Volunteering in the Context of Women’s Activism in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Introduction

In this study the subject of volunteering is addressed by focusing on women’s activism in Bosnia and Hercegovina’s civil society in the postwar and postsocialist periods. Despite the flourishing of numerous civil society organizations (CSOs), matters of what are called ‘NGOization’, fragmentation, and a project-driven approach (‘projectitis disease’) remain as problems in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) just as they do in many other countries, due to the extensive and continuing international assistance and difficulties with democratic consolidation— which in many cases lags behind.^[1] Women enjoy greater presence and are more vocal in civil society than they are in official political institutions and political parties, something many interpret as a consequence of political underrepresentation.^[2] In this study, volunteering is therefore addressed in the context of certain features of BiH’s civil society and of women’s engagement within it. Civil society values such as solidarity, equity, self-help, and autonomy have been shown to have positive effects on volunteering, yet such idealistic values face multiple obstacles.^[3] In BiH, female activism and volunteering are made more complex and questionable by the country’s low levels of social capital and trust and its fragmentation and low levels of membership. Government institutions favour male associations such as sports and veterans’ groups. The legal framework too for volunteering is inadequate, and there is widespread misunderstanding of volunteering among the general public. Indeed, if people understood the concept better they might well have more faith in civil society, and there could be challenges to the widespread perception of female volunteering as a simple extension of what is perceived as their ‘natural’ duties.

I have researched women’s activism in Bosnia and Herzegovina over different time periods, first during 2011 when I conducted twenty-two in-depth interviews for the purposes of my own doctoral dissertation on BiH’s women’s movement. I have used that material in this analysis, adding it to a second phase of deep and thorough research into women’s networking which I undertook during 2017 with Lejla Somun-Krupalija and for which we had the support of the TRAG and OAK foundations.^[4] That second phase consisted of face-to-face and Skype interviews, work with focus groups, and document analysis. In addition, with Amila Ždralović I have recently conducted research in cooperation with the CURE Foundation and the Foundation for Economic Empowerment of Women. That work, done during 2019, was focused on marginal groups of women and their organizations, such as women in rural settings, Roma women, and women from small communities.^[5] In this present article my focus is on my own transcriptions of the interviews which formed the basis of that project.

The fact that the research relevant for this study was done at different times and with different aims has enabled a nuanced approach to the topic, for although volunteering was not the main research question, many female activists brought the subject up themselves, and sometimes it emerged as a question in semi-structured interviews, thereby providing a broader picture of women’s activism. I analysed the connection between civil society and values such as solidarity, reciprocity, and equity, and their positive effect on volunteering. One of my main findings is that women activists have somewhat different perceptions of volunteering depending on whether they belong to a larger or a smaller organization, and based on how they connect their volunteer activity to matters such as fragmentation, hierarchy, and solidarity. The data regarding those perceptions will be elaborated in detail in the context of the research literature.

The Concept of Civil Society

Frequently, the concept of civil society is highlighted in order to demonstrate a country’s level of democracy or democratization. The origin of the concept of civil society is traceable in modern political theory as a critical tool against absolutism, and it became a popular concept again in the 1980s with the rise of protest movements under the authoritarian regimes in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and Latin America, both under authoritarian rule and during transitional periods.^[6] Under authoritarian rule, civil society stands in opposition to the non-democratic state, although in transition phases it is often characterized by cooperation with it for the sake of democratic consolidation. At such times, civil society maintains an important critical function, as a watchdog of the very process of change. In some cases, new political elites closely connected to or engaged within civil society during the authoritarian period attempted to derail it during the subsequent transition towards democracy.^[7] Such elites tend then to perceive civil society as a tool to overthrow an old regime, a sort of ‘necessary good’, but not as anything intrinsically connected to a democratic society.^[8]

According to Larry Diamond’s frequently quoted definition, civil society is the realm of organized social life that is voluntary, self-supporting, self-generating, and autonomous from the state.^[9] Scholars highlight the importance of those characteristics and values to civil society in Southeastern Europe too. Vukašin Pavlović has written that civil society is a normative ideal that includes different ethical principles such as autonomy, anti-hierarchy, solidarity, grassroots initiatives, pluralism, volunteering, self-initiative, humanitarianism, and self-help.^[10] According to Ismet Sejfija, there are four structural dimensions to civil society: formal and informal associations, values and principles on which civil society is based and which it promotes, social capital, and the public.^[11]

