Civil Society

Challenges for Civil Society

An Address by Susan V. Berresford to the City Club of Cleveland, Cleveland, Ohio

Since the trustees of the Ford Foundation asked me to become the Foundation's next President in 1996, I have given much thought to the role of philanthropy in a rapidly changing world—a world altered by technology, demographics, economic and political reorganization, and changing values. During this period of reflection I met with individuals from a variety of disciplines and countries who generously shared their knowledge and ideas with me.

First, I want to tell you what I learned from these consultations, in particular what I came to believe is special about this point in time and the challenges we face. Second, I will make some comments about what I believe are four important opportunities for us all in this period, and for the Ford Foundation in particular.

Most people I spoke with believed their societies are experiencing a profound crisis of confidence and certainty.

I will briefly mention some of the elements that seem so troubling to people.

First, there is a loss of confidence in what used to be commonly held beliefs, coupled with a growing pessimism. Ideas such as: "science can solve our problems," "poverty can be eliminated," "the end of the cold war means peace," and "democracy brings clear benefits to all," no longer command general acceptance. In fact, what used to be unthinkable concepts such as "writing off the cities," "losing a generation," "letting 'them' kill each other," and "poverty can't be reduced" now sound reasonable to many people. One hears these ideas spoken very naturally. It would seem that many people believe there are powerful and negative economic, political, and social forces beyond their control.

A second set of doubts strikes at core beliefs about civility and opportunity. As conflicts between religions increase, many think it unlikely that religion can supply the moral base on which to build civility and common culture. Others doubt our individual and political will to make the necessary changes in attitudes and institutions that will open opportunity to larger numbers of marginalized people. As a result, they expect increasing social strife.

A third area of concern is technology, which is bringing unsettling effects even as it accomplishes miracles. Over and over, men and women noted that advancing technology is leaving large numbers of people behind, people who will be unable to get good jobs or the skills required by a changing economy. They also noted that technology is creating a magnetic new culture. But many expressed concern that this new culture fails to provide personal strength, create satisfying identity, and generate deep knowledge.

Finally, many with whom I spoke were intensely worried about challenges to their personal authority, identity, and values. They are uneasy about the implications of changes in men's and women's roles, and the vulnerability and changing shape of families. They sense that changes in men's and women's roles may be among the most profound developments of our century. They may not resist these changes but they are confused and concerned about their long-term effects. They worry about cultural changes, too, and communities' failures to protect valued traditions and institutions. So they mourn the loss of anchors they thought they could underpin stable communities.

The overwhelming impression I had from my many discussions was that countries around the world, even the most successful ones, are in the throes of deep changes that are only partially understood and potentially dangerous.

We must address this uncertainty and be alert to its dangers. I see two particularly important dangers: First, too often when people are pessimistic and lose confidence, they withdraw from the effort to build a better life and community. When that happens, society loses their talent and energy. Second, in withdrawing they often stop thinking for themselves and hand their freedom to others offering certainty. That certainty often rests on simplistic answers, incorrect solutions, and even scapegoats. We ought to worry when people withdraw from the struggle to build community and embrace ugly stereotypes. They cause harm to others and fail to address the real sources of our problems.

To avoid these outcomes, we should:

• Explore the sources of uncertainty that trouble people and challenge the stereotypes that are embedded in simplistic answers.
• Build processes and institutions that draw people at all levels into the most promising efforts to improve human well-being.

What can foundations do? As many of you know, foundations are a small sub-category among a larger field of nonprofit organizations. Traditionally, some foundations have done charitable work such as feeding the hungry—in other words, addressing immediate needs. Others have tried to eliminate the root causes of problems with longer-term developmental strategies. Many foundations blend these charitable and developmental roles.

From its earliest days, the Ford Foundation has spent grant funds on efforts to get at root causes of problems. One of the Foundation's charter goals was to "advance human welfare." The Foundation's resources have, from the beginning, been applied to problems of poverty, democratic values, education, human and intergroup behavior, and peace between nations. As we approach the 21st century, and consider the challenges and dangers I noted at the outset, we at the Ford Foundation are resetting our course with the same program compass points in mind.

