Government Policy and the Nonprofit Sector: Switzerland - VMI
Government Policy and the Nonprofit Sector: Switzerland - VMI
Government Policy and the Nonprofit Sector: Switzerland - VMI
- TAGS
- nonprofit
- switzerland
- vmi.ch
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Ce n t e r f o r Civil So C i e t y St u d i e S<br />
at <strong>the</strong> Johns Hopkins Institute for <strong>Policy</strong> Studies<br />
Co m pa r at i v e No N p r o f i t Se C t o r pr o j e C t<br />
<strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>:<br />
Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
by<br />
Prof. Dr. Michael Nollert<br />
Prof. Dr. Monica Budowski
WORKING PAPERS<br />
The Johns Hopkins Comparative<br />
<strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong> Project<br />
Lester M. Salamon, Director<br />
GOVERNMENT POLICY AND THE<br />
NONPROFIT SECTOR:<br />
SWITZERLAND<br />
by<br />
Prof. Dr. Michael Nollert<br />
<strong>and</strong><br />
Prof. Dr. Monica Budowski<br />
Working Paper Number 48<br />
September 2009
The CNP Project in Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
Research team:<br />
Prof. Dr. Bernd Helmig, <strong>VMI</strong> – University of Fribourg, University of Mannheim (Germany)<br />
lic. rer. pol. Christoph Bärlocher, <strong>VMI</strong> – University of Fribourg<br />
Prof. Dr. Markus Gmür, <strong>VMI</strong> – University of Fribourg<br />
Dr. Hans Lichtsteiner, <strong>VMI</strong> – University of Fribourg<br />
Prof. Dr. Robert Purtschert, <strong>VMI</strong> – University of Fribourg<br />
Ass.‐Prof. Dr. Georg von Schnurbein, University of Basel<br />
lic. rer. pol. Martin Blickenstorfer, <strong>VMI</strong> – University of Fribourg<br />
BA in soc. sc. Stefan Bächtold, <strong>VMI</strong> – University of Fribourg<br />
Prof. Dr. Monica Budowski, University of Fribourg<br />
Prof. Dr. Michael Nollert, University of Fribourg<br />
Prof. Dr. Dominique Jakob, University of Zurich<br />
Dr. Bernard Degen, University of Basel<br />
Prof. Dr. Josef Mooser, University of Basel<br />
Switzerl<strong>and</strong> Advisory Committee:<br />
Dr. Martina Ziegerer, ZEWO Foundation, CEO<br />
Dr. h.c. Franz Marty, Raiffeisen group, President of <strong>the</strong> advisory board<br />
Prof. Dr. Ernst Buschor, Bertelsmann Foundation, Chairman of <strong>the</strong> board of trustees<br />
lic. sc. écon. Philippe Küttel, Swiss Federal Statistic Office, Director of <strong>the</strong> Section National Accounts<br />
Prof. h.c. Marco Blatter, Swiss Olympic Association, Former CEO<br />
Dr. Herbert Ammann, Schweizerische Gemeinnützige Gesellschaft, CEO<br />
Dr. Beat von Wartburg, SwissFoundations, President<br />
Dr. h.c. Jürg Krummenacher, Caritas Switzerl<strong>and</strong> , Former Director<br />
The CNP Project in Switzerl<strong>and</strong> was funded by:<br />
GEBERT RÜF STIFTUNG, Basel<br />
Ecoscientia Stiftung, Vaduz<br />
ISBN 1‐886333‐62‐9<br />
© The Johns Hopkins University Center for Civil Society Studies, 2009<br />
All rights reserved.<br />
Center for Civil Society Studies<br />
Institute for <strong>Policy</strong> Studies<br />
The Johns Hopkins University<br />
3400 N. Charles Street<br />
Baltimore, Maryl<strong>and</strong> 21218‐2688<br />
USA<br />
Verb<strong>and</strong>smanagement Institut (<strong>VMI</strong>)<br />
Universität Fribourg<br />
Postfach 1559<br />
1701 Fribourg<br />
0041(0)26 – 300 84 00<br />
0041(0)26 – 300 97 55<br />
This publication is available for download at www.ccss.jhu.edu.<br />
Suggested form of citation<br />
Michael Nollert <strong>and</strong> Monica Budowski. “<strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong>.” Working Papers of <strong>the</strong><br />
Johns Hopkins Comparative <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong> Project, No. 48. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Center for Civil Society Studies,<br />
2009.
TABLE OF CONTENTS<br />
PREFACE i<br />
ABBREVIATIONS ii<br />
I. INTRODUCTION 1<br />
II. THE SWISS POLITICAL CONTEXT 2<br />
a) Overall Posture of <strong>the</strong> <strong>Government</strong> 2<br />
1. General attitude of <strong>the</strong> government towards nonprofit organizations 2<br />
2. Specific <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> Towards <strong>Nonprofit</strong> Organizations 3<br />
3. The Philosophy <strong>and</strong> Principles Behind Swiss <strong>Policy</strong> 4<br />
4. Differences Among Parties in Their Attitudes Toward <strong>the</strong> NPO <strong>Sector</strong> 5<br />
b) Type <strong>and</strong> Extent of <strong>Government</strong>al Support 6<br />
1. Type of <strong>Government</strong>al Support of <strong>the</strong> <strong>Sector</strong> 6<br />
2. Extent of <strong>Government</strong>al Support 7<br />
3. Ideas Behind <strong>Government</strong>al Funding 8<br />
c) Changes in Position of <strong>the</strong> Federal <strong>Government</strong> 9<br />
1. Shifts in Philosophy 9<br />
2. Changes in Level <strong>and</strong> Type of Support 9<br />
3. Incentives for <strong>the</strong> Formation <strong>and</strong> Operation of Organizations 10<br />
4. New Restrictions 10<br />
d) Overall Position of Local Governing Bodies 12<br />
e) Local Attitudes Towards Supra‐National Organizations 12<br />
III. CHARACTERISTICS OF NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS AND THEIR POLITICAL IMPORTANCE 13<br />
a) Role of <strong>Nonprofit</strong> Organizations for Politics <strong>and</strong> Policies 14<br />
b) The Role of Umbrella Groups on <strong>Policy</strong> Issues 17<br />
c) Involvement of Swiss <strong>Nonprofit</strong> Organizations in International or Regional Umbrella Groups 18<br />
III. CURRENT ISSUES 19<br />
a) Restructuring of Swiss Politics 20<br />
b) Cooperation with Commercial Organizations 21<br />
c) State Financial Support 22<br />
d) Professionalization 22<br />
e) Legal Framework 23<br />
V. SUMMARY 24<br />
VII. REFERENCES 25<br />
APPENDIX 1: Consulted Experts 27<br />
APPENDIX 1: Interview Questions 28<br />
i
Institute for <strong>Policy</strong> Studies<br />
Wyman Park Building / 3400 North Charles Street / Baltimore, MD 21218‐2688<br />
410‐516‐5463 / FAX 410‐516‐7818 / E‐mail: ccss@jhu.edu<br />
Center for Civil Society Studies<br />
Lester M. Salamon<br />
Director<br />
Preface<br />
This is one in a series of working papers produced under <strong>the</strong> Johns Hopkins Comparative <strong>Nonprofit</strong><br />
<strong>Sector</strong> Project (CNP), a collaborative effort by scholars around <strong>the</strong> world to underst<strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> scope, structure,<br />
financing, <strong>and</strong> role of <strong>the</strong> nonprofit sector using a common framework <strong>and</strong> approach. Begun in 1991 in 13<br />
countries, <strong>the</strong> project continues to exp<strong>and</strong>, currently encompassing more than 40 countries.<br />
The working papers provide a vehicle for <strong>the</strong> initial dissemination of <strong>the</strong> CNP work to an international<br />
audience of scholars, practitioners, <strong>and</strong> policy analysts interested in <strong>the</strong> social <strong>and</strong> economic role played by<br />
nonprofit organizations in different countries, <strong>and</strong> in <strong>the</strong> comparative analysis of <strong>the</strong>se important, but often<br />
neglected, institutions.<br />
Working papers are intermediary products, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>y are released in <strong>the</strong> interest of timely distribution of<br />
project results to stimulate scholarly discussion <strong>and</strong> inform policy debates. A full list of <strong>the</strong>se papers is provided<br />
inside <strong>the</strong> back cover.<br />
The production of <strong>the</strong>se Working Papers owes much to <strong>the</strong> devoted efforts of our project staff. The<br />
present paper benefited greatly from <strong>the</strong> contributions of Senior Research Associate Wojciech Sokolowski <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
editorial work of CNP Project Coordinator Megan Haddock <strong>and</strong> Project Assistant Chelsea Newhouse. On behalf<br />
of <strong>the</strong> project’s core staff, I also want to express our deep gratitude to our project colleagues around <strong>the</strong> world <strong>and</strong><br />
to <strong>the</strong> many sponsors of <strong>the</strong> project listed at <strong>the</strong> end of this paper.<br />
The views <strong>and</strong> opinions expressed in <strong>the</strong>se papers are those of <strong>the</strong> authors <strong>and</strong> do not necessarily<br />
represent <strong>the</strong> views or opinions of <strong>the</strong> institutions with which <strong>the</strong>y are affiliated, <strong>the</strong> Johns Hopkins University, its<br />
Institute for <strong>Policy</strong> Studies <strong>and</strong> Center for Civil Society Studies, or any of <strong>the</strong>ir officers or supporters, or <strong>the</strong><br />
series’ editors.<br />
We are delighted to be able to make <strong>the</strong> early results of this project available in this form <strong>and</strong> welcome<br />
comments <strong>and</strong> inquiries ei<strong>the</strong>r about this paper or <strong>the</strong> project as a whole.<br />
ii<br />
Lester M. Salamon<br />
Project Director
ABBREVIATIONS<br />
ASM: Arbeitgeberverb<strong>and</strong> schweizerischer Metall‐ und Maschinenindustrieller<br />
BFS: Bundesamt für Statistik<br />
BV: Bundesverfassung<br />
CVP: Christlichdemokratische Volkspartei<br />
EFD: Eidgenössisches Finanzdepartement<br />
E.U.: European Union<br />
FDHA: Federal Department of Home Affairs<br />
FDP: Freisinnig‐Demokratische Partei<br />
FIFA: Fédération Internationale de Football Association<br />
KPGH: Konferenz der Präsidentinnen und Präsidenten der grossen Hilfswerke der Schweiz<br />
NPO: <strong>Nonprofit</strong> Organization<br />
SGF: Dachverb<strong>and</strong> Schweizerischer Gemeinnütziger Frauen<br />
SGG: Schweizerische Gemeinnützige Gesellschaft<br />
SMUV: Schweizerischer Metall‐ und Uhrenarbeiterverb<strong>and</strong><br />
SPS: Sozialdemokratische Partei der Schweiz<br />
SVP: Schweizerische Volkspartei<br />
UEFA: Union of European Football Associations<br />
VAT: Value‐added Tax<br />
ZEWO: Schweizerische Fachstelle für gemeinnützige, Spenden sammelnde Organisationen<br />
iii
I. INTRODUCTION<br />
<strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
Dr. Michael Nollert 1<br />
Dr. Monica Budowski 2<br />
This paper addresses <strong>the</strong> political context for nonprofit organizations (NPOs) in Switzerl<strong>and</strong>. The term “NPO” as<br />
used in this article refers to trusteeship organizations that exist alongside state <strong>and</strong> commercially run<br />
organizations. The term “civil society organization” is used more commonly in o<strong>the</strong>r countries than in<br />
Switzerl<strong>and</strong> where <strong>the</strong> term NPO is more frequently used. 3 These NPOs provide goods <strong>and</strong>/or services to <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
members or to third parties, <strong>and</strong> according to surveys by <strong>the</strong> Swiss Federal Statistical Office <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> Swiss<br />
Society of Public Utility, 4 engage approximately one quarter of Switzerl<strong>and</strong>’s 7.7 million inhabitants (2009), who<br />
voluntarily participate in NPOs (Nollert <strong>and</strong> Huser 2007, Ammann et al. 2007).<br />
In <strong>the</strong> Swiss nonprofit sector three legal entities have been established: associations, co‐operatives, <strong>and</strong><br />
foundations. The following offers a brief description of <strong>the</strong>ir importance <strong>and</strong> function in Switzerl<strong>and</strong>.<br />
Associations are by far <strong>the</strong> most important legal entities, numbering more than 100,000. Their primary function<br />
is to serve <strong>the</strong>ir members, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>y most commonly operate in <strong>the</strong> sporting, cultural <strong>and</strong> political arenas.<br />
Foundations come second in importance, counting more than 25,000. In contrast to associations, <strong>the</strong>y do not<br />
take direct action <strong>the</strong>mselves, but ra<strong>the</strong>r provide financing for public welfare groups (Egger et al. 2006). Nearly<br />
half are unregistered personal foundations. There are also approximately 12,000 charitable foundations (NPOs<br />
in <strong>the</strong> narrowest sense) <strong>and</strong> each year a fur<strong>the</strong>r 200‐300 new foundations are established.<br />
There are nearly 15,000 co‐operatives in Switzerl<strong>and</strong>. Agricultural co‐operatives, wholesale co‐operatives (e.g.<br />
Migros, Coop), <strong>and</strong> mutual savings banks <strong>and</strong> loan societies (e.g. Raiffeisen) have played an important role in<br />
Swiss economic history <strong>and</strong> politics (Purtschert 2005). However, according to Helmig, Bärlocher <strong>and</strong> von<br />
Schnurbein (2009) <strong>the</strong>y are not a part of <strong>the</strong> Swiss nonprofit sector as defined by <strong>the</strong> Johns Hopkins Comparative<br />
<strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong> Project because <strong>the</strong>y distribute profit to <strong>the</strong>ir members.<br />
Of slightly less importance are incorporated companies with charitable status, <strong>and</strong> religious organizations.<br />
Among <strong>the</strong>se, publicly <strong>and</strong> legally recognized churches need to be distinguished from free churches. The former<br />
1<br />
Dr. Michael Nollert is Associate Professor at <strong>the</strong> Section of Sociology, Social <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> Social Work in <strong>the</strong> Department of Social Sciences<br />
at <strong>the</strong> University of Fribourg (Switzerl<strong>and</strong>).<br />
