye, S. (2018). Legitimacy, worthiness, and social network: An empirical study of the key factors influencing crowdfunding outcomes for nonprofit projects. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-018-0004-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, J., Ye, S., & Liu, Y. (2018). Legitimacy, board involvement, and resource competitiveness: Drivers of NGO revenue diversification. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,29(6), 1176–1189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmermann, A., & Favell, A. (2011). Governmentality, political field or public sphere? Theoretical alternatives in the political sociology of the EU. European Journal of Social Theory,14(4), 489–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Liv Egholm.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Authors share co-first authorship; all authors contributed equally to this publication.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Egholm, L., Heyse, L. & Mourey, D. Civil Society Organizations: the Site of Legitimizing the Common Good—a Literature Review. Voluntas 31, 1–18 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-019-00171-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-019-00171-y

Keywords

Navigation