Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Changing Space for NGOs: Civil Society in Authoritarian and Hybrid Regimes

  • Research Papers
  • Published:
VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this introductory essay to the special issue on civil society in authoritarian and hybrid regimes, we review core themes in the growing literature on shrinking or closing space for civil society. We discuss the role of civil society organizations (CSOs) as agents of democratization and note the emergence of dual, at times apparently conflicting policy postures within authoritarian regimes (restriction and repression for some CSOs vs. financial support and opportunities for collaboration for others). We posit that different conceptual perspectives applied to civil society can help account for the duality of authoritarian postures and examine repercussions for three key subgroups of CSOs: claims-making (or advocacy) NGOs, nonprofit service providers and regime-loyal NGOs supporting often populist and nationalist discourses.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aasland, A., Berg-Nordlie, M., & Bogdanova, E. (2016). Encouraged but controlled: governance networks in Russian regions. East European Politics, 32(2), 148–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aasland, A., Kropp, S., & Meylakhs, A. Y. (2020). Between collaboration and subordination: State and non-state actors in Russian anti-drug policy. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-019-00158-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Åberg, P. (2015). Civil society and biopolitics in contemporary Russia: The case of Russian “Daddy-Schools”. Foucault Studies, 20, 76–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adam, T. (2016). Philanthropy, civil society, and the state in German history, 1815–1989. Suffolk: Boydell & Brewer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adam, T. (2020). The genesis and proliferation of civil society in democracy and monarchy: A historical comparison of America and Prussia in the nineteenth century. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-019-00149-w.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, J. (Ed.). (1998). Real civil societies. Dilemmas of institutionalization. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Almond, G., & Verba, S. (1963). The civic culture. Political attitudes and democracy in five nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alscher, M., Priller, E., Ratka, S., & Strachwitz, R. G. (2017). The space for civil society: Shrinking? Growing? Changing? (Opuscula #104). Berlin: Maecenata Institut.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anheier, H. (2003). Movement development and organizational networks: The role of ‘single members’ in the German Nazi Party, 1925–30. In D. McAdam & M. Diani (Eds.), Social movements and networks: Relational approaches to collective action (pp. 49–74). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anheier, H. K., Lang, M., & Toepler, S. (2019). Civil society in times of change: shrinking, changing and expanding spaces and the need for new regulatory approaches. Economics: The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal, 13(2019-8), 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anheier, H. K., Lang, M., & Toepler, S. (2020). Comparative nonprofit sector research: A critical assessment. In W. Powell & P. Bromley (Eds.), The nonprofit sector: A research handbook (3rd ed., pp. 648–676). Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anheier, H. K., & Toepler, S. (2019). Policy neglect: The true challenge to the nonprofit sector. Nonprofit Policy Forum, 10, 4. https://doi.org/10.1515/npf-2019-0041.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belokurova, E. (2010). Civil society discourses in Russia: The influence of the European Union and the role of EU–Russia cooperation. European Integration, 32(5), 457–474.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benevolenski, V., & Toepler, S. (2017). Modernising social service delivery in Russia: Evolving government support for non-profit organisations. Development in Practice, 27(1), 64–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman, S. (1997). Civil society and the collapse of the Weimar Republic. World Politics, 49(3), 401–429.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogdanova, E., Cook, L., & Kulmala, M. (2018). The carrot or the stick? Constraints and opportunities of Russia’s CSO Policy. Europe-Asia Studies, 70(4), 501–513.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bromley, P., Schofer, E., & Longhofer, W. (2019). Contentions over world culture: The rise of legal restrictions on foreign funding to NGOs, 1994–2015. Social Forces. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soz138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carothers, T. (2002). The end of the transition paradigm. Journal of Democracy, 13(1), 5–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carothers, T., & Brechenmacher, S. (2014). Closing space: Democracy and human rights support under fire. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavatorta, F. (2013). Civil society activism under authoritarian rule. A comparative perspective. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, A., Chu, Y., & Welsh, B. (2013). Southeast Asia: Sources of regime support. Journal of Democracy, 24(2), 150–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheskin, A., & March, L. (2015). State–society relations in contemporary Russia: New forms of political and social contention. East European Politics, 31(3), 261–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, D., & Weinstein, J. M. (2013). Defunding dissent: Restrictions on aid to NGOs. Journal of Democracy, 24(2), 77–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J., & Arato, A. (1992). Civil society and political theory (pp. 255–298). New Baskerville: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Croissant, A., & Merkel, W. (2004). Introduction: Democratization in the early twenty-first century. Democratization, 11(5), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeMattee, A. J. (2019). Covenants, constitutions, and distinct law types: Investigating governments’ restrictions on CSOs using an institutional approach. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 30, 1229–1255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deng, G. (2010). The Hidden Rules Governing China's Unregistered NGOs: Management and Consequences. China Review, 10(1), 183–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, L. (1994). Rethinking civil society. Toward democratic consolidation. Journal of Democracy, 5(3), 4–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, J. L. (2016). Civil society as ideology in the Middle East: A critical perspective. British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 43(3), 403–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dupuy, K., & Prakash, A. (2020). Global backlash against foreign funding to domestic nongovernmental organizations. In W. Powell & P. Bromley (Eds.), The nonprofit sector: A research handbook (3rd ed., pp. 618–630). Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dupuy, K., Ron, J., & Prakash, A. (2016). Hands off my regime! Governments’ restrictions on foreign aid to non-governmental organizations in poor and middle-income countries. World Development, 84, 299–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, M. (2004). Civil Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.