2<br />
Dr. Monica Budowski is Full Professor at <strong>the</strong> Section of Sociology, Social <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> Social Work in <strong>the</strong> Department of Social Sciences at<br />
<strong>the</strong> University of Fribourg (Switzerl<strong>and</strong>).<br />
3<br />
The term gemeinnützige Gesellschaft i.e. “society of public utility” covers a wide spectrum, primarily because <strong>the</strong> activities of <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
contributions to <strong>the</strong>se organizations are subject to tax privileges.<br />
4<br />
Schweizerische Gemeinnützige Gesellschaft, SGG<br />
1
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
are characterized by a strong link to <strong>the</strong> state through a long list of rights <strong>and</strong> responsibilities (Cattacin et al.<br />
2003). As a result of this relationship with <strong>the</strong> state, legally recognized churches are not considered to be NPOs<br />
according to <strong>the</strong> Comparative <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong> Project (CNP), whereas free churches are included.<br />
The rest of this paper is structured as follows: Section II addresses <strong>the</strong> Swiss political context with its<br />
particularities of a confederation <strong>and</strong> of direct democratic instruments that impinge upon <strong>the</strong> socio‐political<br />
environment for nonprofit organizations. Section III discusses <strong>the</strong> characteristics of nonprofit organizations <strong>and</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong>ir influence on politics <strong>and</strong> policies. Current issues relevant for nonprofit organizations according to<br />
interviews with experts in <strong>the</strong> field are presented in Section IV. Finally, a brief summary of nonprofit<br />
organizations is offered in Section V.<br />
II. THE SWISS POLITICAL CONTEXT<br />
In this section we discuss <strong>the</strong> overall posture of <strong>the</strong> Swiss <strong>Government</strong> towards <strong>the</strong> nonprofit sector. We specify<br />
where this has led to specific policy changes. We fur<strong>the</strong>r present <strong>and</strong> discuss <strong>the</strong> extent <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> form of <strong>the</strong><br />
governmental support for nonprofit organizations in general, on <strong>the</strong> local level <strong>and</strong> with respect to supra‐<br />
national organizations, depict ideas underpinning <strong>the</strong> history of this specific relationship between <strong>the</strong><br />
government <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> NPOs, <strong>and</strong> look at <strong>the</strong> attitudes various political parties have towards <strong>the</strong> NPO sector.<br />
a) Overall Posture of <strong>the</strong> <strong>Government</strong><br />
1. General attitude of <strong>the</strong> government towards nonprofit organizations<br />
Switzerl<strong>and</strong> has been described as a “Confederation” (Confoederatio Helvetica) since <strong>the</strong> end of its first attempt<br />
to found a unitary state, <strong>the</strong> Helvetic Republic in 1802, which shows that <strong>the</strong> government has adopted a<br />
generally positive stance toward <strong>the</strong> nonprofit sector. This is so because <strong>the</strong> old Swiss confederation was<br />
originally created as an alliance among <strong>the</strong> sovereign valley communities of <strong>the</strong> central Alps, <strong>and</strong> after its<br />
constitution in 1848 <strong>the</strong> Swiss state continued to assume that all social problems with <strong>the</strong> exception of defense,<br />
foreign affairs <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> common currency should be managed by sovereign actors such as municipalities,<br />
cantons, families <strong>and</strong> commercial or nonprofit companies. Indeed, co‐operative associations played an<br />
important role even before <strong>the</strong> Federal state was founded in 1848. Organizations such as <strong>the</strong> Forest <strong>and</strong> Alp Co‐<br />
operatives 5 recall traditions that are centuries old in organizing social relationships <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir shared<br />
environments.<br />
The idea of “self‐help” developed during <strong>the</strong> industrial revolution, particularly in agricultural <strong>and</strong> wholesale co‐<br />
operatives <strong>and</strong> in mutual savings banks <strong>and</strong> loan societies. NPOs later gained national importance by organizing<br />
in umbrella groups, unions <strong>and</strong> political parties, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> state began to rely on <strong>the</strong> many public services provided<br />
by <strong>the</strong>se NPOs. This mutual dependency became institutionalized as NPOs <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> government collectively<br />
engaged in <strong>the</strong> process of drafting <strong>and</strong> implementing political measures <strong>and</strong> coordinating economic processes<br />
(Wagner 1999, 2002).<br />
5 Wald‐ und Alpenkorporationen<br />
2
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
Despite <strong>the</strong> state’s reliance on NPOs, <strong>the</strong> Swiss state’s resources for social spending are limited (as measured by<br />
<strong>the</strong> public spending ratio), which is undoubtedly <strong>the</strong> result of <strong>the</strong> powerful influence exerted by private interest<br />
associations (o<strong>the</strong>r than charitable) <strong>and</strong> by <strong>the</strong> Liberal‐Democratic Party (FDP) 6 . This might also explain why <strong>the</strong><br />
government looks kindly upon nonprofit organizations that carry out charitable or relief tasks without or with<br />
scant state support. The strong network of varied relationships between politics <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> nonprofit sector is<br />
fur<strong>the</strong>r encouraged by <strong>the</strong> fact that many members of Swiss Parliament <strong>and</strong> former executive committee<br />
members hold m<strong>and</strong>ates on boards of nonprofit organizations.<br />
Although <strong>the</strong> Swiss <strong>Government</strong> looks favorably on <strong>the</strong> NPO sector <strong>and</strong> relies on it to provide many services, it<br />
takes a h<strong>and</strong>s‐off approach <strong>and</strong> does not pursue explicit policies in favor of nonprofit organizations. The June<br />
2000 parliamentary stance on volunteer organizations that led to a request to <strong>the</strong> Federal Council for a<br />
comprehensive study of voluntary <strong>and</strong> honorary activity in Switzerl<strong>and</strong> provides a good example of this<br />
approach. In its response, <strong>the</strong> Federal Council acknowledged <strong>the</strong> functions of volunteer work <strong>and</strong> welcomed <strong>the</strong><br />
commission of a report. But when asked about <strong>the</strong> report on July 18, 2001 during <strong>the</strong> Federal Council’s question<br />
time by <strong>the</strong> National councilor from Tessin, Chiara Simoneschi, <strong>the</strong> Federal Council responded it did not have<br />
resources available to commission such a report. The Swiss Federal Statistical Office later funded <strong>and</strong> completed<br />
<strong>the</strong> requested report in <strong>the</strong> end with its own means (BFS 2004).<br />
2. Specific <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> Towards <strong>Nonprofit</strong> Organizations<br />
As described above, though <strong>the</strong> Swiss government’s relationship towards NPOs has been more implicit <strong>and</strong><br />
incoherent than explicit, it appreciates <strong>the</strong> programs <strong>and</strong> services that NPOs deliver <strong>and</strong> it has always been<br />
interested in good relations with <strong>the</strong> NPO sector. The state has been reluctant to regulate this sector because it<br />
considers <strong>the</strong> nonprofit sector an important component of society with a high level of activity that is anchored<br />
explicitly in independence from <strong>the</strong> state. Hence, unlike countries such as France or Germany, <strong>the</strong> autonomy of<br />
<strong>the</strong> nonprofit sector has generally not been questioned <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>refore appears to require no special protection<br />
(Ermatinger 1936).<br />
This does vary somewhat as each department of <strong>the</strong> government takes its own approach towards NPOs.<br />
Consequently, various relationships between government <strong>and</strong> NPOs exist within <strong>and</strong> among fields. Overall,<br />
however, <strong>the</strong> nonprofit sector is considered by <strong>the</strong> state to be a resource <strong>and</strong> source of knowledge <strong>and</strong><br />
expertise that can be drawn upon when governmental agencies are overcharged or lack resources. The<br />
relationship has led <strong>the</strong> “small state” Swiss government to entrust many public services to private social actors<br />
from <strong>the</strong> outset. This is evidenced by <strong>the</strong> role professional federations play in vocational training, <strong>the</strong> presence<br />
of public relief organizations in dealing with social problems, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> militia institution 7 requiring citizens to get<br />
involved in public services (e.g. school janitorial service, fire brigade) on an honorary basis (Beobachter 2000b).<br />
In recent years, however, some critical voices have challenged this partnership between government <strong>and</strong> NPOs<br />
by arguing that many NPOs function as quasi‐public agencies <strong>and</strong> are subsidized by <strong>the</strong> state (see section II.c).<br />
6 Freisinnig‐Demokratische Partei (FDP)<br />
7 Milizwesen<br />
3
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
The importance <strong>and</strong> political influence of <strong>the</strong> NPO sector in Swiss politics is tied to <strong>the</strong> general weakness of <strong>the</strong><br />
state bureaucracy. One indication of <strong>the</strong> weakness of <strong>the</strong> state bureaucracy is that most members of Parliament<br />
are strongly affiliated with interest groups (supervisory boards of enterprises, employers’ organizations, trade<br />
unions). A second indication is that public servants <strong>and</strong> members of <strong>the</strong> Parliament often depend on external<br />
expertise provided by interest groups. A fur<strong>the</strong>r indication is that <strong>the</strong> comparatively few strikes, high<br />
protectoral tariffs, <strong>and</strong> large agricultural subsidies are due in particular to special interest politics of associations<br />
<strong>and</strong> not to activities of public authorities.<br />
The low level of conflict amongst <strong>the</strong> workforce can be traced back to <strong>the</strong> so‐called “peace agreement” of 1937<br />
in <strong>the</strong> Swiss metalwork <strong>and</strong> machine industry. Against <strong>the</strong> background of threatening fascist Axis powers, <strong>the</strong><br />
National Council <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> president of <strong>the</strong> Swiss Metalwork <strong>and</strong> Watch Industry Workers Federation (SMUV) 8 ,<br />
Konrad Ilg, proposed to <strong>the</strong> president of <strong>the</strong> Federation of Swiss Metalwork <strong>and</strong> Machine Industrialists (ASM) 9<br />
abstention from militant action under certain conditions. One condition was that central disputes be evaluated<br />
<strong>and</strong> resolved by a neutral arbitration board according to a “good faith” effort (Humbel 1987). This model of<br />
social partnership became <strong>the</strong> collective labor agreement 10 , a sector‐by‐sector agreement between trade unions<br />
<strong>and</strong> employers regarding working conditions, pay <strong>and</strong> hours. This agreement continued after <strong>the</strong> war <strong>and</strong><br />
became codified in <strong>the</strong> 1974 collective labor agreement (Armingeon et al., 2000, Fluder et al., 1991, 1996).<br />
The NPOs’ strong influence is fur<strong>the</strong>r institutionalized in some of <strong>the</strong> instruments of direct democracy: <strong>the</strong><br />
referendum, <strong>the</strong> initiative, as well as <strong>the</strong> consultation process (see section III.a <strong>and</strong> Linder 1999). If a qualified<br />
number of citizens disagree with proposed legislation, Swiss law requires it to be subject to a referendum.<br />
Consequently legislators try to incorporate as many NPOs as possible at <strong>the</strong> consultation stage of policy‐making<br />
in order to avoid this happening too frequently (see section III.a). NPOs can also force votes on extra‐<br />
parliamentary proposals via initiatives.<br />
3. The Philosophy <strong>and</strong> Principles Behind Swiss <strong>Policy</strong><br />
The Swiss government’s policy with regard to nonprofit organizations is fundamentally based on <strong>the</strong> subsidiarity<br />
principle (Latin: subsidum = assistance). Article 5a of <strong>the</strong> Federal Constitution explicitly states: “The principle of<br />
subsidiarity is to be observed in <strong>the</strong> allocation <strong>and</strong> implementation of public functions.” According to this<br />
principle <strong>the</strong> state should only carry out activities <strong>and</strong> resolve problems when no o<strong>the</strong>r social actor subordinate<br />
to <strong>the</strong> Swiss <strong>Government</strong> can be found to take responsibility, such as municipalities, cantons, families <strong>and</strong><br />