John Keane, one of the most influential thinkers on civil society, points out that the meta-discourse or ‘big narrative’ of civil society is full of simplistic and dogmatic idealizations,^[12] which is the consequence of a well-established dichotomy with a ‘long philosophical genealogy’.^[13] Early modern political thinkers saw a distinction between the state as a sphere of coercion, and civil society as a sphere of freedom. Under authoritarian rule the distinction was real in that civil society was suppressed in various ways and flattened.^[14] In periods of so-called democratization however, such dichotomy becomes dysfunctional. Seymour Martin Lipset has noted that functioning democratic institutions are of great importance for the development of civil society, and to ensure the presence of its values and prerequisites. Lipset focuses especially closely on social capital and trust, by which he means that if institutions are bound by the rule of law and perceived as accountable, people tend to trust each other more and consequently are more ready to form civil society groups and organizations or to involve themselves in them.^[15] Features of civil society such as solidarity, autonomy, self-help and anti-hierarchy must therefore be addressed within their specific contexts and in connection with other arenas of democratization, such as a functioning state, at least a relatively autonomous and well-valued political society, the rule of law, a state bureaucracy which a democratically elected government can use, and solid economic institutions.^[16]

The mutual interaction of all those values must be analysed with full regard to their interconnectedness, and although to a great extent they are idealistic, they have a traceable impact on volunteering. According to certain studies a key set of values has, or might have, a significant impact on volunteering, and they include altruism (compassion or care), solidarity (responsibility for contributing to the wellbeing of the group and its members), reciprocity (helping others and sometimes receiving help in return) as well as equity and social justice—in other words the sense that inequality and injustice are agreed to be morally wrong.^[17]

The end of state socialism in many Central East European countries was followed by proliferation of CSOs both in the number of them and in the different activities they undertook in the name of civil society.^[18] Certain scholars claim that although studies have been made of civil society in particular countries in Central Eastern Europe, there has been little systematic research and few comparative approaches. While after 1990 the new political setting and legal framework triggered a boom in CSOs, more recent changes in government in certain countries, such as Hungary, created volatile relationships, scepticism of and even repression of them. In several of the countries that once made up Yugoslavia, war stopped the development of civil society but then international humanitarian aid, financial and technical assistance facilitated it. In the CEE countries there is also a difference between EU members and non-member states. The figures for the first group of states show more members, a greater proportion employed in CSOs, more engaged volunteers, positive attitudes, and trust among the population.^[19]

According to feminist studies, certain general features of civil society during transitional periods are marked by ‘feminization’. Thus, during the authoritarian state socialist period men were distinguished as leaders of civil society and the so-called feminine question appeared unimportant.^[20] In the subsequent transitional period, former dissidents seized institutional power and the state withdrew from—or reduced—the functions it had performed during socialism, such as social care. However, there always came a time when the new societal structure proved incapable of solving the everyday problems of the citizens, opening up space for grassroots groups and organizations to mobilize themselves.^[21] Women, traditionally perceived as more sensitive to others’ needs, gained more prominence than men in civil society.^[22] They entered civil society precisely to address those needs, as well as to enter the male-dominated public sphere and make their own voices heard. One of the problems, according to feminist scholars, is that civil society in the transitional (former socialist) countries became shorthand for women’s unpaid work,^[23] although that is more true for the early transitional period (1991–1996). According to more recent studies, across the Central East European countries the contribution of civil society to national GDP has grown and in some countries women’s groups are considered one of the most influential and effective phenomena.^[24]

In most transitional countries, a phenomenon occurred which might be called ‘NGOization’, meaning that very often civil society was equated with non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Many authors highlight that the concept is most often applied by international assistance practitioners who reduce civil society to professional non-governmental associations giving technical assistance. They therefore tend to overlook grassroots institutions, religious organizations, trade unions, community organizations, traditional leadership institutions and informal networks.^[25] Effectively, ‘contentious groups were not “needed” by the regimes of the new and weak democracies’, so that grassroots mobilization groups and social movements were easily marginalized.^[26]