  • Edwards, M., Hulme, D., & Wallace, T. (1999). NGOs in a global future: Marrying local delivery to worldwide leverage. Public Administration and Development, 19(2), 117–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falkenhain, M. (2020). Dividing lines: Understanding the creation and replication of fragmentations among NGOs in hybrid regimes. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-019-00185-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, J. (2013). Importing democracy: The role of NGOs in South Africa, Tajikistan, & Argentina. Washington, DC: Kettering Foundation Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flikke, G. (2016). Resurgent authoritarianism: The case of Russia’s new NGO legislation. Post-Soviet Affairs, 32(2), 103–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flikke, G. (2018). Conflicting opportunities or patronal politics? Restrictive NGO legislation in Russia 2012–2015. Europe-Asia Studies, 70(4), 564–590.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fröhlich, C., & Skokova, Y. (2020). Two for one: Public welfare and regime legitimacy through state funding for CSOs in Russia. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-020-00203-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerschewski, J. (2013). The three pillars of stability: Legitimation, repression, and co-optation in autocratic regimes. Democratization, 20(1), 13–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giersdorf, S., & Croissant, A. (2011). Civil society and competitive authoritarianism in Malaysia. Journal of Civil Society, 7(1), 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks of Antonio Gramsci. New York: International Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawthorne, A. (2004). Middle eastern democracy: Is civil society the answer. Carnegie Papers: Middle East Series, 44, 3–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrold, C. E. (2016). NGO policy in pre-and post-Mubarak Egypt: Effects on NGOs’ roles in democracy promotion. Nonprofit Policy Forum, 7(2), 189–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrold, C., & Atia, M. (2016). Competing rather than collaborating: Egyptian nongovernmental organizations in Turbulence. Nonprofit Policy Forum, 7(3), 389–407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heurlin, C. (2010). Governing civil society: The political logic of NGO–state relations under dictatorship. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 21(2), 220–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, C. (2010). Beyond civil society: An organizational perspective on state-NGO relations in the People’s Republic of China. Journal of Civil Society, 6(3), 259–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, M., & Guo, C. (2016). Fundraising policy reform and its impact on nonprofits in China: A view from the trenches. Nonprofit Policy Forum, 7(2), 213–236.

    Google Scholar 

  • ICNL. (2018). Effective donor responses to the challenge of closing civic space. Retrieved February 20, 2020 from https://www.icnl.org/post/report/effective-donor-responses.