As we do this, I am grateful for the 25 years I have had at the Foundation serving during the presidencies of McGeorge Bundy and Franklin Thomas. Both built on the programmatic traditions Ford had developed through the years in its worldwide work, and both renewed the Foundation's capacity to meet a new generation of problems. Our senior management team intends to follow their example as we design our continuing and new programs.

So where does that lead us? I see four basic program challenges before us.

The first challenge is the uncertainty people express about their ability to create change in the face of seemingly negative and powerful forces. Foundations can respond by helping to project the visions of inspirational individuals involved in the struggle to improve human well-being. Trustees and staff can ask: Where are the visionary voices that will stir people to act constructively rather than to withdraw? And without doubt we will find people with varying motives. Some will act out of a powerful desire for a better life for themselves; some are simply curious about the possibility of finding a new way; others are moved by ethical and spiritual ideals; still others are angry about unfairness and loss of dignity they or others have suffered.

We should support discussions among these various types of people; interviews on popular media; profiles of their histories and beliefs. Some of these visionaries will be well-known, others will be seemingly ordinary people of extraordinary talent, formerly hidden from view. They will be men and women whose ideas go beyond a nostalgic wish to restore the past. We know such people exist but we often need a talent scout to find them and they need a boost and a microphone so others will hear and be moved by them. We should support their voices and, where possible, the activities they inspire.

Such grant making can help restore belief in the capacity of individuals to create change that matters—individuals acting singly and together with courage and principle. It can help us reject the notion of powerlessness and see that the aspirations we hold are held by others. It should also remind us about the interdependency of our futures and the power of alliances based on shared values.

Moving beyond the first challenge—finding voices and visions—the second challenge for the Ford Foundation is to remove the barriers that men and women encounter as they become active in improving their communities and personal situations. We want to be sure that people are free to become involved and to apply their energy and talent. At the most fundamental level, this means working to reduce conflicts in and among nations so that people are safe and able to think beyond security concerns. With safety assured, it means supporting people who want to establish, revive, or strengthen democratic processes and opportunities for civic participation.

Peace and democratic practice—tall orders and far beyond the reach of a single foundation or even a group of foundations. So we must choose leverage points that promise significant results.

We think that Ford's portfolio already contains work on high-leverage areas and we will continue to work on those subjects. Let me mention just a few.

• We will continue to strengthen the peacekeeping and peacemaking capacities of intergovernmental bodies such as the United Nations and regional associations of nations. No multilateral institutions are perfect. Most are very new and all can be improved as their leaders refine institutional roles and practices. We can support analysis, training, and experimentation to guide peacemaking and peacekeeping.
• Ford will also continue to support basic principles of fairness, the rule of law, rights and responsibilities in all societies where we work. Without such principles and adherence to them, it can be difficult and dangerous for men and women to pursue reforms or new opportunities. In recent decades, advocates for international human rights, women's rights, minority civil rights, and immigrants' rights have helped to establish standards of fairness that are increasingly recognized worldwide. Their efforts have reduced conflict and removed barriers, thereby freeing huge wellsprings of talent. We see this powerfully illustrated in South Africa and Eastern Europe. The advocates and the systems they are developing deserve ongoing assistance as we all struggle to remove barriers that remain.
• A third continuing line of work involves support for activities that reinforce strong governmental performance. Good government makes a difference in people's lives and helps give them confidence to participate in basic institutions of society. The Ford Foundation's Innovations in American Government Awards, which began in the United States 10 years ago and have been adapted in the Philippines and Brazil, will continue to spotlight and reward examples of governmental excellence and problem solving. Ford will also continue to support broad-ranging policy analysis and professional training for government service.

What are some of the areas we are expanding or new areas related to peace and democratic values?