commercial or nonprofit companies.<br />
In Switzerl<strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> subsidiarity principle has two philosophical origins; <strong>the</strong>se are evident in <strong>the</strong> differences<br />
between <strong>the</strong> manifestos of <strong>the</strong> Liberal <strong>and</strong> Catholic parties. The liberal subsidiarity principle supports <strong>the</strong><br />
assumption that individuals are responsible for <strong>the</strong>ir own lives <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir own protection against risk. The state<br />
<strong>the</strong>refore interferes only when <strong>the</strong> individual’s resources <strong>and</strong> those of its primary social networks are<br />
insufficient.<br />
8<br />
Schweizerischer Metall‐ und Uhrenarbeiterverb<strong>and</strong><br />
9<br />
Arbeitgeberverb<strong>and</strong> schweizerischer Maschinen‐ und Metallindustrieller<br />
10<br />
Der Gesamtarbeitsvertrag, GAV<br />
4
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
The Catholic subsidiarity principle developed in Switzerl<strong>and</strong> in <strong>the</strong> second half of <strong>the</strong> 19 th century; its origins date<br />
back to <strong>the</strong> search for solutions to <strong>the</strong> “social question”. The 19 th century Papal Social Encyclicals 11 advocated a<br />
third way forward between capitalism <strong>and</strong> state socialism that built on <strong>the</strong> potential of families <strong>and</strong> workers to<br />
help <strong>and</strong> organize <strong>the</strong>mselves <strong>and</strong> on <strong>the</strong> activities of charities (Caritas 2002) to solve <strong>the</strong> problem of social<br />
integration.<br />
Unlike <strong>the</strong> liberal approach which limits governmental support to that of last resort (<strong>the</strong> ultimate social safety<br />
net), <strong>the</strong> Catholic view emphasizes State support of its citizens in <strong>the</strong>ir efforts to organize <strong>the</strong>mselves, <strong>and</strong> to<br />
protect <strong>the</strong>ir social <strong>and</strong> employment rights.<br />
4. Differences Among Parties in Their Attitudes Toward <strong>the</strong> NPO <strong>Sector</strong><br />
In general, four political parties have influenced Swiss politics for many years: <strong>the</strong> Liberal‐Democratic Party<br />
(FDP) 12 , <strong>the</strong> Christian Democratic People’s Party (CVP) 13 , <strong>the</strong> Swiss People’s Party (SVP) 14 , <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> Social<br />
Democratic Party (SPS) 15 . The political stances of <strong>the</strong>se four parties vary widely, but most political parties have<br />
positive attitudes towards <strong>the</strong> nonprofit sector. The Liberal‐Democratic Party (FDP) considers <strong>the</strong> nonprofit<br />
sector to be an important anti<strong>the</strong>sis to <strong>the</strong> state <strong>and</strong> consequently supports it in <strong>the</strong>ory. Their position has<br />
become extreme when it comes to social issues: many of <strong>the</strong> party’s representatives hope that NPOs <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
volunteers will assume responsibility for <strong>the</strong> traditional social services provided by <strong>the</strong> state. The Christian<br />
Democratic People’s Party (CVP), on <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r h<strong>and</strong>, views it as an area of common public interest, solidarity,<br />
<strong>and</strong> charity.<br />
The moderate‐left Social Democratic Party (SPS) does not share or appreciate <strong>the</strong> FDP’s posture. They fear that<br />
<strong>the</strong> delegation of traditional public services carried out with governmental support to NPOs <strong>and</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r actors<br />
without governmental support will erode professionalism in <strong>the</strong> nonprofit <strong>and</strong> social sectors. Although <strong>the</strong><br />
Social Democratic Party in general advocates state‐run or state‐led problem‐solving, it none<strong>the</strong>less considers <strong>the</strong><br />
nonprofit sector a bastion of practiced solidarity <strong>and</strong> accordingly supports <strong>the</strong> sector in <strong>the</strong> political arena.<br />
The only party with a critical attitude towards <strong>the</strong> nonprofit sector is <strong>the</strong> conservative Swiss People’s Party (SVP).<br />
Many party representatives consider several nonprofit organizations unnecessary. They are particularly critical<br />
of <strong>the</strong> environmental associations, which <strong>the</strong>y believe misuse <strong>the</strong> Federation Complaint Right 16 (see section III.a)<br />
to block economically sound construction projects. In <strong>the</strong> last few years <strong>the</strong> Swiss People’s Party (SVP) has<br />
received support from <strong>the</strong> Liberal‐Democratic Party (FDP) to start an initiative to cancel <strong>the</strong> Federation<br />
Complaint Right. Targeting environmental associations <strong>and</strong> development agencies, <strong>the</strong> SVP members of<br />
Parliament requested that <strong>the</strong> Federal Council obliges NPOs receiving substantial financing from public<br />
institutions to disclose <strong>the</strong> sources <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> amount of contributions received from <strong>the</strong> state or from major<br />
11 Sozialenzyklika<br />
12 Freisinnig‐Demokratische Partei (FDP)<br />
13 Christlichdemokratische Volkspartei (CVP)<br />
14 Schweizerische Volkspartei (SVP)<br />
15 Sozialdemokratische Partei der Schweiz (SPS)<br />
16 Verb<strong>and</strong>sbeschwerderecht<br />
5
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
contributors in <strong>the</strong>ir balance sheet <strong>and</strong> to present a statement of account on how <strong>the</strong>se contributions were<br />
used.<br />
As a result of such debates over <strong>the</strong> past decade, many representatives of relief organizations have associated<br />
<strong>the</strong> rise of <strong>the</strong> Swiss People’s Party (SVP) with a decreased willingness of <strong>the</strong> state to support NPOs financially<br />
(Kriesi 2005).<br />
There are, however, a few exceptions to <strong>the</strong> Swiss People’s Party’s (SVP) posture, such as NPOs in <strong>the</strong> sports or<br />
<strong>the</strong> agricultural sector. Since many SVP members are actively engaged in sport clubs <strong>and</strong> associations, <strong>the</strong>y<br />
argue that it is primarily <strong>the</strong> state that should finance <strong>the</strong> security measures of events like <strong>the</strong> UEFA European<br />
football championship 2008. The Swiss People’s Party’s is also strongly represented in rural NPOs.<br />
b) Type <strong>and</strong> Extent of <strong>Government</strong>al Support<br />
This section presents <strong>the</strong> specific type <strong>and</strong> extent of governmental support as well as <strong>the</strong> basic ideas behind<br />
governmental funding.<br />
1. Type of <strong>Government</strong>al Support of <strong>the</strong> <strong>Sector</strong><br />
Because <strong>the</strong> subsidiarity principle is interpreted basically as a request to NPOs to assume <strong>the</strong>ir share of<br />
responsibility in Swiss society, <strong>the</strong> government eschews provision of extensive symbolic or regulatory support<br />
for NPOs at <strong>the</strong> federal, cantonal, <strong>and</strong> municipal levels. The Swiss government’s main methods of supporting<br />
NPOs are <strong>the</strong> creation of a incentivizing tax policy, discussed below in section II.c, <strong>and</strong> material support when<br />
entrusting NPOs with public services, such as care of <strong>the</strong> elderly <strong>and</strong> asylum seekers. When compared with<br />
private organizations (such as incorporated companies <strong>and</strong> limited liability companies), relief NPOs (most<br />
notably, associations, foundations, <strong>and</strong> co‐operatives) receive substantial tax benefits. In addition, ordinary<br />
taxpayers may deduct part of <strong>the</strong>ir donations to NPOs from <strong>the</strong>ir taxes.<br />
Many Swiss NPOs are supported financially by public funds. There are three types of such state support: (i)<br />
direct contributions that are not linked to provision of services, (ii) <strong>the</strong> provision of capital, <strong>and</strong> (iii) so‐called<br />
service agreements. The service agreement consists of a contract between <strong>the</strong> state <strong>and</strong> one or more NPOs,<br />
comparable to contracts with private companies in <strong>the</strong> service sector. Because direct contributions <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
provision of capital are of minor importance in Switzerl<strong>and</strong> we will focus on service agreements.<br />
Service agreements entrust NPOs with <strong>the</strong> provision of a defined public service. Examples of such agreements<br />
are contracts between <strong>the</strong> Central Office for Family Issues of <strong>the</strong> Federal Social Insurance Office (BSV) 17 <strong>and</strong><br />
umbrella organizations in <strong>the</strong> care sector 18 to provide services to <strong>the</strong> elderly <strong>and</strong> h<strong>and</strong>icapped or for matters of<br />
family policy 19 , contracts between <strong>the</strong> Federal Office of Culture 20 <strong>and</strong> NPOs in <strong>the</strong> arts sector, between <strong>the</strong><br />
17<br />
Zentralstelle für Familienfragen im Bundesamt für Sozialversicherungen (BSV)<br />
18<br />
Dachverbände im Bereich der Alters‐ und Invalidenhilfe<br />
19<br />
Dachverbände im Bereich der Familienpolitik<br />
20<br />
Bundesamt für Kultur (BAK)<br />
6
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
Federal Office of Sports 21 <strong>and</strong> sport associations, or contracts by <strong>the</strong> Federal Agency for Development <strong>and</strong><br />
Cooperation (SDC) 22 for missions abroad <strong>and</strong> international assignments. A good example of <strong>the</strong> willingness of<br />
<strong>the</strong> state to support NPOs by injection of capital is <strong>the</strong> NPO‐certifying foundation ZEWO (see section III.b); its<br />
start‐up capital was largely provided by <strong>the</strong> cantons.<br />
Ano<strong>the</strong>r source of state support is <strong>the</strong> subsidizing of voluntary work by contributing funds to NPOs for<br />
investment in recruitment, initial training <strong>and</strong> fur<strong>the</strong>r education, <strong>and</strong> providing partial compensation for<br />
volunteers. These subsidies are, however, rare <strong>and</strong> concentrate mainly on providing funds to finance training<br />
programs for leaders of Youth <strong>and</strong> Sports associations 23 <strong>and</strong> for sports for <strong>the</strong> elderly.<br />
The state’s positive stance on NPOs was apparent in its tacit (symbolic) support of <strong>the</strong> commission of a report on<br />
voluntary work in Switzerl<strong>and</strong> in 2004. The report was financed <strong>and</strong> coordinated by an office subsidiary to <strong>the</strong><br />
Swiss Federal <strong>Government</strong>: <strong>the</strong> Swiss Federal Statistical Office 24 . It provides a summary of volunteer work <strong>and</strong><br />
includes a list of measures designed to promote volunteer work. The foreword of <strong>the</strong> report mentions that no<br />
new measures are presently to be expected as a result of state financial constraints.<br />
2. Extent of <strong>Government</strong>al Support<br />
The increased recognition <strong>and</strong> importance of service agreements over <strong>the</strong> past few years has highlighted <strong>the</strong><br />
relationship of support between <strong>the</strong> state <strong>and</strong> NPOs. Contracts between <strong>the</strong> government, cantons or<br />
municipalities <strong>and</strong> NPOs (or indeed commercial organizations) consist of <strong>the</strong> organization’s commitment to<br />
provide a public service remunerated by <strong>the</strong> public purse. A fur<strong>the</strong>r form of such mutual support is <strong>the</strong> public‐<br />
private partnership. This form of collaboration differs from a service agreement in that <strong>the</strong> exchange of services<br />
is not contractual.<br />
Until <strong>the</strong> 1990s <strong>the</strong> lack of data precluded a precise estimate of <strong>the</strong> level of monetary contribution assigned to<br />
<strong>the</strong>se service agreements. In order to provide such evidence <strong>the</strong> first Subsidy Report was published in 1997<br />
allowing for <strong>the</strong> conclusion that <strong>the</strong> Swiss State is actually a transfer state regarding subsidies. This conclusion is<br />
supported by <strong>the</strong> Swiss Statistics for Subsidies 25 that confirms <strong>the</strong> allocation of considerable sums to such<br />
service agreements <strong>and</strong> that such subsidies account for more than half of <strong>the</strong> Federal budget.<br />
According to <strong>the</strong> 1997 Subsidy Report 26 (EFD 1997), social welfare, transport, agriculture, <strong>and</strong> nutrition each<br />
account for more than 10 percent of <strong>the</strong> subsidies in <strong>the</strong>ir fields <strong>and</strong> are <strong>the</strong>refore <strong>the</strong> largest beneficiaries. If<br />
<strong>the</strong> development of <strong>the</strong>se various sectors is extrapolated over <strong>the</strong> period 1970‐1997, social welfare, an area<br />
where many NPOs are actively involved, may be receiving more than 50 percent (15 billion CHF) of all subsidies.<br />