  • Ishkanian, A. (2007). Democracy promotion and civil society. Global civil society 2007/8: Communicative power and democracy, (pp. 58–85).

  • Jakobson, L., Toepler, S., & Mersianova, I. (2018). Foundations in Russia: Evolving approaches to philanthropy. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(13), 1844–1868.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jing, Y., & Hu, Y. (2017). From service contracting to collaborative governance: Evolution of government-nonprofit relations. Public Administration and Development, 37, 191–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaldor, M., & Kostovicova, D. (2008). Global civil society and illiberal regimes. In M. Albrow, et al. (Eds.), Global civil society 2007/8: Communicative power and democracy (pp. 86–113). Los Angeles: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaldor, M., & Muro, D. (2003). Religious and nationalist militant groups. In M. Kaldor, H. Anheier, & M. Glasius (Eds.), Global civil society 2003. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang, Y. (2019). What does China’s twin-pillared NGO funding game entail? Growing diversity and increasing isomorphism. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 30(3), 499–515.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, H. (2010). Civil society theory: Gramsci. In H. K. Anheier & S. Toepler (Eds.), International encyclopedia of civil society. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keane, J. (2005). Eleven theses on markets and civil society. Journal of Civil Society, 1(1), 25–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koshar, R. (1987). From Stammtisch to party: Nazi joiners and the contradictions of grass roots fascism in Weimar Germany. The Journal of Modern History, 59(1), 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, R. M. (1981). Voluntary agencies in the welfare state. Univ of California Press.

  • Kulmala, M. (2016). Post-Soviet “Political”? “Social” and “Political” in the work of Russian socially oriented CSOs. Demokratizatsiya, 24(2), 199–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuti, É., & Marschall, M. (forthcoming). Global civil society in retreat: Is it Cyclical or Existential? In M. Hölscher, R. List, A. Ruser & S. Toepler (Eds.), Charting global challenges in civil society, the nonprofit sector, and culture. New York: Springer.

  • Lewis, D. (2013). Civil society and the authoritarian state: Cooperation, contestation and discourse. Journal of Civil Society, 9(3), 325–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, D. (2014). Non-governmental organizations, management and development. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liverani, A. (2008). Civil society in Algeria. The political functions of associational life. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ljubownikow, S., Crotty, J., & Rodgers, P. W. (2013). The state and civil society in Post-Soviet Russia: The development of a Russian-style civil society. Progress in Development Studies, 13(2), 153–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorch, J., & Bunk, B. (2017). Using civil society as an authoritarian legitimation strategy: Algeria and Mozambique in comparative perspective. Democratization, 24(6), 987–1005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mati, J. M. (2020). Civil society in ‘politics’ and ‘development’ in African Hybrid Regimes: The Kenyan Case. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-020-00211-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moser, E., & Skripchenko, A. (2018). Russian NGOs and their struggle for legitimacy in the face of the ‘foreign agents’ law: Surviving in small ecologies. Europe-Asia Studies, 70(4), 591–614.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mosley, J., Weiner-Davis, T., & Anasti, T. (2020). Advocacy and lobbying. In H. K. Anheier & S. Toepler (Eds.), The Routledge companion to nonprofit management (pp. 335–348). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Obuch, K. (2017). Civil society organizations in the hybrid regime of Nicaragua: Challenging or maintaining the status Quo?. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, G., & Schmitter, P. (1986). Transitions from authoritarian rule. Prospects for democracy. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Østbø, J. (2017). Securitizing ‘‘spiritual-moral values’’ in Russia. Post-Soviet Affairs, 33(3), 200–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poppe, A. E., & Wolff, J. (2017). The contested spaces of civil society in a plural world: norm contestation in the debate about restrictions on international civil society support. Contemporary Politics, 23(4), 469–488.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quigley, K. F. (1997). For democracy’s sake: Foundations and democracy assistance in Central Europe. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richter, J. (2009). The ministry of civil society? The public chambers in the regions. Problems of Post-Communism, 56(6), 7–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rupnik, J. (2016). The specter haunting Europe: Surging illiberalism in the east. Journal of Democracy, 27(4), 77–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutzen, D. (2006). The global associational counter-revolution. Alliance Magazine. Retrieved February 20, 2020, from www.alliancemagazine.org/article/the-associational-counter-revolution/.

