Civil Society and the Market: Are They Necessary Protagonists or Antagonists?

One of the most persistent and perplexing ideas in social science is civil society, which makes it a great subject for analytical investigation. Because it provides a flexible framework for analyzing the "geometry of human relations," or the patterns of group behavior and interaction that give societies at least some answers to issues of structure and authority, meaning and belonging, citizenship and self-direction, the idea has endured. Since classical Greece, intellectuals have looked back to civil society as a means of coming up with fresh perspectives on age-old and well known issues as their surroundings have changed. However, because there are so many different definitions and understandings of civil society—many of which are poorly connected to and articulated with one another—and because the claims that are occasionally made about its explanatory power never quite match the complexities and contingencies of actual cultures and societies—particularly when interpretations created at one time or in one part of the world are transported to another—civil society is also a confusing and contentious concept. The history of civil society has at least three centuries of interactions with business and the market, but since the fall of the Berlin Wall and the emergence of corporate social responsibility in the late 1980s and early 1990s, these interactions have become much more frequent and intense. Some believe that civic society and markets are inherently complementary, relying on one another, and cooperating to address social issues. In order to prevent co-optation that could rob them of their unique skills and ideals, others view them as essential adversaries who bring about change through confrontation. Additionally, a broad and developing middle ground that celebrates the emergence of new institutions that can no longer be classified as belonging to one sector or the other finds inspiration in fusing aspects of both of these viewpoints. What is the background of the concepts of civil society? Does civil society have the power to change markets, and if so, how and to what extent? In order to address these problems, this paper examines three levels of how modern civil society action affects market actors' behavior and assesses the social, environmental, and economic repercussions. The strategic level of action investigates whether a more ambitious agenda and potential for change have been sacrificed in exchange for less significant tactical successes; the tactical level of action focuses on the specific outcomes of such efforts, such as a campaign against a corporation; and the systemic level investigates whether the fundamental conditions for civil society action on market transformation are themselves changing in light of experience and broader global changes. If so, what are the ramifications of this change? These three levels of action are interwoven throughout the analysis that follows, which starts with contextualizing the debate and outlining the history of civil society concepts and the emergence of "civil regulation," followed by a brief synopsis of the impact of civil society. This paper then delves into new economic and geopolitical developments that both complicate and enhance the interactions between civil society and the market, and it ends by reassessing the outcomes of these interactions in light of these developments.