• Ford is beginning to support people who are developing new social indicators—simple, standardized measures of human and community well-being. Interest in new social indicators has grown out of people saying, "Why does my situation seem bad when all the economic indicators are good?" Societies should consider progress beyond gross economic performance. They should measure what they value in community, family, and social life in order to build support for public and private investment in those areas. Good social indicators will be particularly important as societies begin to consider the implications of very profound changes in men's and women's roles. Thirty years ago, there was an unsuccessful effort to create new social indicators but the people working on this today seem to have good ideas as well as better technology for a new approach. We think this can be a high-leverage area if it is successful.
• A second area of expansion is closely connected to the first. We are increasing support for research and public dialogues about key aspects of the "common good." We hope to keep the public spotlight on such issues as:
• Who falls behind as others prosper in modern economies?
• How do both men and women find time beyond work for essential family and community roles?
• How should civil-military relations be managed in democracies?
• And finally, we are making a bigger bet on expanding the various voluntary and nonprofit sectors that are emerging worldwide. The nonprofit, or "third sector," gives people organizations and networks to struggle with problems that concern them: Russian men and women working on the environment, U.S. communities organizing to prevent neighborhood violence, Vietnamese women concerned about economic opportunity, and so on. Participation in the third sector also helps people learn about realistic time frames and the complexities of change processes. And since philanthropy is key to support of the third sector, many Ford offices worldwide will be doing new work to create and strengthen new foundations.

So: Beyond visions and voices, beyond democratic values and participatory systems, the third major challenge before us all is to directly address the despair people voice about our ability to reduce poverty. Huge advances in poverty reduction have occurred within recent history. We too often forget that. And we fail to see good bets for another generation of advances that are before us. So, in addition to focusing on broad questions of trade and economic policy, foundations can also help bring some of the less well-known poverty-reduction strategies to public attention, particularly strategies that build human dignity and self sufficiency.

In this connection:

• Ford will continue to support efforts to improve reproductive health—a key aspect of human dignity as well as a crucial factor in men's and women's abilities to contribute to personal and national development. We are fortunate that the Cairo Conference on Population and Human Development in 1994 endorsed the concept of reproductive health, moving beyond population control, and Ford will now try to help put the new concepts to work, including new investments in research on human sexuality.
• Ford will also continue to fund community development corporations working to revitalize low-income rural and urban areas. You know these nonprofit development corporations in Cleveland. They are directed by local leaders; they re-establish safe neighborhoods with sound housing and core services. In many parts of the world, community development corporations are just emerging; a support system for them ought to be built. In the United States, they are a robust national resource ready for increasing public investment. We hope to be helpful in both ways.

We will pursue two newer lines of poverty-reduction work that we see as complements to community and sustainable development.

• One involves building banking institutions and credit systems that give priority to asset building for low-income communities. We believe there is a special niche for development banks, specialized loan funds, and credit unions. In poor communities, these banks can help stimulate individual asset accumulation for education, for home ownership, or for business development. They can also help build bridges between low-income community institutions and commercial banks. We believe the emerging field called "development finance" is a key missing piece in future poverty-reduction work around the world but, like community development 20 years ago, it must be built into a fully professional, worldwide field.
• The second new strategy involves Ford's working with for-profit corporations to develop products that help reduce poverty and disadvantage. For example, we are working with financial services corporations to develop, and share the risks of, housing loans that would benefit very low-income people.
  
  We are exploring corporate purchasing and outsourcing functions for their possible contributions to community economic development in poor areas. In other words, we believe that beyond corporate philanthropy, corporate for-profit activity can have direct community development benefits. Ford staff will work to create more such models and make them better known.

Finally, beyond vision, beyond democratic values, beyond poverty reduction, a fourth major challenge springs from the uncertainties people expressed about identity, technology, and learning. How, in this fast-changing world can we ensure that men and women obtain knowledge that deepens their understanding of the past and prepares them for the future? All societies must address this continuing challenge, however well-developed their educational and cultural institutions may be. All must worry about supporting their nation's scholarly, artistic, and intellectual resources. And most societies now ask as well, how can we build successful pluralistic communities that allow satisfying personal identities and at the same time create solidarity and shared values.