  • Rutzen, D. (2015). Civil society under assault. Journal of Democracy, 26(4), 28–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rymsza, M., & Zimmer, A. (2004). Embeddedness of nonprofit organizations: Government-nonprofit relationships. In Future of civil society (pp. 169–-197). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden.

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Salamon, L., Benevolenski, V., & Jakobson, L. (2015). Penetrating the dual realities of government–nonprofit relations in Russia. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 26(6), 2178–2214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salamon, L., & Toepler, S. (2015). Government-nonprofit cooperation: Anomaly or necessity? VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 26(6), 2155–2177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seibel, W. (1989). The function of mellow weakness: Nonprofit organizations as problem nonsolvers in Germany. In E. James (Ed.), The nonprofit sector in international perspective (pp. 177–192). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selznick, P. (1949). TVA and the grass roots: A study in the sociology of formal organization. Univ of California Press.

  • Sending, O., & Neumann, I. (2006). Governance to governmentality: Analyzing NGOs, states, and power. International Studies Quarterly, 50(3), 651–672.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shieh, S., & Deng, G. (2011). An emerging civil society: The impact of the 2008 Sichuan earthquake on grass-roots associations in China. The China Journal, 65, 181–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sidel, M. (2019). Managing the foreign: The Drive to securitize foreign nonprofit and foundation management in China. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 30(4), 664–677.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simsa, R. (2019). Civil society capture by early stage autocrats in well-developed democracies—The case of Austria. Nonprofit Policy Forum, 10, 3. https://doi.org/10.1515/npf-2019-0029.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skokova, Y., Pape, U., & Krasnopolskaya, I. (2018). The non-profit sector in today’s Russia: between confrontation and co-optation. Europe-Asia Studies, 70(4), 1–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, S. R., & Lipsky, M. (1993). Nonprofits for hire. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spires, A. J. (2011). Contingent symbiosis and civil society in an authoritarian state: Understanding the survival of China’s grassroots NGOs. American Journal of Sociology, 117(1), 1–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suárez, D. F. (2011). Collaboration and professionalization: The contours of public sector funding for nonprofit organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(2), 307–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundstrom, L. M. (2006). Funding civil society: Foreign assistance and NGO development in Russia. Stanford University Press.

  • Sundstrom, L. M. (2011). Commentary on Jakobson and Sanovich: What does this really mean for Russian politics and society? Journal of Civil Society, 7(2), 229–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swiney, C. (2019). The counter-associational revolution: The rise, spread & contagion of restrictive civil society laws in the world’s strongest democratic states. Fordham International Law Journal, 43(2), 399–456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarasenko, A. (2018). Russian non-profit organisations in service delivery: Neoliberal and statist social policy principles intertwined. Europe-Asia Studies, 70(4), 514–530.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teets, J. C. (2014). Civil society under authoritarianism: The China model. Cambridge.: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilly, C. (2008). Contentious performances. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toepler, S. (2018). Government funding policies. In B. Seaman & D. Young (Eds.), Handbook of research on nonprofit economics and management (2nd ed., pp. 409–427). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toepler, S., & Fröhlich, C. (2020). Advocacy in authoritarian contexts: The case of disability NGOs in Russia. International Journal of Sociology and Social policy. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSSP-03-2020-0077.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toepler, S., Pape, U., & Benevolenski, V. (2019). Subnational variations in government-nonprofit relations: A comparative analysis of regional differences within Russia. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 22(1), 47–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsygankov, A. (2016). Crafting the state-civilization Vladimir Putin’s turn to distinct values. Problems of Post-Communism, 63(3), 146–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tysiachniouk, M., Tulaeva, S., & Henry, L. A. (2018). Civil society under the law ‘on foreign agents’: NGO strategies and network transformation. Europe-Asia Studies, 70(4), 615–637.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Rooy, A. (2013). Civil society as idea: An analytical hatstand? In A. Van Rooy (Ed.), Civil society and the aid industry (pp. 24–48). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viterna, J., Clough, E., & Clarke, K. (2015). Reclaiming the “third sector” from “civil society”: A new agenda for development studies. Sociology of Development, 1(1), 173–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Q., & Kang, X. (2018). China’s Nonprofit Policymaking in the New Millennium. In Nonprofit policy forum (Vol. 9, No. 1).