However, it is worth noting that in 1997, 85 percent of all subsidies went to federally‐owned institutions (e.g.<br />
social insurances, railways, national roads) <strong>and</strong> only 8.2 percent to private organizations (6.8 percent went to<br />
21<br />
Bundesamt für Sport (BASPO)<br />
22<br />
Direktion für Entwicklung und Zusammenarbeit (DEZA)<br />
23<br />
Jugend und Sport<br />
24<br />
Bundesamt für Statistik<br />
25<br />
Schweizerische Subventionsstatistik<br />
26<br />
Subventionsbericht<br />
7
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
o<strong>the</strong>r actors). According to <strong>the</strong> 2008 Subsidy Report (EFD 2008) <strong>the</strong> subsidies’ share of <strong>the</strong> Federal<br />
government’s spending rose from 40 to 58 percent (about 30 billion CHF) from 1970 to 2005. In 2006 most of<br />
<strong>the</strong> subsidies were spent for social welfare (45 percent), traffic (18 percent), research <strong>and</strong> education (15<br />
percent), <strong>and</strong> agriculture <strong>and</strong> nutrition (12 percent).<br />
The Federal subsidy database provides information about <strong>the</strong> recipients, purpose, type, <strong>and</strong> amount of support<br />
given. For example, more than 50 million CHF was given to training programs that <strong>the</strong> Youth <strong>and</strong> Sport<br />
association provides to o<strong>the</strong>r associations each year. More than 3 million CHF was allocated to professional arts<br />
organizations <strong>and</strong> social actors with national responsibilities in this sector <strong>and</strong> to o<strong>the</strong>r national umbrella<br />
organizations. Approximately 1.5 million CHF went to family associations whose functions were coordination,<br />
information on <strong>and</strong> development of quality st<strong>and</strong>ards etc.; charity <strong>and</strong> relief organizations received more than<br />
1.5 million CHF as lump‐sum payments for <strong>the</strong>ir assistance in hearing asylum claims; more than 1.5 million was<br />
contributed to support coverage of <strong>the</strong> administrative costs of Swiss Refugee Support 27 ; nearly 14 million CHF<br />
was directed to programs implemented to assist <strong>and</strong> improve <strong>the</strong> social integration of foreign nationals as well<br />
as to <strong>the</strong> creation of structures promoting social integration; more than 18 million CHF was invested in cantonal<br />
advisory services providing advice to farmers.<br />
3. Ideas Behind <strong>Government</strong>al Funding<br />
Although <strong>the</strong>re is no explicit policy of <strong>the</strong> Swiss government towards <strong>the</strong> NPOs, <strong>the</strong> previous sections<br />
none<strong>the</strong>less document <strong>the</strong> close <strong>and</strong> constructive cooperation between <strong>the</strong> state <strong>and</strong> NPOs. In many areas,<br />
NPOs assume responsibility for certain services on behalf of <strong>the</strong> state that in o<strong>the</strong>r countries government<br />
agencies would normally be responsible for <strong>and</strong> secure provision. It can <strong>the</strong>refore be maintained that <strong>the</strong> Swiss<br />
government – at least implicitly – considers <strong>the</strong> nonprofit sector to be an essential link within society between<br />
<strong>the</strong> people <strong>and</strong> government. It is also clear <strong>the</strong>refore that in <strong>the</strong> past <strong>the</strong> public authorities expressed <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
interest in <strong>and</strong> support for a healthy nonprofit sector by developing regulations that streng<strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong>se<br />
organizations such as providing tax exemptions for NPOs or offering tax deductions for contributions to NPOs.<br />
However, as <strong>the</strong> next section shows, this interest <strong>and</strong> support for a healthy nonprofit sector has diminished<br />
substantially due to <strong>the</strong> philosophy of New Public Management.<br />
c) Changes in Position of <strong>the</strong> Federal <strong>Government</strong><br />
The following section discusses <strong>the</strong> various changes that have taken place over time in Switzerl<strong>and</strong>. The<br />
philosophy of New Public Management <strong>and</strong> harsh criticisms regarding efficiency <strong>and</strong> efficacy require NPOs to<br />
react, in particular, if <strong>the</strong>y want to continue to receive public subsidies for <strong>the</strong> public services <strong>the</strong>y deliver. Such<br />
changes have <strong>the</strong>ir repercussions on legislation. Despite claims to advantage organizations in terms of tax<br />
reductions, <strong>the</strong>re are presently no explicit governmental encouragements for NPOs with <strong>the</strong> exception of<br />
international organizations <strong>and</strong> foundations.<br />
27 Schweizerische Flüchtlingshilfe<br />
8
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
1. Shifts in Philosophy<br />
As stated in <strong>the</strong> introduction, liberal attitudes are at <strong>the</strong> core of <strong>the</strong> Swiss constitution, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>refore <strong>the</strong> Swiss<br />
government attributes a major role to NPOs in terms of policy formulation <strong>and</strong> implementation, as well as in<br />
regulating economic processes <strong>and</strong> tackling social problems. Since <strong>the</strong> late 1990s, however, <strong>the</strong> partnership<br />
between <strong>the</strong> state <strong>and</strong> NPOs has been challenged by <strong>the</strong> economic climate. One challenge comes from <strong>the</strong><br />
neoliberal economists, who argue that extensive market regulation in combination with raised levels of<br />
participation options for associations have resulted in “distribution coalitions” that were responsible for <strong>the</strong> lack<br />
of innovation in <strong>the</strong> post‐war period (Borner, Brunetti <strong>and</strong> Straubhaar 1990).<br />
Ano<strong>the</strong>r challenge has come from <strong>the</strong> philosophy of New Public Management, which calls for a more efficient<br />
public‐private partnership. At <strong>the</strong> same time <strong>the</strong> partnership is challenged by questions as to whe<strong>the</strong>r subsidies<br />
for NPOs in <strong>the</strong> social sector <strong>and</strong> sector of development cooperation are necessary. Although radical<br />
suggestions, such as abolishing plebiscitary devices (initiatives or referendums, <strong>the</strong> Federation Complaint Right),<br />
or canceling subsidies for well‐known welfare <strong>and</strong> relief organizations are not acceptable to <strong>the</strong> majority, <strong>the</strong>y<br />
point to an increasingly skeptical judgment promoted primarily by <strong>the</strong> Swiss People’s Party of <strong>the</strong> social <strong>and</strong><br />
economic functionality of associations <strong>and</strong> environmental organizations.<br />
2. Changes in Level <strong>and</strong> Type of Support<br />
Over <strong>the</strong> past few years, <strong>the</strong> government’s position has changed in two respects: (i) state institutions are acting<br />
with increased caution when meting out financial support; (ii) NPOs are receiving greater regulatory support.<br />
Since Switzerl<strong>and</strong> is federally organized it is important to stress that taxation in particular, can vary widely at <strong>the</strong><br />
federal, cantonal, <strong>and</strong> municipal levels. The impact of this is that <strong>the</strong> Federal government, <strong>the</strong> cantons, <strong>and</strong><br />
municipalities raise taxes in independent ways <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>reby all have a certain amount of control over specific<br />
devices acknowledging or supporting <strong>the</strong> work of NPOs by means of tax deductions or acknowledgement of<br />
<strong>the</strong>ir contributions to society.<br />
In 2006 <strong>the</strong> Foundation <strong>and</strong> Fiscal Law for <strong>Nonprofit</strong> Organizations 28 in <strong>the</strong> Civil Code was revised <strong>and</strong> ensured<br />
that differences between cantons <strong>and</strong> municipalities were minimized in <strong>the</strong> medium‐term, <strong>and</strong> allowable<br />
deductions for donations from direct Federal taxes was increased from 10 percent to 20 percent as of January<br />
2006. The point of departure for this revision dates back to a parliamentary initiative. It assumed that revising<br />
<strong>the</strong> Foundations legislation would increase <strong>the</strong> propensity to provide nonprofit foundations with greater<br />
financial means.<br />
At <strong>the</strong> cantonal level <strong>the</strong> deductions have been continually revised, which increased <strong>and</strong> harmonized <strong>the</strong> overall<br />
level of tax deduction for natural persons. As of January 1, 2006 <strong>and</strong> January 1, 2007 respectively, twelve<br />
cantons increased <strong>the</strong>ir tax deductions in respect to donations to welfare <strong>and</strong> relief organizations to 20 percent<br />
(Solothurn, Obwalden, Appenzell Innerrhoden, Glarus, Nidwalden, St. Gallen, Schwyz, Uri, Vaud, Zug, <strong>and</strong><br />
Luzern). Tax deductions of this sort have already been at this level for many years in three additional cantons<br />
(Aargau, Schaffhausen, <strong>and</strong> Zurich). The front‐runner is Basel‐L<strong>and</strong> with a 100 percent tax deduction in respect<br />
28 Stiftungs‐ und steuerliches Gemeinnützigkeitsrecht<br />
9
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
to donations made. The cantons of Berne <strong>and</strong> Grison (Graubünden) are currently revising <strong>the</strong>ir tax laws, both<br />
aiming at a 20 percent tax deduction for donations to welfare organizations.<br />
Presently, <strong>the</strong>re are efforts to harmonize <strong>the</strong> level of deductible contributions to political parties across<br />
Switzerl<strong>and</strong> to 10,000 CHF because, unlike in countries such as Germany, <strong>the</strong>y do not receive any financial<br />
support from <strong>the</strong> state. The reason for <strong>the</strong> proposal is that in contrast to <strong>the</strong> Federal government, 15 cantons<br />
allow deductions for membership fees <strong>and</strong> donations. The state political commission of <strong>the</strong> Council of States, 29<br />
supported by <strong>the</strong> majority of cantons <strong>and</strong> all political parties, submitted such a proposal for consultation.<br />
Although Federal councilor Eveline Widmer‐Schlumpf argued that <strong>the</strong> proposal would undermine <strong>the</strong> objective<br />
of a more simple tax system, <strong>the</strong> Council of States eventually supported <strong>the</strong> proposal with 36 to 4 votes in<br />
September 2008. In <strong>the</strong>ir spring session in 2009 <strong>the</strong> National Council also approved of <strong>the</strong> proposal.<br />
In contrast to tax deductions regarding donations, all previous attempts to provide o<strong>the</strong>r tax advantages to<br />
volunteers have failed. This is due to <strong>the</strong> opposition of <strong>the</strong> Swiss People’s Party (SVP), <strong>the</strong> Liberal‐Democratic<br />
Party (FDP), <strong>and</strong> elements of <strong>the</strong> Christian Democratic People’s Party (CVP) (e.g. as in 2004 in Zurich).<br />
None<strong>the</strong>less, some cantons plan to allow volunteers to also deduct out‐of‐pocket expenses. In Zurich, a<br />
deduction of 1000 CHF from taxable income is legal since 2007.<br />
3. Incentives for <strong>the</strong> Formation <strong>and</strong> Operation of Organizations<br />
At <strong>the</strong> moment, <strong>the</strong> Swiss government does not offer any explicit encouragements for most NPOs similar to<br />
those offered to donors <strong>and</strong> volunteers, though <strong>the</strong>re are some tax incentives offered to international<br />
organizations <strong>and</strong> foundations. Both categories profit from low taxation in Switzerl<strong>and</strong> in all cantons; in addition<br />
foundations also profit from <strong>the</strong> inter‐cantonal tax competition. Indeed, despite political attempts to advantage<br />
organizations in terms of tax deductions, many NPOs are facing new restrictions as outlined in <strong>the</strong> next section.<br />
4. New Restrictions<br />
The state’s predominantly positive appraisal of NPOs has to date prevented any major legislative intervention.<br />
However, as mentioned above, <strong>the</strong>re are political forces that would like to see <strong>the</strong> influence of associations<br />
limited. It is <strong>the</strong>refore quite possible that sooner or later restrictive proposals will come into force. The plan to<br />
abolish <strong>the</strong> Federation Complaint Right has been <strong>the</strong> subject of lively debate, for example. Some proponents in<br />
liberal circles (in particular from <strong>the</strong> Liberal Democratic Party (FDP)) have gone so far as to suggest constraining<br />
<strong>the</strong> constitutional rights provided by an initiative <strong>and</strong> referendum, which would considerably weaken <strong>the</strong><br />
influence of associations. They claim that many associations misuse <strong>the</strong>ir influence in order to hinder economic<br />
progress, especially where <strong>the</strong> private sector is concerned.<br />
Interactions between public authorities <strong>and</strong> NPOs have been restricted in new ways recently, although none of<br />
