Civil Society in Urban Policy and the limits of Corporate Social Responsibility
The role of civil society in Canada’s cities cannot be ignored. NGOs such as the United Way, Woodgreen, and A Way Home Canada provide vital research and programs focussed on improving the lives of vulnerable populations. In their Fireside Chat, United Way Greater Toronto CEO Daniele Zanotti and BMO Financial Group CEO Darryl White discussed how the COVID-19 pandemic made even more apparent the deep systemic issues that are at the crux of issues like poverty and inequality in Toronto, Canada, and around the world. The role of civil society groups and the socially motivated people who work in the field will likely continue to grow as efforts are made rebuild the Canadian economy with a more equitable and sustainable structure.
The role of civil society in addressing systemic issues was articulated by Mr. Zanotti when he described how focus needs to be on the “water valve” causing issues of poverty and inequality. By addressing systemic issues and focussing on promoting good jobs, affordable housing, and the construction of neighbourhoods that work for residents, civil society groups can help ensure the benefits of economic prosperity and growth in Canada translate to improvements in the quality of life of all Canadians.
One quibble that comes to mind with regards to the increasing role of NGOs in providing both research into social services and directing resources to those services and/or the agencies that provide them is their reliance on the beneficence of donors, many of which are large private businesses and corporations. The 2020 documentary The New Corporation engages with the growing trend of corporations portraying themselves as both profit-focussed and socially consciously, demonstrating how the two goals are can be quite contradictory. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has become increasingly common terminology over the last decade or so, but it is not as innovative as some make it seem.
In a 2017 article, Marie-Laure Djelic and Helen Etchanchu describe how, although distinct in some ways, CSR has many similarities with the paternalism of 19th century Europe and 20th century managerial trusteeship in America with regards to limits on privatized models intent on “serving the common good.” They found that paternalism and trusteeship were prevented from improving the common good as a direct result of owner and managerial discretion over allocation of resources. CSR has somewhat broadened who is able to impact the allocation of corporate beneficence through a heightened role of shareholders of corporations like BMO. However, corporate shareholders are still subject to the same foundational logic of their 19th and 20th century counterparts: maintaining and growing the profitability of the corporation they have shares in. This can lead to inherent tensions with certain policies that address poverty and inequality. Therefore, support for NGOs is structurally more likely to be provided to organizations that advocate policies that maintain a place for private investment despite the possible existence of better policies options that are less friendly to profit-making. Another implication is the divergence of political power away from democratically accountable governments and towards private firms with very limited direct democratic scrutiny from the general Canadian public.
Rafaela Costa Camoes Rabello, Karen Nairn, and Vivienne Anderson offer an possible alternative framework to help capitalist economies resolve contradictions between corporate profit maximization and policies geared towards the common good. Neocommunitarianism, which is based “on ideals of mutual responsibility and inclusive communities,” believes that workfare scheme policies can be effective tools for economic redistribution. Such policies would see businesses incorporating the various inputs and work-expectations of different communities into their business strategies in order to generate a “social economy,” made of “enterprising subjects” contributing to market supply and demand.
Initiatives like United Way’s Inclusive Local Economic Opportunity (ILEO) pilot projects in the Greater Golden Mile might signal a step towards an adoption of neocommunitarianism principles in neighbourhood level investment. Policies like inclusive procurement, neighbourhood-based training and hiring programs, and joint-ventures allowing for community ownership of firms may be important tools to creating a social economy. The results of projects like the Greater Golden Mile will provide important lessons to urban policymakers striving to eliminate poverty and lessen economic inequalities. The forward thinking nature of the ILEO initiative demonstrates the important role civil society plays in the evolving landscape of urban policy.