In response to these concerns, Ford will continue to support such work as:

• Strengthening mainstream educational systems at the K-12 and college and university levels.
• New artistic creativity—especially as it involves artistic collaboration between the United States and countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America.
• Funding for scholarship that helps illuminate poorly understood histories and artistic and literary contributions such as those of women and disadvantaged minorities.

Three newer lines of work will get under way once we have hired new staff.

• The first will support people and institutions that are using new technology and media systems to deliver educational and cultural services to broad publics. For example, we are currently exploring whether the United States could have a national T.V. literacy channel available everywhere 24 hours a day. Given the spectacular reach and flexibility of modern media systems, these benefits should be possible, but they will not occur without special efforts. We hope to support the most promising systems of this kind and the policies that support them.
• The second new field will involve support for people building knowledge and public understanding of the role of belief systems and spiritual institutions in civic life. For example, we should try to understand and support the secular role of black churches. We should try to understand the varieties of Muslim traditions and cultures and their relation to civic life. We should try to understand what we can learn from communitarian belief systems and those that revere land and water and other natural resources.
  
  And we can always benefit from having a strong ethical perspective in our public policy dialogues. Belief systems have value in part because they distill and pass along principles that build human relationships and strong communities. So they have an important connection to civil society's secular concerns. We hope to do interesting new work in this area.
• Finally, we expect to do new work on civic education, helping to build curriculum and experiential service—learning that challenges stereotypes that divide us and learning that builds knowledge of our shared values. In the United States we must broaden understanding of the concepts articulated in our core documents—the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. The concepts each nation holds at its core require continual discussion and dialogue. They are not naturally passed along from generation to generation and their meaning is rarely static. We need new curricula and learning programs to teach basic national values in new ways.
• We also need service opportunities for young people to spend time learning about others of their age who come from different backgrounds. We must offer young people a chance to move beyond their immediate surroundings. In the United States this will mean support for national and community service programs. In other countries it might take other forms.

So, four challenges set the Ford Foundation's course for the next period:

• Finding visionary voices to overcome pessimism and passivity.
• Removing barriers so men and women can participate in the struggle to build a better life.
• Bringing less recognized poverty-alleviation strategies to public attention and enlarging their scope.
• Building institutions that convey knowledge, values, and identity in pluralistic societies.

We believe these are crucial problems of our age, all around the world, wherever we work. We believe that promising leads are before us, and that foundations, with their freedom from partisan politics and bottom-line pressures, are well suited to follow these leads. The trial and error, analysis, and patient capacity building foundations can do, can be important to innovation and progress. So we will devote a substantial share of our funds to these matters.

We also recognize the serendipity and messiness of life. We know some of what we have chosen will not prove strong in the end and we know that we will find people with ideas we have not yet thought of. So Ford will also continue to hold aside a substantial unallocated reserve for the unexpected.

In the end, Ford's very general charter gives its leaders broad choice about the problems we put on our agenda. As I hope I have made clear, we have again chosen to work on complex problems of international conflict, of human suffering and achievement. From its earliest days that was the Ford tradition and we are proud to maintain it, however difficult our work may be and however challenging it will be to measure progress.

Our confidence about our ability to make a difference on this rough terrain springs largely from our confidence in the abilities of diverse people who come to us with their ideas. We see ourselves as a resource for innovative people and institutions worldwide. Talent abounds in the world; most people want to live better lives and have better communities; and many are ready to struggle for that. Foundations are one resource for these people. We are privileged to know and support these courageous people and the institutions they create.

Although this is a time of danger and uncertainty, I believe it can also be a time of great opportunity. New alliances of for-profit and nonprofit institutions can be built. New partnerships between government and nonprofits can emerge. And networks to spread results and learning worldwide are now before us thanks to new technology. Foundations can help these things happen. It is our right in free societies and I think it is our responsibility as well.