<strong>the</strong>se restrictions threaten <strong>the</strong> future existence of NPOs. For example, some political actors have called for<br />
subsidies to NPOs in <strong>the</strong> social sector to be subject to service agreements or that NPOs should be subject to a<br />
binding recommendation to rely heavily on donations <strong>and</strong> sponsors. The introduction of new management<br />
29 Staatspolitische Kommission des Ständerats<br />
10
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
techniques – New Public Management – focused on public finances, as well as continual criticism of government<br />
subsidy policy, underpins such dem<strong>and</strong>s. In 1997, as a result of its financial plight, <strong>the</strong> Federal government<br />
produced a report scrutinizing subsidy policy. The report was enthusiastically received <strong>and</strong> fed conservative<br />
criticism of NPOs subsidy without substantial service obligations.<br />
Foundations <strong>and</strong> associations consider <strong>the</strong> 2004 revision, initiated by <strong>the</strong> Federal Council, of <strong>the</strong> Stock<br />
Corporation <strong>and</strong> Financial‐Accounting Law 30 , a part of <strong>the</strong> Swiss Code of Obligations, to represent a fur<strong>the</strong>r<br />
restriction, particularly because it places <strong>the</strong>m on a par with incorporated companies <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>reby subject <strong>the</strong>m<br />
to <strong>the</strong> Code of Obligations in terms of financial <strong>and</strong> management accounting. Complaints about <strong>the</strong> law center<br />
largely on <strong>the</strong> fact that measures are too complex for <strong>the</strong> many of <strong>the</strong> small <strong>and</strong> middle‐size foundations <strong>and</strong><br />
associations run by volunteers <strong>and</strong> also on <strong>the</strong> structural differences between foundations, associations <strong>and</strong><br />
o<strong>the</strong>r legal entities.<br />
The planned reform of value‐added tax (VAT) appears even more restrictive. The incumbent Federal Minister of<br />
Finance has proposed that <strong>the</strong> current VAT exemption available to many NPOs should be abolished. In January<br />
2008, <strong>the</strong> Federal Council redrafted this proposal by adding <strong>the</strong> suggestion that NPOs <strong>and</strong> well‐managed<br />
voluntary associations with a revenue maximum of 250,000 CHF should be exempt from paying VAT.<br />
The Swiss Olympic Association still considers this threshold to be too low <strong>and</strong> has voiced concerns that<br />
approximately 700 voluntary organizations are at risk of closure. For example, <strong>the</strong> umbrella organization<br />
ProFonds (see section III.b) analyzed <strong>the</strong> Swiss Foundations <strong>and</strong> Associations sector <strong>and</strong> considers it to be over‐<br />
regulated <strong>and</strong> bureaucratized; at <strong>the</strong> same time it acknowledges <strong>the</strong> increase in tax deductions in respect of<br />
donations as a positive development.<br />
One reason for such new restrictions – according to proFonds – was <strong>the</strong> finding that many NPOs financed by<br />
public contributions do not respect legislator’s decisions. In this vein, <strong>the</strong> government’s Business Audit<br />
Commission 31 announced on January 28, 2008 that it planned to examine <strong>and</strong> shed light on <strong>the</strong> role of<br />
nongovernmental organizations engaged in migration policy <strong>and</strong> development cooperation. Relief organizations<br />
are often accused of living off state funds <strong>and</strong> disregarding <strong>the</strong> wishes of Federal government. Relief<br />
organizations working with asylum seekers are, for example, accused of having a financial interest in prolonging<br />
<strong>the</strong> process <strong>and</strong> encouraging <strong>the</strong>m to appeal.<br />
d) Overall Position of Local Governing Bodies<br />
Switzerl<strong>and</strong> is a Federal state providing its sub‐entities (<strong>and</strong> more than 2500 municipalities of widely varied size<br />
<strong>and</strong> population) with a huge range of possible policies <strong>and</strong> strategies, such as whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>and</strong> how NPOs receive tax<br />
incentives. It also expects – in line with <strong>the</strong> principle of subsidiarity – that NPOs will generally be supported at<br />
local level by sub‐entities.<br />
30 Aktien‐ und Rechnungslegungsrecht<br />
31 Geschäftsprüfungskommission<br />
11
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
It is <strong>the</strong> smaller ra<strong>the</strong>r than <strong>the</strong> larger municipalities that tend to work closely with local NPOs <strong>and</strong> tend to have<br />
more of an impact on local politics. As <strong>the</strong> size of municipalities increases, <strong>the</strong> probability that politicians are<br />
simultaneously involved with NPOs decreases, e.g. in sport clubs, welfare or relief organizations. Thus,<br />
politicians in small towns absolutely need to engage in <strong>and</strong> affiliate with local NPOs in order to acquire support<br />
at <strong>the</strong> polls. In contrast, in large towns party affiliation is more important than personal reputation for<br />
politicians. In o<strong>the</strong>r words: political competition is more personalized in small towns; <strong>the</strong>refore politicians in<br />
large towns can focus more strongly on <strong>the</strong>ir political objectives.<br />
Similar differences can also be seen with regard to voluntary work. In rural regions, <strong>the</strong> population displays a<br />
proportionally higher level of readiness for volunteer work as compared to urban agglomerations, though this<br />
varies by region.<br />
A comparison of <strong>the</strong> various regions in Switzerl<strong>and</strong> reveals that <strong>the</strong> population in <strong>the</strong> French‐speaking sector<br />
more readily accepts <strong>the</strong> <strong>Government</strong> as an agent for <strong>the</strong> resolution of social <strong>and</strong> public problems than German‐<br />
speaking Switzerl<strong>and</strong>. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, <strong>the</strong> former is less willing to participate in NPOs than <strong>the</strong> latter, less likely to<br />
donate, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> public authorities in this region are less willing to give NPOs permission for public advertising<br />
(for more details see <strong>the</strong> Volunteer Survey of <strong>the</strong> Swiss Society of Public Utility (SGG), Ammann et al. 2007).<br />
High levels of economic <strong>and</strong> cultural prosperity observed in most large cities, but also in some small cities (such<br />
as Zug or Neuchâtel), correlate with involvement in voluntary activities. The high concentration of NPO<br />
headquarters in <strong>the</strong> capital, Berne, also shows that it makes sense, particularly for interest groups, to be located<br />
at <strong>the</strong> centre of political power.<br />
In contrast to o<strong>the</strong>r policy areas, <strong>the</strong> effective differences in tax benefits between <strong>the</strong> regions <strong>and</strong> cantons are<br />
comparatively small regarding donations <strong>and</strong> volunteering. Exceptions to this are <strong>the</strong> canton of Neuchâtel that<br />
has very low tax deductions, <strong>and</strong> Basel‐L<strong>and</strong> with very high deductions. In addition, Zurich has allowed<br />
volunteers to deduct up to 1000 CHF of <strong>the</strong>ir out‐of‐pocket expenses from <strong>the</strong>ir gross income since 2007.<br />
However, <strong>the</strong> canton of Zug has become particularly attractive for foundations in recent years thanks to its<br />
unusually low rates of taxation.<br />
Marked differences exist in <strong>the</strong> degree of tacit (symbolic) support for NPOs in <strong>the</strong> social sector. Some cantons,<br />
Vaud <strong>and</strong> Neuchâtel for example, <strong>and</strong> some municipalities, such as Berne <strong>and</strong> Zurich, have established<br />
coordination centers for potential volunteers <strong>and</strong> government institutions, where institutions like hospitals call<br />
upon <strong>the</strong> local population to become active as volunteers. The linguistic regions vary in <strong>the</strong>ir approach to<br />
volunteer work: in <strong>the</strong> French‐ <strong>and</strong> Italian‐speaking cantons <strong>the</strong> approach is ra<strong>the</strong>r “top‐down”; in <strong>the</strong> German‐<br />
speaking cantons it is ra<strong>the</strong>r “bottom‐up”. In French‐speaking Switzerl<strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> population expects <strong>the</strong> state –<br />
<strong>and</strong> not <strong>the</strong> associations – to mobilize volunteers. Their participation as volunteers in formal organizations is<br />
generally lower than in <strong>the</strong> German‐speaking part. The differences between <strong>the</strong> three linguistic regions<br />
ultimately manifest <strong>the</strong>mselves in <strong>the</strong> quantity of new service agreements: more service agreements exist<br />
between <strong>the</strong> state <strong>and</strong> NPOs in <strong>the</strong> French‐ <strong>and</strong> Italian‐speaking than in <strong>the</strong> German‐speaking cantons. Still,<br />
given <strong>the</strong> different levels of potential support (municipal, cantonal, <strong>and</strong> federal), it is worth noting that <strong>the</strong><br />
predisposition to support NPOs can vary widely even within single cantons.<br />
12
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
e) Local Attitudes Towards Supra‐National Organizations<br />
Supra‐national organizations shy away from making explicit statements about civil society. The number of<br />
international organizations with headquarters in Switzerl<strong>and</strong> (e.g. <strong>the</strong> Red Cross, <strong>the</strong> International Labor<br />
Organization (ILO), <strong>the</strong> Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> Union of European<br />
Football Associations (UEFA)) testifies to <strong>the</strong> favorable political climate for NPOs in <strong>the</strong> country. A good example<br />
of this climate was Zurich’s offer of a 1.8 million CHF subsidy to <strong>the</strong> Club of Rome if it moved its headquarters<br />
from Hamburg to Zurich. However, in recent years an increasing number of public actors have questioned <strong>the</strong><br />
benefit to be gained from <strong>the</strong> creation of global football associations, <strong>and</strong> additionally why financially secure<br />
NPOs should in fact receive any additional state support or indeed tax incentives. It is not surprising <strong>the</strong>refore,<br />
that a referendum revealed a marginal vote against <strong>the</strong> relocation of <strong>the</strong> Club of Rome’s headquarters to Zurich<br />
in February in 2008. The Club of Rome moved to Winterthur in <strong>the</strong> canton of Zurich in April 2008, financed by a<br />
private Foundation, <strong>the</strong> “Robert und Ruth Heuberger Stiftung”.<br />
Having given an overview of <strong>the</strong> position of NPOs in Switzerl<strong>and</strong>, <strong>the</strong> following section focuses on its<br />
characteristics <strong>and</strong> political influence.<br />
III. CHARACTERISTICS OF NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS AND THEIR POLITICAL IMPORTANCE<br />
The Swiss nonprofit sector is extremely fragmented <strong>and</strong> faces various <strong>the</strong>mes <strong>and</strong> contentious issues. In <strong>the</strong><br />
social sector, a key topic is <strong>the</strong> decrease in <strong>the</strong> level of state financial aid <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> fact that its provision is<br />
contingent upon a service agreement. Established regional churches face <strong>the</strong> same problem. In <strong>the</strong> health<br />
sector <strong>the</strong> NPOs (mainly m<strong>and</strong>atory health insurances) are challenged by rising costs in hospitals <strong>and</strong> opposing<br />
claims of clients <strong>and</strong> medicines (Hplus 2008). Moreover, <strong>the</strong> relationship between <strong>the</strong> health insurances is very<br />
competitive due to <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong>y can charge different levels of premiums. In contrast to many Anglo‐<br />
American countries, NPOs in <strong>the</strong> education sector have been comparatively marginal. However, due to<br />
increasing shares of scholars with immigrant background, more <strong>and</strong> more Swiss parents are looking for<br />
alternatives to <strong>the</strong> public schools. Hence, representatives of religion‐affiliated <strong>and</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r nonprofit elementary<br />
<strong>and</strong> secondary schools argue that <strong>the</strong>y should get more public support for <strong>the</strong>ir engagement.<br />
In <strong>the</strong> field of political interest intermediation it is worth noting that <strong>the</strong> state does not subsidize political parties.<br />
Therefore, <strong>the</strong>y depend on money donated by enterprises or individuals like relief organizations. In contrast to<br />
<strong>the</strong> Liberal‐Democratic Party (FDP), Christian Democratic People’s Party (CVP), <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> Swiss People’s Party<br />
(SVP), <strong>the</strong> Social Democratic Party (SPS) has always argued for governmental support for parties, as is <strong>the</strong> case,<br />
for example, in Germany, as well as for transparence, as is <strong>the</strong> case in <strong>the</strong> USA. As a result of <strong>the</strong> current<br />
