Principle: Granovetter (1973, 1985), Burt (1992) – Emphasizes the importance of relationships and the structure of the networks in which actors (individuals or organizations) are embedded. Access to resources (information, funding, expertise, legitimacy) depends on the position in the network (centrality, bridging between groups – “structural holes”), the type of ties (strong or weak) and the accumulated social capital (trust, norms of reciprocity). Action is “embedded” in these networks.
- Access to funding, particularly international funding, is heavily mediated by networks: knowing the right people, attending the right conferences, being part of the donors’ trusted “circles”.
- The autonomy of an NGO may depend on its ability to diversify its support networks (not depending on a single network of donors) and to mobilize its local networks (community, local authorities, local businesses) to obtain alternative resources (financial or non-financial such as volunteering, premises, etc.) or to strengthen its local legitimacy.
- The ability to create “bridges” between different networks (e.g., connecting local needs to international funding opportunities) can be a key source of innovation and relative autonomy.
APPLICATION TO AFRICAN NGOs: #
Case study / Evidence: Studies show that NGOs led by people who have studied abroad or have worked for international organizations often have privileged access to external funding thanks to their networks (extensive “weak ties”). The effectiveness of NGO platforms or consortia relies on their ability to pool networks and speak with a stronger voice. The success of many community development or local fundraising initiatives (e.g., adapted tontines) depends on the density and trust within local social networks (“strong ties”).
Critique / African Nuance: Network analysis must imperatively take into account African cultural and political specificities (importance of ethnic, religious, clientelist ties, role of elders, etc.). Access to influential networks (especially international) remains very unequal and can reproduce forms of dependency. Theory can describe the structure of networks but explains less how marginalized actors can actively modify them or create new ones to gain autonomy. Trust, a key element of social capital, can be volatile in contexts of instability or heightened competition for resources.
