Frequently asked questions (FAQs)

1. What is the 'third sector'?
2. In what sense does the TSEP network examine 'European policy'?
3. Why does third sector European policy matter?
4. Which institutions are involved with third sector European policy within the EU and at national levels?
5. The network is primarily exploring 'cross cutting' or 'horizontal' as opposed to 'vertical' policy processes. It examines 'policy cases'. What does that mean?
6. The network includes Switzerland, which is not a member state, and the Czech Republic, which joined the Union in 2004. How is the network examining their situations?
7. How does the network differ from longer established research efforts such as the European component of the John Hopkins Comparative Nonprofit Sector study, and CIRIEC's programmes on social economy and social enterprises?

1. What is the 'third sector'?

The 'third sector' refers to organisations between the market and the state. More specifically, there is no single 'correct' definition in Europe, with different collective nouns involving varied criteria of definition used for different purposes and in different contexts. For the purposes of TSEP, the 'third sector' has provisionally been taken to include those organizations which are self-governing and constitutionally independent of the state; do not involve the distribution of profits to shareholders; and benefit to a significant degree from voluntarism. Note that this has been an initial working definition, whose policy relevance is being ascertained by Partners.At the country level, the specific 'indigenous' conceptualizations deployed in practice is a question to be determined empirically, not a priori imposed.

2. In what sense does the TSEP network examine 'European policy'?

'Policy' refers to intended courses of action which are explicitly and proactively articulated by actors with significant levels of political authority and are reflected in patterned policy discourse, events and institutions. Part of the work of the network is exploring these features in relation to the 'third sector' as they develop nationally, and also in Brussels-based and allied European Union institutions. The network is based on the understanding that European, national and sub-national levels of third sector policy are interrelated and are all important locations for research. This does not mean we assume that third sector policy involves 'multi level governance' which is typically used to claim that substantive power is vested at all these levels. This assumption needs testing empirically. However, the network is specifically set up to allow detailed investigation of the reciprocal relationships between policy actors on all three levels, encompassing influences from EU policy processes on national and sub-national levels and vice versa.

3. Why does third sector European policy matter?

European institutions have tended to be perceived as of high significance to third sector actors at national level only within a small number of vertical policy fields (particularly environmental policy and overseas development & relief). However, the salience of the horizontal European dimension in already higher than most accounts of third sector policy seem to acknowledge, and is likely to increase over time for several reasons. Firstly, a supportive dialogue has emerged, principally around the themes of tackling social exclusion, unemployment and the democratic deficit - and latterly, constitutional design - across the European Union. This is being generated by emerging coalitions, networks of activists and academic interest within and outside the third sector itself, particularly at the Brussels level. Second, although contested, certain constructs have been adopted to link the third sector to these challenges - as with the notions of 'civil dialogue' and 'social enterprise.' Thirdly, even in social policy - relating to the welfare fields where much European third sector activity is concentrated - nation states are only semi-sovereign. The European Court of Justice is becoming relevant in interpreting the position of third sector providers as contractors and providers of services. Fourthly, third sector organisations are significant economic actors, who are affected by EU labour market and fiscal policy, and have themselves begun to recognise this to some extent.  

4. Which institutions are involved with third sector European policy within the EU and at national levels?

At the EU level there has been some distinct but interrelated development of interest in third sector European policy within different institutions. Some elements within the European Parliament have positioned the Parliament as an ally to the third sector since the mid-1980s. More recently, the Commission (and within it some Directorate Generales in particular) works with third sector actors on policy issues and has developed opinions on the way in such relationships could be expressed and extended (e.g. 2001 Governance White Paper). The Economic and Social Committee, based in Brussels, has also shown an interest in strengthening links with some third sector groups as 'representatives' of 'civil society'. The Council has also recognized the potential contribution of 'civil society… and NGOs as… partners' in achieving sustainable economic growth and social cohesion (Lisbon 2000). Supportive Presidencies have been important in driving some of this interest.

At the national and sub-national levels one can look to those policy fields where domestic and EU policy responsibilities are shared or overlapping. Actors include government in vertical policy fields or horizontal issues (see below), as well other interests. The latter includes the third sector itself and groups claiming to promote its interests, such as fora, 'umbrellas', platforms and coalitions at regional, national and international levels.

5. The network is primarily exploring 'cross cutting' or 'horizontal' as opposed to 'vertical' policy processes. It also examines 'policy cases'. What does that mean?

Vertical policy processes are understood as developed and applying essentially within a particular field or domain. To define 'field' boundaries TSEP follows the standard industrial classification adapted to account for the specificities of the third sector, as represented in the International Classification of Nonprofit Organizations (ICNPO). This refers to culture and recreation, education and research, health, social care and so on, as discrete policy fields.

Cross-cutting and horizontal are used as shorthand for third sector relevant cross-cutting/horizontal, and refers to concepts/beliefs or policies/practices/actions which are not confined to within single vertical policy fields, but which are (a) either held to be relevant or applied discretely but according to common principles within two or more vertical policy fields; or (b) which are held to be relevant/applied as a matter of 'generic' policy. These may be sustained by macro political institutions whose reach cuts across vertical policy fields, can involve constitutional practice or design, and includes general or basic laws, procedures etc which are not confined to particular fields. There are 'pure' cases of horizontality, whereby policies or concepts are related to the entire third sector as defined in the relevant collective nouns. But we also include as 'horizontal' narrower-in-scope concepts or policies which cut across some but not all vertical fields, as with 'social exclusion' policies and 'social policies'.

The content of the horizontal policy agenda can therefore include such matters as sector-specific legal treatments and structures, the expression of citizenship through group activity, generic principles for managing policy inputs and relationships (such as consultation and funding codes of conduct), or the general promotion of voluntarism through formal organisations. In addition, in some countries and at EU level, the sector-specific agenda can be hard to separate from those public policy agenda items which inherently involve actions cutting across industries or fields, such as social exclusion and social integration. Thus, although voluntary sector policy seems to refer to a particular structure and form of organising - while the latter social policies seem to have more to do with meeting needs and achieving social outcomes - policies can closely link the two.

The term 'case' refers to particular policy events or programmes. In TSEP 'closed cases' have been chosen to capture various EU-wide 'policy modes' and stages in the policy process, including regulatory activity, multi-level governance (e.g. structural funds), policy coordination and benchmarking of policy. As well as expressing this variety, the closed cases all involve a reasonably high degree of 'horizontality' and are expected to include different combinations of policy participants and drivers of policy development. 'Open cases' are also being examined at Partners' discretion.

6. The network includes Switzerland, which is not a member state, and the Czech Republic, which joined the Union in 2004. How is the network examining the situation here?

The United Nations Year of Volunteering (2001) is included in the list of closed cases for all countries, to allow for the inclusion of Switzerland in the comparative core, as well as giving an impression of how UN and EU 'external shocks' may compare. The inclusion of the Czech Republic allows the network to collect information on the experience of accession countries. The Czech Republic's voluntary sector has been on the receiving end of EU policy prior to accession, through 'external' programmes such as PHARE, but as a new member, it will experience 'internal' policies. Many areas of European Union policy are already being framed or reframed with reference to these countries.

7. How does the third sector European policy network differ from longer established research efforts, such as the European component of the Johns Hopkins Comparative Nonprofit Sector project, and CIRIEC's programmes on the social economy and social enterprise?

The network focuses on policy process and policy change in relation to the third sector, rather than the third sector per se. So, it does not aim to map the economic and social contours of the third sector within Europe in the way that those long established research projects have done, and continue to do. Rather it is intended to investigate the rhetorical and substantive involvement of the sector  in policy learning and policy processes.

^