Although NGOs are obviously a valuable part of civil society, they are nevertheless only a ‘subset of civil society, formally organized and registered’.^[27] In fact too much reliance on them means that a distorted picture of volunteering tends to emerge, reducing civil society to an NGOs framework while measuring its capacities and reliability by using the standards of foreign donors. From that perspective, volunteering appears as another of the human resources of some organization or other, so is seen less clearly as having its own value and as being one of the normative ideals of civil societies mentioned above.^[28] The reductionist approach focusing on NGOs has therefore contributed to the creation of a distorted image of volunteering. In the following, I will therefore focus on women’s activism within Bosnia and Herzegovina’s civil society in the light of the notion of feminization of civil society. My aim is to seek contextualized insights into how volunteering is perceived and how it actually operates.

Civil Society, Women’s Activism and Volunteering in Bosnia and Herzegovina

The narrow approach to what constitutes civil society is more strongly present in Bosnia and Herzegovina than it is elsewhere. The reason for that is the huge amount of international assistance with reconstruction there which began in the form of humanitarian aid during the war of 1992–1995. Not only was a large amount of money distributed through NGOs, but the very registration of certain NGOs happened precisely to address the requirement of international organizations for local partners in the field.^[29]

Foreign influence is clear too from the fact that only 10 % of the currently registered CSOs existed before the war.^[30] That does not mean that international actors were operating in line with some ‘hidden agenda’, nor does it deny the positive benefits of assistance.^[31] Rather, it raises the problem of a discrepancy between ‘local and donor legitimacy constructs’.^[32]

Soon after the war the vast majority of projects by foreign NGOs and organizations addressed the areas of reconstruction and the delivery of humanitarian assistance to citizens, while analogous areas of ​interest were held by local NGOs. With the passage of time, local NGOs supported by foreign donors professionalized. However, matters of human rights and discourses of ‘gender equality’, ‘human rights’, ‘Roma rights’ and ‘LGBTQ rights’ have been perceived by local actors as being too abstract, and not addressing concrete—and pressing—problems.^[33]

The numbers reveal how CSOs have blossomed, for it was estimated in 2016 that there were more than 23,000 of them registered, a substantial increase from about 12,000 in 2013. The most numerous are sports clubs and pastime-related associations, while associations for the protection of women comprise 7.3 % of registered CSOs. However, it is estimated that the ratio of active to inactive organizations is about 1:2 or even 1:3, because by law organizations must pay ‘winding-up’ fees to shut themselves down, and many CSOs refuse to pay.^[34] During the interviews conducted in 2011, female activists described the trend:

‘There was an expansion in terms of registration, and foreign donations were strengthening the capacity of organizations, but when they withdrew, they [i. e. the CSOs] did not manage to survive. I have not got any information on the number of women’s organizations; we could come up with estimates of course, but it needs to be investigated properly. It is difficult for us, because an association could be registered at all sorts of levels; it will be a huge job to go through them all, and find out which of them are still active.’^[35]

‘[…] one official said that there are more than 2,000 women’s associations in BiH. That’s why the first thing we did was go to the Ministry of Justice in 2008. They have got 12,808 NGOs registered now. Anyway, that was when we started with the questionnaires, because we have got a network in the field so that we reach whatever the exact number is that there are. We ended up sending more than 300 questionnaires, and we got ninety-nine back from organizations. Some of then had not got a website, say, and some just had no idea! But anyway we tried to get feedback from everyone involved with women’s issues. With the registered ones, we tried to see the key realities for them, but when you look at the questions and the answers we got, things like, “is there a women’s network?” or a women’s movement; they really do not know. And, just look at how many organizations just shut down. It was devastating […].’^[36]

The largest growth occurred after the war ended in 1995, while more recently there has been a significant tendency to strengthen technical, administrative, and management capacities, as well as to seek gender balance in the management of CSOs.^[37] However, there is a huge gap between these more technical aspects and the real impact of CSOs on people’s everyday lives.^[38] Compared with Central East European countries, the population of BiH and in fact of the Balkan region as a whole is more critical of international support, which was ‘partially perceived as the installation of a donor-driven “parallel system of CSOs”’.^[39] In the earlier research, half the NGOs acknowledged that they were completely oriented toward donors.^[40]