financial crisis, however, even <strong>the</strong> rightist parties are now confronted with financial shortages. The United Bank<br />
of Switzerl<strong>and</strong> (UBS), one of <strong>the</strong> major sponsors of political parties, required public money in late 2008. This led<br />
to harsh criticism that members of <strong>the</strong> Parliament were backed <strong>and</strong> received subsidies from <strong>the</strong> United Bank of<br />
Switzerl<strong>and</strong> (UBS), <strong>and</strong> led to rising claims on parties to disclose <strong>the</strong>ir financial sources. Consequently, UBS<br />
decided to stop supporting rightist parties.<br />
13
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
The sports sector also differs from <strong>the</strong> same sector in o<strong>the</strong>r countries. The main reason is that in Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
this sector is clearly stratified with elite sports sponsored <strong>and</strong> operated by for‐profit organizations <strong>and</strong><br />
mainstream sports are in <strong>the</strong> domain of NPOs.<br />
Regarding religious communities <strong>the</strong>re is a continuous debate regarding whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> government should collect<br />
<strong>the</strong> members contributions on behalf of <strong>the</strong> Church. In many cantons in Switzerl<strong>and</strong>, as in many European<br />
countries, <strong>the</strong> contributions to <strong>the</strong> state‐affiliated Churches (L<strong>and</strong>eskirchen) 32 are included in <strong>the</strong> income taxes.<br />
Thus, <strong>the</strong> level of <strong>the</strong> contributions is linked to <strong>the</strong> level of income. This tax collection arrangement is challenged<br />
by two opposing views. On <strong>the</strong> one h<strong>and</strong>, secular <strong>and</strong> libertarian voices argue that Churches should be<br />
independent from state <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>refore should levy voluntary contributions. On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r h<strong>and</strong>, some free<br />
Christian Churches <strong>and</strong> even Jewish <strong>and</strong> Islamic communities call for tax status’ similar to that of <strong>the</strong> state‐<br />
affiliated Churches (L<strong>and</strong>eskirchen).<br />
Also, <strong>the</strong> constructive <strong>and</strong> strong relationships between <strong>the</strong> state <strong>and</strong> international development <strong>and</strong><br />
cooperation (relief agencies) <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> environmental associations are harshly criticized by <strong>the</strong> SVP (see section<br />
II.a), where as <strong>the</strong> NPOs active in <strong>the</strong> arts’ sector have experienced an improvement in <strong>the</strong>ir relationship with<br />
<strong>the</strong> state. In this sector professionalization is becoming increasingly important (also see section IV.d), but is a<br />
double‐edged sword because emphasizing professional qualifications for management has led to a decline in<br />
artistic content.<br />
Regarding structure, foundations in particular have profited from an improvement in <strong>the</strong> legal framework. 33 As<br />
in o<strong>the</strong>r countries, a comparison of various types of NPOs over <strong>the</strong> last decade has shown that some NPOs have<br />
been able to increase <strong>the</strong>ir resources (such as <strong>the</strong> Swiss People’s Party (SVP)), whilst o<strong>the</strong>rs (such as <strong>the</strong> Swiss<br />
Workers Aid Association 34 <strong>and</strong> certain unions) have experienced more difficulty. However, <strong>the</strong> key factors for<br />
<strong>the</strong> success or failure of an NPO are not only business criteria, such as management <strong>and</strong> marketing, but also <strong>the</strong><br />
timing of a given issue (e.g. <strong>the</strong> 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami,) <strong>and</strong> what <strong>the</strong> characteristics of <strong>the</strong> NPO<br />
beneficiaries are.<br />
a) Role of <strong>Nonprofit</strong> Organizations for Politics <strong>and</strong> Policies<br />
In this section we address <strong>the</strong> role of nonprofit organizations for politics <strong>and</strong> policies over <strong>the</strong> past ten to fifteen<br />
years. An important point to be mentioned is <strong>the</strong> huge potential for interest groups to wield political influence<br />
within <strong>the</strong> Swiss political system. Associations are <strong>the</strong>refore just as heavily involved <strong>and</strong> influential in political<br />
decision making as political parties (Tschäni 1986). This is due to <strong>the</strong> fact that members of Parliament only<br />
pursue <strong>the</strong>ir m<strong>and</strong>ates on a part‐time basis <strong>and</strong> most of <strong>the</strong> political parties have fewer financial <strong>and</strong> human<br />
resources than interest groups or large companies. Comparative political research shows that Switzerl<strong>and</strong> can<br />
be classified as “corporatist” (Armingeon 1997).<br />
32<br />
According to Helmig, Bärlocher <strong>and</strong> von Schnurbein (2009), L<strong>and</strong>eskirchen are not likely to be part of Swiss nonprofit sector.<br />
33<br />
Worthy of note is also that <strong>the</strong> foundation Pro Helvetia that promotes cultural activities is a well‐known example of a Swiss foundation<br />
operated by <strong>the</strong> Federal government under public law.<br />
34<br />
Schweizerisches Arbeiterhilfswerk (SAH)<br />
14
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
The strong influence of NPOs is grounded in four institutions; <strong>the</strong> democratic device of referenda <strong>and</strong> initiatives,<br />
<strong>the</strong> consultation process, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> Federation Complaint Right. Institutions allow NPOs to disb<strong>and</strong> (by means of<br />
referendum), to advance (through initiatives), <strong>and</strong> to participate in <strong>the</strong> creation of legislation (consultation<br />
process). The Federation Complaint Right also allows NPOs to hinder planned construction. These devices are<br />
effective – as mentioned above – because large associations <strong>and</strong> many committees that organize initiatives or<br />
referenda have greater financial <strong>and</strong> human resources at <strong>the</strong>ir disposal than political parties. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore,<br />
many interest groups are better able to put forward <strong>the</strong>ir views (e.g. against cuts in social welfare, tax increases,<br />
flight paths, or sexual predators) by means of collective protest than political parties specifically oriented<br />
towards general public welfare.<br />
A referendum (since 1874) is usually called for when a significant portion of <strong>the</strong> population does not agree with a<br />
law proposed by <strong>the</strong> Swiss Parliament. If a party, association, or private person is able to collect 50,000<br />
signatures within 100 days, <strong>the</strong> decision is submitted to popular vote. This vote is called a facultative<br />
referendum. A simple majority is needed for <strong>the</strong> decision to be accepted.<br />
In <strong>the</strong> case of changes to <strong>the</strong> constitution, or to participation in any organization of collective security or in<br />
supranational associations, a referendum is compulsory. This means that a popular vote is necessary in every<br />
case. However, a double majority must accept such a proposal; i.e. it must be accepted both by <strong>the</strong> majority of<br />
voters, as well as <strong>the</strong> majority of cantons.<br />
Since 1891 citizens <strong>and</strong> NPOs have been able to dem<strong>and</strong> a referendum on changes to <strong>the</strong> constitution by means<br />
of initiatives. If an initiative committee is able to collect <strong>the</strong> required 100,000 signatures within 18 months, a<br />
popular vote takes place. The Swiss population has rejected <strong>the</strong> majority of similar initiatives, such as <strong>the</strong> 1989<br />
initiative to abolish <strong>the</strong> Swiss army. Citizens’ initiatives may also deal with cantonal <strong>and</strong> municipal issues.<br />
In order to diminish <strong>the</strong> probability of losing a popular vote (always a potential threat for legislators), all political<br />
parties with <strong>the</strong> power to call for a referendum are included during <strong>the</strong> formulation stage of a proposal. This<br />
happens by means of <strong>the</strong> consultation process, <strong>the</strong> preliminary phase of legal proceedings. This stage checks<br />
whe<strong>the</strong>r governmental proposals are politically, financially, economically, ecologically, socially, or culturally<br />
significant with regard to accuracy of contents, possibility of successful implementation <strong>and</strong> social acceptance.<br />
The draft proposal is thus submitted to <strong>the</strong> cantons, to <strong>the</strong> parties represented in Parliament, to <strong>the</strong> governing<br />
bodies of municipalities, cities, <strong>and</strong> mountain regions, to umbrella organizations of economic bodies, as well to<br />
o<strong>the</strong>r possible interested groups or associations according to <strong>the</strong> matter concerned.<br />
The consultation process is m<strong>and</strong>ated by <strong>the</strong> Federal Council, <strong>and</strong> is organized <strong>and</strong> carried out by <strong>the</strong> relevant<br />
government department. Even individuals that are not invited to <strong>the</strong> consultation process may offer <strong>the</strong>ir input.<br />
All opinions connected with <strong>the</strong> consultation process are evaluated before <strong>the</strong> Federal Council marks out <strong>the</strong><br />
conditions for <strong>the</strong> proposal. If <strong>the</strong> proposal is sent to Parliament, <strong>the</strong> Federal councilors discuss <strong>the</strong> proposal in<br />
<strong>the</strong> knowledge of <strong>the</strong> results of <strong>the</strong> consultation process.<br />
15
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
The Swiss Parliament itself may also recommend an administrative consultation 35 . In this case it is ei<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong><br />
government department or <strong>the</strong> parliamentary commission responsible for <strong>the</strong> issue that is in charge of seeing<br />
<strong>the</strong> process through to its conclusion.<br />
If accuracy regarding contents, possibility of successful implementation <strong>and</strong> social acceptance on a ra<strong>the</strong>r<br />
unimportant issue need to be verified, a hearing takes place. A government department, office or<br />
administrative commission is <strong>the</strong> party responsible for opening <strong>the</strong> consultation procedure. If <strong>the</strong> consequences<br />
of such an issue are considered minor, fewer people are addressed <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> procedural formalities are more<br />
limited. A fur<strong>the</strong>r peculiarity of <strong>the</strong> Swiss political system is <strong>the</strong> so‐called Federation Complaint Right, which was<br />
incorporated into Federal Nature <strong>and</strong> Homel<strong>and</strong> Protection Law 36 in 1966, into <strong>the</strong> Environmental Protection<br />
Law 37 of 1983, <strong>and</strong> into <strong>the</strong> Federal Law on Walking <strong>and</strong> Hiking Trails Act 38 of 1985. The law allows national<br />
environmental associations that are at least ten years old to instigate investigations by <strong>the</strong> authorities into<br />
projects that have an environmental impact, such as applications for deforestation or for construction outside<br />
zoned areas, for rural l<strong>and</strong> improvements, as well as o<strong>the</strong>r governmental tasks.<br />
Despite <strong>the</strong> weight of direct democratic devices in <strong>the</strong> Swiss political agenda, it is worth noting that <strong>the</strong>se<br />
devices, particularly <strong>the</strong> initiative, have little chance of success at popular vote. So far, both Swiss citizens <strong>and</strong><br />
cantons have voted against nine out of ten Swiss citizens’ initiatives. In short, since <strong>the</strong> initiative has existed (as<br />
a device in <strong>the</strong> constitution since 1891), only 15 out of 162 have been accepted. Referenda by contrast are<br />
much more successful. Of <strong>the</strong> 161 facultative referenda to date, 88 have been accepted. The poor success rate<br />
of initiatives is often due to settlement between <strong>the</strong> legislator <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> originator or even <strong>the</strong> result of a counter‐<br />
proposal. In addition, it is much more costly to create a legislation requiring 100,000 signatures than to organize<br />
50,000 signatures rejecting <strong>the</strong> introduction of new law. Hence, affluent NPOs or even entrepreneurs launch<br />
initiatives most often. In contrast, even small NPOs can realize a successful referendum. Since 1987, <strong>the</strong><br />
possibility of a “double yes” vote exists; this means that <strong>the</strong>re can be a vote for both <strong>the</strong> initiative <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
counter‐proposal. In such cases a tie‐break question is used to decide which of <strong>the</strong> two texts will go forward.<br />
