|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Alternative Models of Government-Nonprofit Sector Relations: Theoretical and International Perspectives
Dennis R. Young
Case Western Reserve University
Economic theories of the nonprofit sector suggest several different ways of understanding the relationship between government and private, not-for-profit organizations. In particular, different strands of theory support the alternative views that nonprofits (a) operate independently as supplements to government, (b) work as complements to government in a partnership relationship, or (c) are engaged in an adversarial relationship of mutual accountability with government. A historical review of the United States revealed that all three views have validity and that government-nonprofit sector relations must be understood as a multilayered phenomenon. In this article, the foregoing analysis is extended internationally. The three theoretical perspectives are applied to four countries: the United States, the United Kingdom, Israel, and Japan, in an effort to illuminate nonprofit-government relations in those countries and to assess whether the multilayered approach provides a substantially richer understanding than any one theoretical perspective.
References
- Amenomori, T. (1997). Japan. In L. M. Salamon & H. K. Anheier (Eds.), Defining the nonprofit sector (chap. 8, pp. 188-214). Manchester/New York: Manchester University Press.
- Amenomori, T., & Yamamoto, T. (1998). Introduction. In T. Yamamoto (Ed.), The nonprofit sector in Japan (pp. 1-18). Manchester/New York: Manchester University Press.
- Ben-Ner, A. (1986). Nonprofit organizations: Why do they exist in a market economy? In S. Rose-Ackerman (Ed.), The economics of nonprofit institutions (pp. 94-113). New York: Oxford University Press.
- Bremner, R. H. (1988). American philanthropy (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Buchanan, J. M., & Tullock, G. (1962). The calculus of consent. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
- Coase, R. H. (1988). The firm, the market and the law. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Douglas, J. (1987). Political theories of nonprofit organizations. In W. W. Powell (Ed.), The nonprofit sector: A research handbook (pp. 43-54). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
- Ferris, J. M. (1993). The double-edged sword of social service contracting: Public accountability versus nonprofit autonomy. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 3(4), 363-376.
- Gidron, B. (1992). Aresurgent third sector and its relationship to government in Israel. In B. Gidron, R. M. Kramer, & L. M. Salamon (Eds.), Government and the third sector (pp. 176-195). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
- Gidron, B., & Katz, H. (1998). Defining the nonprofit sector: Israel. In L. M. Salamon & H. K. Anheier (Eds.), Working Papers of the Johns Hopkins Comparative Nonprofit Sector Project (No. 26). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Institute for Policy Studies.
- Gronbjerg, K. A. (1997). Transaction costs in social service contracting: Lessons from the U.S.A. In Perri6&J. Kendall, The contract culture in public services (pp. 99-118). London: Ashgate.
- Hall, P. D. (1994). Historical perspectives on nonprofit organizations. In R. D. Herman and Associates, (Eds.), The Jossey-Bass Handbook of Nonprofit Leadership and Management (pp. 3-43). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
- Hansmann, H. (1980). The role of nonprofit enterprise. Yale Law Journal, 89(3), 835-901.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
- Kendall, J., & Knapp, M. (1997). The United Kingdom. In L. M. Salamon & H. K. Anheier (Eds.), Defining the nonprofit sector (pp. 249-279). Manchester/New York: Manchester University Press.
- Najam, A. (1997). The 3 Cs of NGO-government relations: Confrontation, complementarity, collaboration. Unpublished manuscript, Boston University.
- Niskanen, W. A. (1971). Bureaucracy and representative government. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.
- Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- ONeill, M. (1989). The third America. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
- Powell, W. W., & DiMaggio, P. J. (Eds.). (1991). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Salamon, L. M. (1995). Partners in public service. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
- Smith, S. R., & Lipsky, M. (1993). Nonprofits for hire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Steinberg, R. (1997). Competition in contracted markets. In Perri6&J. Kendall, The contract culture in public services (pp. 161-179). London: Ashgate.
- Taylor, M. (1992). The changing role of the nonprofit sector in Britain: Moving toward the market. In B. Gidron, R. M. Kramer, & L. M. Salamon (Eds.), Government and the third sector (pp. 147-175). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
- Tiebout, C. (1956). A pure theory of public expenditure. Journal of Political Economy, 64, 416-424.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
- Weisbrod, B. A. (1977). The voluntary nonprofit sector. Lexington: D.C. Heath and Company.
- Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and hierarchies. New York: Free Press.
- The Working Group on Government Relations. (1998). Consultative document on the development of a compact between government and the voluntary and community sector. Unpublished manuscript, London.
- Yamamoto, T. (1998). The state and the nonprofit sector in Japan. In T. Yamamoto (Ed.), The nonprofit sector in Japan (pp. 119-144). Manchester/New York: Manchester University Press.
- Yamaoka, Y. (1998). On the history of the nonprofit sector in Japan. In T. Yamamoto (Ed.), The nonprofit sector in Japan (pp. 19-58). Manchester/New York: Manchester University Press.
- Yamauchi, N. (1998, March). The nonprofit sector in the Japanese economy: An overview (SCOPE Working Paper No. 7). Working Papers in Philanthropy. Japan: Graduate University for Advanced Studies.
- Young, D. R. (1983). If not for profit, for what?Lexington: D.C. Heath and Company.
- Young, D. R. (1999). Complementary, supplementary or adversarial: A theoretical and historical examination of government-nonprofit relations in the U.S. In E. T. Boris and C. E. Steurele (Eds.), Government and nonprofit organizations: The challenges of civil society. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, Vol. 29, No. 1,
149-172 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/0899764000291009

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
G. Rosen and E. Razin
The Rise of Gated Communities in Israel: Reflections on Changing Urban Governance in a Neo-liberal Era
Urban Stud,
July 1, 2009;
46(8):
1702 - 1722.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
N. Claiborne, Junqing Liu, H. Vandenburgh, J. Hagen, A. Mera Rodas, J. M. Raunelli Sander, J. G. Adanaque Zapata, and M. J. Zurita Paucar
Northern Peruvian non-governmental organizations: Patterns of interorganizational relationships
International Social Work,
May 1, 2009;
52(3):
327 - 341.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. P. Osborne, G. Jenei, and G. Fabian
`Whispering at the Back Door'?: Local Government -- Voluntary and Community Sector Relationships in Post-accession Hungary
Public Policy and Administration,
October 1, 2008;
23(4):
331 - 350.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. Neal
The Importance of the State: Political Dimensions of a Nonprofit Network in Oaxaca, Mexico
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,
September 1, 2008;
37(3):
492 - 511.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
T. A. Andreassen
Asymmetric Mutuality: User Involvement as a Government--Voluntary Sector Relationship in Norway
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,
June 1, 2008;
37(2):
281 - 299.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
G. Donnelly-Cox and S. McGee
Institutionalizing Support for Nonprofit Management Education: Developing a Case for State Investment
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,
December 1, 2007;
36(4_suppl):
136S - 147S.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. Morse and N. McNamara
Analysing institutional partnerships in development: a contract between equals or a loaded process?
Progress in Development Studies,
October 1, 2006;
6(4):
321 - 336.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|
|