The criticism of civil society in BiH can be further elaborated from the types of organization. Certain scholars group CSOs into three categories. The first, and most numerous in BiH, is oriented towards the interests of its members but subservient to the interests of political parties and the government institutions from which they receive their grants. The most notorious case is that of war veterans’ associations. The second category is comprised of think tanks, while the third—much less well supported by government funds—is made up of grassroots associations, most of them small scale, and most having no full-time employees.^[41]

As for women’s organizations, it is certainly true that at local level especially only symbolic amounts of money are allocated to them. There is another problem too, concerning the lack of transparency of selection processes for awards of grants of local public funds, nor is there any measurement at all of the impact of whatever funds are allocated.^[42] Women activists themselves confirmed that point in interview, one for example stressing their orientation towards foreign funds because of how procedures and rules are defined when applying for grants:

‘When we complained to the Council that they were not giving associations anything, they said, “That is not true, we gave money to basketball players, fishing clubs and things like that.” When we go to the NGOs, they say, “Oh, go to the mayor! Ask him; and while you are at it have a little cry!” So we got used to working with foreigners; and of course they have a procedure. Actually, what it comes down to is: I really do not know what to do without that procedure.’^[43]

That problem was further confirmed in our most recent research from 2019, when activists again emphasized that substantially more money from the local budget is allocated to men’s activities. One activist pointed out that a structural 50/50 ratio ought to be introduced: ‘This is one of the issues that should be raised by the women’s lobby group; state—and city—financing of women’s associations etc. These are the open issues that need to be addressed, and they need to be raised soon, to prevent closures …’^[44]

The fact that associations based on members’ common interests receive most government support and that many grassroots associations are oriented towards foreign donors contributes to people’s distorted and somewhat cynical picture of civil society and their lack of interest in what they do, let alone in the idea of making a contribution themselves, which might include volunteering.^[45] According to an activist from Banja Luka, the image of NGOs in the media and among the general public is very poor because many people are convinced that the non-government sector exists solely to further personal interest.^[46] A woman activist talked of a communication problem between CSOs and the general public: ‘We made a big mistake because we did a lot but we did not truly reach out to women. Many still do not know what was done, what the women’s movement did; the younger generations especially are not aware of it.’^[47]

Field studies throughout BiH confirm that volunteerism is misunderstood, many seeing it as a form of free or exploitative labour rather than as something beneficial to individuals and the community.^[48] Research has pointed up the lack of transparency of CSOs, and many believe women’s organizations are closed to non-members.^[49] Yet in order to recruit volunteers any organization must be open. It must be consultative, and patient if it is to build trust among those willing to work in partnership with it.^[50] The literature notes the use of NGO jargon in project applications in which non-members of women’s NGOs are referred to as ‘beneficiaries’ and ‘users’. That is revealing of how they are perceived as being in passive receipt of support and help,^[51] which in turn reduces motivation to include other women, some of whom might be willing to act as volunteers themselves. Projectization and ‘managerial conservatism’ have been confirmed in numerous countries as obstacles to broader political involvement.^[52]

Lack of motivation to volunteer is further strengthened by inadequate legal frameworks. While the legal conditions for the formation of a civil society association were met by a law passed in 2001, there is no state law covering volunteering.^[53] In fact, the first laws on volunteering were introduced in Republika Srpska in 2009, not until 2012 in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FBiH), and still have not been introduced in the Brčko District—and nowhere at state level.^[54] The law in FBiH, moreover, did not take into account the experience of the implementation of the first law; there was no engagement to research the flaws, benefits and practical experiences of it.^[55]

It is worth pausing here to consider why a law on volunteering is important for the encouragement of citizens to volunteer. A high level of unemployment in Bosnia and Herzegovina, especially among young people, means that the law is often viewed first and foremost in the context of acquiring essential skills and contacts that can be formally documented and thus foster subsequent employment. Volunteering is similarly defined in both the existing laws, the FBiH law stating that volunteering is considered to be ‘a voluntary provision of personal time, efforts, knowledge and skills for the purpose of rendering services or activities, without compensation, for the common good of the Federation of BiH’.^[56] The law in Republika Srpska states:

‘In terms of this Law, volunteering is an organized voluntary activity or provision of services or performance of activities with the aim of general and common welfare or welfare of another person without monetary compensation or material gain, unless otherwise provided by the Law.’^[57]

However, the literature on volunteering challenges the conventional wisdom that volunteering presupposes the absence of remuneration. Volunteering is un-coerced and altruistic activity, productive for volunteers and others: ‘If people are compensated the amount of payment in cash or in-kind is significantly less-than-market-value.’^[58] Voluntarism is a two-way process from which the volunteer derives benefit such as personal fulfilment, acquisition of experience, social recognition and social contacts.^[59]

Despite the entity laws, however, volunteering remains little known and is unsupported by the respective governments. For example, no ministry did anything to promote the law nor the importance of volunteering, and there was no encouragement for state institutions to accredit themselves. NGOs remain the only organizations that have been accredited and which have provided opportunities for young people to gain work experience through volunteering.^[60]

A United Nations (UN) Volunteers Report describes forms of voluntary work often left out of surveys, including community self-help and campaigning or advocacy work, as well as more traditional forms of volunteering not organized by modern CSOs—the so-called ‘hidden volunteering’.^[61] The report notes that some volunteering is hidden only because of inadequate data and mentions that certain surveys approached volunteering incorrectly. Furthermore, perceptions of volunteering are skewed because many staff in BiH NGOs officially work as volunteers because of the high employment tax of approximately 69 %.^[62] Another source of inaccuracy is that statistical offices keep no record of numbers employed on short-term consulting contracts, nor of volunteers.^[63]

Given the prevailing patriarchal perceptions within BiH’s society, women’s work in civil society is often perceived as an extension of their ‘natural’ duties, such as the care and nurturing of others.^[64] The concept, normative ideals, and values of civil society, including volunteering, thereby become ever more complex and ultimately dubious for both citizens and researchers. Some women pioneers in civil society realize that even when their work is recognized, such recognition is used as a strategy for their exclusion from the official institutions by which the most important political decisions are made.^[65] As one activist put it:

‘Our traditional norms situate women in the private sphere, which is primarily about caring for children, the elderly, the disabled, and that is the context women are much more active in in civil society, because that is also about caring for others. It is a consequence of the patriarchal understanding of the role of women, so women are less present in political institutions but more visible in civil society.’^[66]

Some activists tend to idealize their own work and their dedication to the public good, making generalizations about the impact of their work on civil society as a whole. One of the female activists we interviewed made a point expressed by many others too, saying, ‘if NGOs were shut down for just one day, the whole system would collapse’. In her opinion, ‘it is thanks to CSOs that food is provided every day to the hungry, that assistance is given to the elderly and the sick’.^[67] Another activist described the same situation in gendered terms: ‘Women are more sensitive, so there are more of them in civil society, because civil society helps others.’^[68]

Perceptions of Women Activists

In interviews with women activists in the different research periods, to gain insight into volunteering’s connection to values we examined the capacities of certain women’s organizations, along with the presence of normative ideals associated with the very notion of civil society, such as solidarity, commitment, equity, and autonomy. I found during my own research that when they addressed those normative ideals the women tended to make a distinction between wartime and postwar activism, and that their perceptions varied depending on whether they were from larger or smaller organizations, or based in urban centres, smaller local communities or rural areas, while for some of them, age and experience made a difference.

Women’s Networks

Research on women’s networks provides important additional data on civil society values such as solidarity, equity, self-help and the notion of volunteering. It is important to note that women’s networks are considered the most sustainable of all the networks that have emerged in BiH, of which one estimate claims there are about thirty. However only a small number of them existed for more than ten years, or longer than the original projects that created them. Only a small number of networks lasted, such as those of female activists which were ‘the result of genuine conviction of the members on the need for existence of [a] permanent mechanism of cooperation, harmonization of a unified platform of action, coordination of activities and unified approach towards the government institutions’.^[91]

Different attitudes to networks too are discernable among women, depending on whether they worked in larger or smaller organizations. Their views of the functioning of networks differed, and of their activities and the contributions of their members. In certain networks, one larger organization deals with coordination of activity while in others there is a separate coordination committee. Most networks are informal since there is no legal requirement for networks to be registered.