  • Wang, W., & Snape, H. (2018). Government service purchasing from social organizations in China: An overview of the development of a powerful trend. In Nonprofit policy forum, (Vol. 9, No. 1).

  • Wang, J., & Wang, Q. (2018). Social autonomy and political integration: Two policy approaches to the government-nonprofit relationship since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China. In Nonprofit policy forum (Vol. 9, No. 1).

  • Wiktorowicz, Q. (2000). Civil society as social control: State power in Jordan. Comparative Politics, 33(1), 43–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkin, P. (2018). The rise of ‘illiberal’democracy: The orbánization of Hungarian political culture. Journal of World-Systems Research, 24(1), 5–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wischermann, J., Bunk, B., Köllner, P., & Lorch, J. (2018). Do associations support authoritarian rule? Evidence from Algeria, Mozambique, and Vietnam. Journal of Civil Society, 14(2), 95–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wischermann, J., Cuong, B., & Phuong, D. (2016). Vietnamese civic organisations: Supporters of or obstacles to further democratisation? Results from an empirical survey. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 35(2), 57–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wnuk-Lipinsky, E. (2009). Civil society and democratization. In R. Dalton, et al. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political behavior pp 675-692. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, F., & Chan, K.-M. (2012). Graduated control and beyond: The evolving government-NGO relations. China Perspectives, 3(91), 9–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu, J., & Chen, K. (2018). Does nonprofit marketization facilitate or inhibit the development of civil society? A comparative study of China and the USA. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 29, 925–937.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zakaria, F. (1997). The rise of illiberal democracy. Foreign Affairs, 76(6), 22–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Y. (2015). Dependent interdependence: The complicated dance of government-nonprofit relations in China. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 27(6), 2968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, R., Wu, Z., & Tao, C. (2016). Understanding service contracting and its impact on NGO development in China. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 27(5), 2229–2251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zinecker, H. (2011). Civil society in developing countries. Conceptual considerations. Journal of Conflictology, 2(1), 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful for comments and feedback by Éva Kuti, Miklós Marschall, Anthony deMattee, Rupert Graf Strachwitz and the anonymous reviewers. All errors of fact and judgment remain ours. This article also greatly benefited from excellent research assistance provided by Danielle Melton, Joshua Keruski and Jenna Pan through George Mason’s Undergraduate Research Assistance Program, as well as Emily Rogers, MPA, at the graduate level. In part, this work is an output of a research project implemented as part of the Basic Research Programme at the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE University).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Schar School of Policy and Government, George Mason University, Arlington, USA

    Stefan Toepler

  2. Institut für Politikwissenschaft, University of Münster, Münster, Germany

    Annette Zimmer & Katharina Obuch

  3. School of Sociology, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia

    Christian Fröhlich

Authors
  1. Stefan Toepler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Annette Zimmer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christian Fröhlich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Katharina Obuch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefan Toepler.

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.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Toepler, S., Zimmer, A., Fröhlich, C. et al. The Changing Space for NGOs: Civil Society in Authoritarian and Hybrid Regimes. Voluntas 31, 649–662 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-020-00240-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-020-00240-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation