Some insights on
Comparing Parties, Interest
Groups and Service‐oriented
Organizations
The Regulating Civil Society Project
This research has received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union's
Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) / ERC grant agreement n° 335890 STATORG.
Overview
• Research Questions
• Terminology
• Case selection
• Methodology
• Organizational similarities and differences across
countries
• Similarities and differences across parties, interest
groups and service-providing organizations
Research Questions of the Project
• Q1. Which regulatory frameworks are in place in
long-lived democracies to steer the behaviour of
membership-based, voluntary organizations
constitutive for civil society and the third sector (e.g.
political parties, interest groups, service-providing
civil society organizations) and why?
• Q2. How do differences in regulatory frameworks
affect the working, strategic choices and the
evolution of these organizations respectively?
Research Questions of the Project
• Q2. How do differences in regulatory frameworks
affect the working, strategic choices and the
evolution of these organizations respectively?
• Professionalization
• Resources
• Membership involvement
Terminology
• Focused on voluntary membership organizations
(VOs)
• Comparison across different types of VOs:
• Non-profit organizations (NPO)
interest/advocacy groups
• Public benefit organizations (PBO)  serviceproviding organizations
• Political parties
Case Selection
• Overall patterns of regulatory constraint
Survey
• Comparison across countries and across types of VOs
(Parties, NPOs and PBOs)
• Bottom-up strategy to define population of nationally
and regionally relevant membership organizations
• Current response rates:
• UK: NPOs and PBOs 13% and Political Parties 27%
• Norway: NPOs and PBOs 20% and Political Parties
58%
Expectations: Similarities and
differences across countries
• As the level of regulatory constraint is higher in UK,
VOs should be more professionalized than Norway
• VOs in UK should perceive the administrative costs
more burdensome than in Norway
• Members of VOs in UK will be more involved than in
Norway
Sources of Income: UK vs Norway
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Membership Contributions Donations and Financial Donations and Public funding Public funding Other income
subscriptions
by public
gifts from transfers from gifts not from from national from the other generating
office-holders individuals
other units
individuals government
levels of
activities
government
Very important UK
Very important Norway
Types of State Funding: UK vs Norway
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
UK
Norway
Very important
Grant schemes
Contracts
Professionalization: UK vs Norway
25
20
15
10
5
0
UK
Norway
Average number of paid staff
Type of Staff: UK vs Norway
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
UK
Ratio politically/policy oriented staff
Norway
Ratio administrative oriented staff
How burdensome is state funding? UK vs
Norway
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Not at all burdensome
Slightly burdensome
Moderately
burdensome
Burdensome
Very burdensome
Perception of burdensome of administrative costs by organizations in UK
Perception of burdensome of administrative costs by organizations in Norway
Member Involvement: UK vs Norway
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Not at all involved
Slightly involved
Moderately involved
Involved
Perception of membership involvement by organizations in UK
Perception of membership involvement by organizations in Norway
Very involved
Summary
• Professionalization fits expectations: higher in UK
• Proportion of administrative staff fits expectations: higher in UK
• State funding: higher in Norway
• Perception of administrative costs as burdensome: tends to be higher
in Norway
• Trade off between funding and involvement? Not clear
Expectations by Type of VO
• Party regulation in Norway is more constraining than NPO/PBO
regulation. In UK, party regulation is less constraining than NPO/PBO
regulation. We therefore expect reverse patterns when comparing
parties and NPOs/PBOs within each country.
Sources of Income by Type of VO
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Membership Contributions Donations and Financial Donations and Public funding Public funding Other income
subscriptions by public
gifts from transfers from gifts not from from national from the other generating
office-holders individuals
other units
individuals government
levels of
activities
government
Very important UK Parties
Very important UK NPO
Very important UK PBO
Very important Norway Parties
Very important Norway NPO
Very important Norway PBO
Type of State Funding by Type of VO
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Parties
NPO
PBO
Parties
Very important UK
NPO
Very important Norway
Grant schemes
Contracts
PBO
Professionalization by Type of VO
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Parties
NPO
PBO
Parties
UK
NPO
Norway
Average number of paid staff
PBO
Type of Staff by Type of VO
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Parties
NPO
PBO
UK
Ratio politically/policy oriented staff
Parties
NPO
Norway
Ratio administrative oriented staff
PBO
How burdensome is state funding?
Comparison by Type of VO
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Parties
NPO
PBO
Parties
UK
NPO
Norway
Not at all burdensome
Slightly burdensome
Burdensome
Very burdensome
Moderately burdensome
PBO
Member Involvement by Type of VO
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Parties
NPO
PBO
Parties
UK
Not at all involved
NPO
PBO
Norway
Slightly involved
Moderately involved
Involved
Very involved
Most important Challenges by Type of VO
Parties
UK
NPO
Norway
PBO
UK
Norway
UK
Norway
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Decreased state funding
Changed government
requirements to receive
subsidies
Enhanced reporting and
accountability requirements
related to state funding
Aging of constituency
Individualization / growing
societal diversity
Europeanization/globalization
Recruiting and retaining
members
Changes in public opinion
about the issues important to
your organization
Yes
Access to the media
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Final remarks
• Preliminary results
• Survey still active (820 organizations in UK and Norway)
• More sophisticated statistical analysis in the future
Perception of competition
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
PARTIES
NPO
PBO
PARTIES
UK
NPO
Norway
Perception of direct competitors
PBO
Survival anxiety
140
120
Mean Age
100
80
60
40
20
0
Parties
NPO
PBO
Parties
NPO
UK
Very unlikely
Norway
Unlikely
Moderately likely
Likely
Very likely
PBO