The ‘Women’s Network’ (Ženska mreža) consisting of more than fifty organizations, is the largest of those I analysed.^[92] Among other things it strives very actively to raise awareness of and spread feminist values through protest activism. The Network is deeply appreciated among its members, who work in different organizations, to the point that it is sometimes described as a women’s movement, rather than merely a network. However, some consider the term ‘movement’ an exaggeration, for as a few activists underlined, ‘a network is not the same as a movement’. In an interview conducted in 2011, an activist from the coordinating association highlighted the contribution of her own organization to the Network, in terms of financial, human and other resources. During our interview, she expressed the significance of the contribution and the volunteering of her own organization, which is one of the largest women’s organization in BiH: ‘[…] it was us who did everything else, you see; this is a women’s network, we even paid with our own money, to let the Network’s unity show. They all said “Great that you did it”, never mind that no one asked how much it cost!’^[93]

The looseness of the structure of the Network and its more general goals mean that members of other organizations do not feel excluded. One activist from an organization which is a member of both the Women’s Network and another, stressed that the ‘Women’s Network’ has a greater feeling of solidarity.^[94] She described the Women’s Network as more dedicated to protest activism; she said that each organization is engaged in protest volunteering, although not to the same extent, and that they use a combination of ‘cyber activism’ and ‘face to face activism’.^[95] One thing about the contributions of different associations is that the Network’s principles are clearly feminist. On sensitive questions such as LGBTQ rights, not all organizations are ready to join in with the writing or distribution of protest statements, which naturally raises questions about the precious sense of solidarity as well as the problem of a perceived hierarchy among organizations. Activists from the Network’s core organizations highlight the value of protest volunteering, whereas an activist from a member association working in a smaller local community underlined some of the problems they encounter:

‘We had a meeting of a network of women’s organizations and we decided to protest during sixteen days of activism, and to organize women to go to Sarajevo. But the question is, how many will respond? People are scared. We are back to where we were when we started in 1998, and those were tough times.’^[96]

Another women’s network is the RING network which works in the field of anti-trafficking.^[97] It consists of ten organizations, so it is much smaller and has clearer goals and structure than the all-encompassing Women’s Network. RING has tried but failed to register, which caused great difficulty for the larger organizations that had voluntarily paid for RING’s effort. Although RING’s structure is clearer, nevertheless the gap is more visible between the capacities of its various members. Activists from larger organizations sometimes say that they give more to the network than they receive and that smaller organizations are always wanting to be included in different activities while lacking the resources to contribute to them. That also calls into question the value of the notional solidarity and the problem of hierarchy in the network. Activists from the larger organization said:

‘We all have expertise, but four organizations bear the brunt of the work, and the rest rely on their competences. While the network mostly contributes knowledge, we did not really get any additional knowledge back; for us it feels more like we are being drained. But we chose to associate ourselves with the mission of the network, and we do our best.’^[98]

There is volunteer protest activism too, but some activists in the network think it a waste of time: ‘Handing out leaflets annoys people, sometimes they have even been aggressive when we have approached them, because all manner of things get handed out. In any case, my office is full of leaflets; I could spend all my time handing them out.‘^[99]

A third network is the Roma Women’s Network (Ženska romska mreža) which is dedicated to improving the position of Roma women in Bosnia and Herzegovina.^[100] Being doubly marginalized, Roma women see the network as a secure and supportive space and its members describe its as a family. Its umbrella organization is one of the strongest women’s associations in BiH and its leader is a well known face in civil society. She highlights that each of the ten member associations of the network does its bit, but that her own organization contributes the most:

‘Of course, in every network one organization pulls the most but the others contribute what they can. We know more or less who has what capacities, because we have been together for longer than just a year. For more serious things we engage a stronger organization but others make their contribution and pretty much everyone is included.