In <strong>the</strong> past ten years only <strong>the</strong> following five “public initiatives” 39 have been accepted:<br />
• Initiative for “genetically modified free crops” 40<br />
Effective on 27/11/2005<br />
• Initiative for “lifelong incarceration of untreatable <strong>and</strong> extremely dangerous sexual <strong>and</strong> violent<br />
criminals” 41 Effective on 8/2/2004<br />
• Initiative for “membership of Switzerl<strong>and</strong> in <strong>the</strong> United Nations (UN)” 42<br />
Effective on 3/3/2002<br />
35 Vernehmlassung<br />
36 Bundesgesetz über den Natur‐ und Heimatschutz<br />
37 Umweltschutzgesetz<br />
38 Bundesgesetz über Fuss‐ und W<strong>and</strong>erwege<br />
39 Volksinitiative<br />
40 Initiative für Nahrungsmittel aus gentechnikfreier L<strong>and</strong>wirtschaft<br />
41 Initiative für die lebenslange Verwahrung für nicht <strong>the</strong>rapierbare, extrem gefährliche Sexual‐ und Gewaltstraftäter<br />
42 Initiative für den Beitritt der Schweiz zur Organisation der Vereinten Nationen (UNO)<br />
16
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
• Initiative for a “work‐free Federal holiday (August 1st Initiative)” 43<br />
Effective on 1/7/1994<br />
• Initiative for <strong>the</strong> “protection of <strong>the</strong> Alps against transit traffic” 44<br />
Effective on 20/04/1994<br />
b) The Role of Umbrella Groups on <strong>Policy</strong> Issues<br />
There is no single nonprofit umbrella organization that is trans‐sectoral in Switzerl<strong>and</strong>. However, most NPOs<br />
belong to one of many umbrella organizations. Apart from national political parties that are predominantly<br />
involved with parliamentary issues <strong>and</strong> voting campaigns, o<strong>the</strong>r professional bodies such as <strong>the</strong> umbrella<br />
organizations of employers <strong>and</strong> employees (which is sector specific <strong>and</strong> trans‐sectoral) as in o<strong>the</strong>r Western<br />
countries play important roles; however, this is so to a much lesser degree than in Sc<strong>and</strong>inavia.<br />
In <strong>the</strong> social sector, <strong>the</strong> ZEWO Foundation (Schweizerische Fachstelle für gemeinnützige, Spenden sammelnde<br />
Organisationen), originally created in 1934 as an information office, now has approx. 500 organizations that it<br />
inspects <strong>and</strong> certifies regarding reception <strong>and</strong> use of donations.<br />
The large relief organizations have arranged <strong>the</strong>mselves into politically influential umbrella organizations, such<br />
as <strong>the</strong> development‐oriented Alliance Sud (Swiss Alliance of Development Organizations), as well as <strong>the</strong> informal<br />
Swiss Relief Organizations Presidents’ Conference 45 .<br />
Noteworthy among umbrella organizations are <strong>the</strong> foundations proFonds <strong>and</strong> SwissFoundations. The Swiss<br />
umbrella organization proFonds (formerly <strong>the</strong> Working Group for Foundations for Common Welfare 46 with<br />
approximately 300 members) considers itself to represent <strong>the</strong> interests of all <strong>the</strong> Swiss foundations; in<br />
particular, it supported <strong>the</strong> creation of a Swiss NPO Code (Swiss NPO Code 2006). SwissFoundations was<br />
founded in 2001 as a union of eleven existing foundations (for sponsoring). In 2005, SwissFoundations<br />
published <strong>the</strong> first European Good Governance Code for Foundations (for sponsoring). This Code is based upon<br />
three main principles: (i) effective implementation of <strong>the</strong> foundation’s goals, (ii) a balance of management <strong>and</strong><br />
supervision <strong>and</strong>, (iii) high transparency of goals, activities, <strong>and</strong> structure. These are spelt out in 22<br />
recommendations concerning education, management, development, <strong>and</strong> finances.<br />
Ano<strong>the</strong>r important organization is <strong>the</strong> Swiss Society of Public Utility (SGG) 47 founded in 1810. It follows <strong>the</strong><br />
liberal principle that common welfare 48 is necessary when fellow citizens find <strong>the</strong>mselves in difficulty. The Swiss<br />
Society of Public Utility is involved in cantonal, regional, <strong>and</strong> local associations <strong>and</strong> has played an active role in<br />
establishing <strong>the</strong> Swiss Women’s Association for Purposes of Common Welfare (SGF) 49 that to‐date has over 300<br />
43<br />
Initiative für einen arbeitsfreien Bundesfeiertag (1. August‐Initiative)<br />
44<br />
Initiative zum Schutze des Alpengebietes vor dem Transitverkehr<br />
45<br />
Konferenz der Präsidentinnen und Präsidenten der grossen Hilfswerke der Schweiz (KPGH)<br />
46<br />
Arbeitsgemeinschaft für gemeinnützige Stiftungen<br />
47<br />
Schweizerische Gemeinnützige Gesellschaft (SGG)<br />
48<br />
Gemeinnutz<br />
49<br />
Dachverb<strong>and</strong> Schweizerischer Gemeinnütziger Frauen (SGF)<br />
17
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
subdivisions (SGG 2005). The Swiss Society of Public Utility was also a founder of Pro Juventute (1912), Pro<br />
Senectute (1917), Swiss Mountains Relief 50 (1942), Pro Mente Sana (1977) <strong>and</strong> was <strong>the</strong> driving force behind <strong>the</strong><br />
ZEWO foundation by providing more than 400,000 CHF as start‐up capital. One of <strong>the</strong> current projects of <strong>the</strong><br />
Swiss Society of Public Utility is <strong>the</strong> Volunteer Survey that complements <strong>the</strong> survey results provided by <strong>the</strong> Swiss<br />
Federal Statistical Office (Ammann et al. 2007).<br />
Finally, <strong>the</strong> website, freiwilligenarbeit.ch, should be mentioned. This platform was created in 1999 to promote<br />
volunteer work in Switzerl<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> Swiss volunteer work overseas (Markwalder 2005). It counts on <strong>the</strong> support<br />
of 85 organizations. In <strong>the</strong> past few years this forum has campaigned to institutionalize <strong>the</strong> social time card to<br />
document an individuals’ volunteer work.<br />
All of <strong>the</strong>se umbrella organizations <strong>and</strong> national coalitions work toge<strong>the</strong>r on many levels, such as in consultation<br />
processes, election campaigns, or, as in 2006, <strong>the</strong> creation of <strong>the</strong> Swiss NPO Code at <strong>the</strong> Large Swiss Relief<br />
Organizations Presidents’ Conference (KPGH). The Swiss NPO Code should guarantee responsible, transparent<br />
<strong>and</strong> timely good governance in NPOs for common welfare that rely on donations (Swiss NPO Code 2006).<br />
c) Involvement of Swiss <strong>Nonprofit</strong> Organizations in International or Regional Umbrella Groups<br />
Many NPOs, national umbrella organizations, <strong>and</strong> political parties are members of international umbrella<br />
organizations. In light of both <strong>the</strong> European integration process <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> associated shift in political decision‐<br />
making authority from national capitals to Brussels <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> large dependence of <strong>the</strong> Swiss economy on <strong>the</strong><br />
European markets, it is obvious that NPOs, even without membership in <strong>the</strong> European Union (E.U.), are<br />
increasing <strong>the</strong>ir commitment to umbrella organizations (Nollert 1996). On <strong>the</strong> one h<strong>and</strong>, Swiss associations<br />
transmit <strong>the</strong> meaning of decisions made by <strong>the</strong> E.U. to <strong>the</strong>ir members. Hence, enterprises exporting to <strong>the</strong> E.U.<br />
can, for example, adapt <strong>the</strong>ir production to new regulations <strong>and</strong> technical st<strong>and</strong>ards. On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r h<strong>and</strong>,<br />
despite lacking membership in <strong>the</strong> E.U., Swiss associations can still influence E.U. legislation by lobbying for <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
interests within <strong>the</strong> umbrella organizations. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, Swiss associations can ally with associations in<br />
countries with E.U. membership to fight against an objective of <strong>the</strong> E.U. Thus, in accordance with <strong>the</strong> initiative<br />
for <strong>the</strong> “Protection of <strong>the</strong> Alps Against Transit Traffic” Swiss <strong>and</strong> European environmentalist <strong>and</strong> public transport<br />
associations toge<strong>the</strong>r are attempting to prohibit transit by trucks with a 60‐tons load on roads in <strong>the</strong> Alps.<br />
As this section has shown, <strong>the</strong> devices of Swiss direct democracy provide NPOs (as well as its citizens)<br />
considerable opportunities to intervene in public policy making <strong>and</strong> legislation (though networks with politicians<br />
or money considerably helps to support interests in <strong>the</strong> political arena). Umbrella groups have proven to be<br />
important players in politics <strong>and</strong> for policy issues. NPOs have gained interest in international or regional<br />
Umbrella groups, as international or regional (European) legislation are impinging on <strong>the</strong>ir situation in<br />
Switzerl<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> abroad.<br />
50 Schweizer Berghilfe<br />
18
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
The following section will deal with current issues that NPOs <strong>and</strong> umbrella organizations are faced with<br />
presently. Apart from publications we draw <strong>the</strong> information from, we refer to a survey with Swiss experts for<br />
<strong>the</strong> NPO sector in section IV.<br />
IV. CURRENT ISSUES<br />
Looking at <strong>the</strong> publications of NPO umbrella organizations <strong>and</strong> large NPOs, <strong>the</strong> dominant topic is <strong>the</strong><br />
government’s drive to economize. This has resulted in reduced or cancelled subsidies, more stringent conditions<br />
within service agreements, <strong>and</strong> increased competition between NPOs.<br />
An ongoing area of debate of considerable importance is <strong>the</strong> revision of <strong>the</strong> Foundation <strong>and</strong> Fiscal Law for<br />
<strong>Nonprofit</strong> Organizations in <strong>the</strong> Civil Code that has been in effect since 2006. This revision contains among o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
things <strong>the</strong> introduction of compulsory auditing, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> increase in Federal tax relief in respect of donations<br />
from 10 percent to 20 percent. The revision of <strong>the</strong> Stock Corporation <strong>and</strong> Financial‐Accounting Law (a part of<br />
<strong>the</strong> Swiss Code of Obligations) 51 has also prompted discussion, particularly as right of review 52 regardless of an<br />
association’s legal structure is also planned. In o<strong>the</strong>r words, foundations <strong>and</strong> associations are being put on a par<br />
with incorporated companies in terms of book‐keeping <strong>and</strong> financial accounting law. According to proFonds,<br />
this would make accounting unnecessarily complicated for <strong>the</strong> majority of small <strong>and</strong> medium‐sized foundations<br />
<strong>and</strong> associations.<br />
Many concerns have also been voiced with regard to <strong>the</strong> reform of value‐added tax (VAT), since – among o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
things – <strong>the</strong> Federal Council is proposing that revenue <strong>and</strong> membership fees of organizations concerned with<br />
common welfare should no longer be exempt (see section II.c). ProFonds considers this to greatly weaken<br />
Switzerl<strong>and</strong>’s position as a hub for nonprofit organizations.<br />
The Swiss Council of States is also currently discussing a motion adopted on <strong>the</strong> 25 th of September 2006 that it<br />
would like to move <strong>the</strong> Federal Ombudsman for Foundations from <strong>the</strong> Federal Department of Home Affairs<br />
(FDHA) to ano<strong>the</strong>r department. The motion was put forward because <strong>the</strong> Federal Ombudsman was criticized for<br />
having divided loyalties between <strong>the</strong> government’s political will <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> right to autonomy of foundations <strong>and</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong>ir donors, particularly because <strong>the</strong> FDHA is itself involved in so many foundations.<br />
The contentious Federation Complaint Right remains a controversial topic. Since 1990, more than 15 attempts<br />
have been made in Parliament to abolish this device that was originally introduced by environmental groups in<br />
1966. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, development aid organizations such as Alliance Sud have dem<strong>and</strong>ed <strong>the</strong> implementation of<br />
<strong>the</strong> 1970 U.N. resolution requiring 0.7 percent of <strong>the</strong> Gross National Product to be invested in development aid.<br />
One final issue for consideration is <strong>the</strong> recently introduced social time card, which allows NPOs to certify <strong>the</strong><br />
number of hours worked by volunteers.<br />
51 Aktien‐ und Rechnungslegungsrecht im Obligationenrecht<br />
52 Revisionsrecht<br />
19
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
The following sections are based on information from leading experts in <strong>the</strong> field of nonprofit organizations. In<br />
<strong>the</strong> first instance, approx. 100 people in German‐speaking Switzerl<strong>and</strong> 53 were surveyed online (50 percent<br />