[…] We do not have nor do we need money for every activity. We all say, for example, “Girls, we can’t all go to parliament!”, so we agree who will go. And we talk about it and agree what the topic of the meetings will be.’^[101]

There is indeed a hierarchy in this network between stronger and weaker organizations, but given the ever-present marginalization of Roma women in society it is not perceived negatively, for the women feel empowered simply by being part of the network. The members also express solidarity with other CSOs representing the Roma population. While men from Roma associations are often perceived as being not so much supportive as quarrelsome and bossy, there are exceptions. A Roma woman from the Romkinja association from Bijeljina (Udruženje Žena Romkinja Bijeljina) emphasized during our interview with her that the Roma Association for the Promotion of Roma Education Otaharin (Udruženje Otaharin) helped by sharing its premises with her own association. The men also volunteered assistance with general know-how:

‘I have no office of my own, I use Otaharin resources. There is a social worker in Otaharin, a psychologist, and a lawyer, so if I need to use those services they are all Otaharin’s. To put it simply, they just help me with anything I need. The psychologist has had more than twenty conversations with Roma women who have come to my association. I asked them to talk to him [the psychologist …]. I even got volunteers from Otaharin for a street action, as the women who are members of my association are also employed in Otaharin and they are willing to help us.’^[102]

Despite the differences I found among the networks I analysed, I saw similarities in perceptions depending on associations’ capacities, which affected their positions and roles within the network. Women activists from larger organizations tended to stress that their contributions were voluntary and sometimes criticized smaller organizations for not being dedicated enough or not recognizing the larger organization’s efforts enough. Activists from smaller organizations tended to appreciate the work for the network of the activists from core organizations, but also to raise concerns about, for example communication and inclusiveness in decision making. Volunteer work in networks includes protest activism and contributions of technical and human resources in network activities. However, the loose structure of networks sometimes causes misunderstandings among members, which calls into question how much solidarity and reciprocity there really is. Nevertheless, the fact that they have succeeded in enduring for so long indicates that networks are more than a temporary project, and that positive feelings, mutual support and cooperation do indeed contribute to their endeavours.

Conclusion

Women activists in BiH have contributed a great deal to the development of civil society and to the introduction of a number of laws designed to improve the position of women. Things previously considered private matters or even unimportant, such as domestic violence, or the number of women active in political institutions, are now of public concern. Women’s CSOs have grown from informal and mostly humanitarian groups during the war to become specialized organizations, although they continue to help people in need in their communities and among the women they work for. Despite such contributions however, the still prevailing donor-driven approach has led to competition among women’s groups, just as among other civil society groups. CSOs are sometimes perceived as opaque, closed to outsiders and so not encouraging of people who might otherwise wish to volunteer. Government policies too tend not to encourage voluntary work, funding favouring instead associations such as veterans associations which are open to manipulation by political parties.

Nevertheless, women activists have succeeded in carrying out diverse activities as volunteers, attempting to overcome the limitations of the ‘projectitis disease’ that we so often heard mentioned as an obstacle to their work. However, there was a difference in how they understood the voluntary work of their own and other organizations, especially depending on the size of the CSOs concerned. Activists from larger organizations with sufficient funding try not to depend on funding for every one of their activities, and emphasize their own voluntary help to other women’s groups. Activists from smaller CSOs highlight the dedication and support among their own members and beneficiaries, in activity not based on projects. All our interviewees connected volunteering both with positive values such as solidarity, commitment, and negative trends like fragmentation and hierarchy. Both withdrawal of funding and orientation towards EU projects widen the gap between smaller and larger CSOs, because EU projects are more time-consuming and demand more skills, organizational, technical and otherwise.

For that reason, government institutions and CSOs alike should promote volunteer work as mostly having to do with values. Through volunteering the general public could learn skills important to a democratic society and necessary for its consolidation. Trust in CSOs is presently rather low, so it would be good if that were to change. Solidarity and visibility could be increased if larger organizations were to offer more help to organizations possessing fewer resources and capacities, to prevent them from being obliged to shut down. As I have shown, certain associations do indeed feel quite abandoned. Activities must become less project-based, and organisations must promote within networks the activities those networks pursue. That will increase trust and solidarity and improve the commitment of network members. For their part, associations could also become more persistent in seeking government support, especially at local level, which would help them overcome their feeling that they are living in a parallel universe, separate from most citizens and their everyday problems. Making a contribution for the benefit of the local community must become more visible, so that it can create additional motivation for others to join, while the very idea of volunteering in all senses of the word must be discussed more widely. It is not only activists who must talk about volunteering, but society in general.