response rate) 54 . At first glance, <strong>the</strong> survey showed no dominant issues. The respondents’ opinions differed<br />
widely on many issues in terms of <strong>the</strong>ir level of importance. In addition, most respondents focused in <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
answers on <strong>the</strong> situation of <strong>the</strong>ir organization’s work area. On <strong>the</strong> basis of <strong>the</strong>se findings, a sample was selected<br />
<strong>and</strong> included in a second qualitative interview 55 (see Appendix 1 <strong>and</strong> 2). Even when respondents indicated that<br />
<strong>the</strong>y could not comment on NPO activity in general, <strong>the</strong>y were none<strong>the</strong>less able to express views on a restricted<br />
number of areas. In order to reduce redundancy, we will present only those aspects that were not already<br />
mentioned in previous sections.<br />
These experts considered <strong>the</strong> following five issues to be particularly important:<br />
• Restructuring of Swiss politics<br />
• Cooperation with commercial organizations<br />
• State financial support<br />
• Professionalism<br />
• Legal frameworks<br />
These five issues will be separately commented on in <strong>the</strong> next sections.<br />
a) Restructuring of Swiss Politics<br />
Since <strong>the</strong> 1990’s political restructuring in Switzerl<strong>and</strong> has been a key issue for <strong>the</strong> Swiss nonprofit sector because<br />
of <strong>the</strong> increasing political power of <strong>the</strong> ra<strong>the</strong>r NPO‐skeptical Swiss People’s Party (when compared with o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
parties). The Swiss People’s Party has held two Federal Council seats since 2004, whereas <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r two<br />
explicitly NPO‐friendly parties (liberal in European terms), <strong>the</strong> Liberal Democratic Party <strong>and</strong> Christian Democratic<br />
People’s Party, have lost ground in <strong>the</strong> Federal Council.<br />
This restructuring appears to go h<strong>and</strong> in h<strong>and</strong> with a general movement towards reducing solidarity,<br />
individualization <strong>and</strong> economization. This trend has now gained a foothold in <strong>the</strong> relationship between <strong>the</strong> state<br />
<strong>and</strong> nonprofit sector. In this vein, <strong>the</strong>re appears to be a direct connection between <strong>the</strong> rise of <strong>the</strong> Swiss<br />
People’s Party <strong>and</strong> a decreased willingness on <strong>the</strong> part of <strong>the</strong> public institutions to finance NPOs. Many deplore<br />
<strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong> Swiss People’s Party discredits many of <strong>the</strong> NPOs’ beneficiaries, such as <strong>the</strong> poor, disabled or<br />
those of foreign origin, since <strong>the</strong> implication is that <strong>the</strong>y are not worthy of support. In addition, many criticize<br />
<strong>the</strong> Swiss People’s Party’s desire to reduce development aid <strong>and</strong> concentrate on bilateral <strong>and</strong> sectoral<br />
supporting measures.<br />
53 The German‐speaking region was selected because this region has a greater affinity for <strong>the</strong> nonprofit sector, whereas a greater affinity<br />
for state‐led problem‐solving strategies is found in <strong>the</strong> French‐ <strong>and</strong> Italian‐speaking parts of Switzerl<strong>and</strong>.<br />
54 We thank Lic. phil. Nils Wyssbrod for designing <strong>the</strong> online survey.<br />
55 The qualitative interviews by telephone were carried out by Michael Nollert, Nicole Shephard, Chris Young, <strong>and</strong> Nils Wyssbrod in<br />
December 2007, <strong>and</strong> January <strong>and</strong> February 2008 with representatives of NPOs from <strong>the</strong> German‐speaking part of Switzerl<strong>and</strong>.<br />
20
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
The results of <strong>the</strong> survey reveal that <strong>the</strong> reluctance of public institutions to fund NPOs increases <strong>the</strong> competition<br />
between organizations to obtain financing. In addition, national NPOs in <strong>the</strong> social sector are confronted with<br />
increased competition from abroad. Some of <strong>the</strong> foreign NPOs are uncertified by ZEWO <strong>and</strong> thus do not<br />
conform to Swiss St<strong>and</strong>ards in <strong>the</strong> donor market.<br />
World Vision is a key example of such an organization that has not as yet received ZEWO certification but that is<br />
prominent in <strong>the</strong> media <strong>and</strong> competes aggressively for donors in <strong>the</strong> Swiss market. Ultimately, many aid<br />
organizations, in particular in <strong>the</strong> field of asylum <strong>and</strong> refugee work, are no longer competitive (or do not want to<br />
be) <strong>and</strong> are often replaced by for‐profit organizations. A notable example of this is <strong>the</strong> Red Cross, whose<br />
presence in Fribourg was replaced for financial reasons by a Zurich based business in spite of a long history of<br />
assisting <strong>and</strong> helping asylum seekers in Fribourg itself. This increased competition does, however, necessitate a<br />
critical review of antiquated processes in organizations.<br />
b) Cooperation with Commercial Organizations<br />
Unfortunately economically oriented associations <strong>and</strong> political parties that have close ties to <strong>the</strong> private sector<br />
maintain <strong>the</strong> view that NPOs should carry out services for which <strong>the</strong> state had hi<strong>the</strong>rto been responsible <strong>the</strong>reby<br />
delegating <strong>the</strong> role (“stopgaps”) to NPOs. Although <strong>the</strong> nonprofit sector is still very much supported in material<br />
terms, <strong>the</strong> results of <strong>the</strong> qualitative interviews highlight <strong>the</strong> increasing competition between autonomous NPOs<br />
<strong>and</strong> commercial organizations for <strong>the</strong> provision of services previously furnished by NPOs. Commercial<br />
organizations compete for such services by means of political lobby in key areas of decision‐making, sponsorship<br />
in sporting arenas or by <strong>the</strong> creation of competing foundations <strong>and</strong> NPOs such as <strong>the</strong> Novartis or Jacobs<br />
Foundation, or Avenir Suisse.<br />
NPOs are also facing growing competition from private service organizations in many areas such as <strong>the</strong> social<br />
<strong>and</strong> health care sector. As mentioned above, <strong>the</strong> transfer of services from <strong>the</strong> local Red Cross in Fribourg to a<br />
private organization in Zurich is a good example of this type of development. In <strong>the</strong> arts sector, many private<br />
organizations link <strong>the</strong>ir sponsorship to an expectation of receiving something in return. However, according to<br />
<strong>the</strong> donation‐monitoring agency (ZEWO Donation Market Report 2006), this trend has had a positive effect, at<br />
least in <strong>the</strong> arts sector, in that <strong>the</strong> level of donations from private organizations has increased slightly over <strong>the</strong><br />
past two years.<br />
Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, new forms of cooperation between <strong>the</strong> nonprofit <strong>and</strong> commercial sectors may be observed, such<br />
as <strong>the</strong> creation of socially <strong>and</strong> ecologically conscious long‐term mutual funds. Overall, an increasing willingness<br />
to support NPOs is anticipated, particularly from <strong>the</strong> Swiss economic elite, as a result of rising executive salaries<br />
<strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir erstwhile image problem.<br />
Even from <strong>the</strong> perspective of tacit (symbolic) support <strong>the</strong> economy appears to be developing a skeptical view of<br />
certain parts of <strong>the</strong> nonprofit sector. Whilst some perceive associations as pillars of social well‐being, <strong>the</strong>y are<br />
also seen to be weakening <strong>the</strong> Swiss economy. Criticism is most overtly aimed at <strong>the</strong> nonprofit activities of<br />
environmental associations that are considered to be “economically hostile”. This economic hostility is detected<br />
when such associations appear to make use of <strong>the</strong> Federation Complaint Right to simply block economically<br />
21
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
sensible construction projects. Development aid <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> activities of welfare organizations generally are also<br />
coming under increasing scrutiny in <strong>the</strong> business‐friendly media, e.g. Neue Zürcher Zeitung or <strong>the</strong> Weltwoche.<br />
At <strong>the</strong> same time aid organizations lament <strong>the</strong> promotion of such economization in <strong>the</strong> social sector as it leads<br />
to <strong>the</strong> erosion of existing solidarity in <strong>the</strong> medium‐term.<br />
c) State Financial Support<br />
Many NPOs point out that <strong>the</strong> state has been less willing to support NPOs financially without restriction since<br />
<strong>the</strong> 1990’s. Indeed <strong>the</strong> state has been increasingly interested in output in form of service agreements ra<strong>the</strong>r<br />
than input. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, public bodies (e.g. <strong>the</strong> Swiss Agency for Development <strong>and</strong> Cooperation, SDC) have<br />
continually reduced <strong>the</strong> proportion of costs that <strong>the</strong>y are prepared to cover in different projects. The most<br />
recent ZEWO Report on <strong>the</strong> Donation Market (2006), based on data obtained from <strong>the</strong> donation‐monitoring<br />
agency, provides evidence of <strong>the</strong> state’s reduced enthusiasm for such financial support. NPOs face this pressure<br />
by restricting costs, locating new sources of finance <strong>and</strong>/or reactivating existing ones.<br />
This state of affairs also indicates a trend towards commercializing <strong>the</strong> stagnating donation market, leading to<br />
strong competition between domestic <strong>and</strong> international NPOs, <strong>and</strong> from private organizations as well.<br />
Unfortunately for Swiss NPOs, <strong>the</strong> government has recently been considering offers from foreign NPOs as well<br />
as from private companies. According to experts not all NPOs in Switzerl<strong>and</strong> have yet adapted to this new<br />
situation <strong>and</strong> are <strong>the</strong>refore being discriminated against when it comes to cost structure comparisons with<br />
foreign NPOs (such as World Vision), private organizations <strong>and</strong> NPOs with specific activities in certain regional<br />
areas.<br />
Finally, NPOs today appear to have <strong>the</strong> choice between two strategies with respect to <strong>the</strong> state: (i) <strong>the</strong>y can seek<br />
proximity toward <strong>the</strong> state <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>reby risk losing a certain degree of autonomy, or (ii) <strong>the</strong>y can explicitly seek<br />
distance from <strong>the</strong> state, which implies complete reliance on private funding.<br />
d) Professionalization<br />
A key issue for NPOs is professionalization. This refers specifically to <strong>the</strong> efforts of NPOs to improve <strong>the</strong><br />
management skills of <strong>the</strong>ir staff. Professional marketing devices are becoming necessary in order to raise funds<br />
<strong>and</strong> to motivate potential donors. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, <strong>the</strong> interviewees have identified a trend towards monetarizing<br />
volunteer work, i.e. documenting volunteer work in order to calculate its economic value <strong>and</strong> to make it<br />
comparable with o<strong>the</strong>r types of work (Farago et al. 2005).<br />
In order for NPOs to be certified by organizations such as ZEWO, <strong>the</strong>ir practices need to be professionalized.<br />
The increase both in efficiency <strong>and</strong> effectiveness of such professionalization however leads to higher costs,<br />
which has led to public criticism. The Swiss Cancer League experienced this when it chose a private company to<br />
produce a television advertisement for its 2007 donation campaign but had to utilize 400,000 CHF of donation<br />
funding to do so. Business practices in Pro Facile, serious (legal) conflicts between <strong>the</strong> interests of <strong>the</strong> Swiss<br />
Paraplegic Foundation <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> personal interests of its founder <strong>and</strong> former president leading to conviction of<br />
22
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong> latter as well as discussions about misappropriation of donations to Swiss Solidarity 56 , have provided fur<strong>the</strong>r<br />
reasons for public criticism.<br />
Exp<strong>and</strong>ing professional requirements for NPO positions also increases salary levels. Many organizations realize<br />
that when it comes to management positions <strong>the</strong> lack of financial incentive makes it difficult to compete with<br />
private organizations. It must be acknowledged, however, that intrinsic motivation in NPOs is still high <strong>and</strong> that<br />
this prevents mass migration to <strong>the</strong> private sector.<br />
The tendency towards professionalization becomes problematic when volunteers realize that <strong>the</strong>y are<br />
performing <strong>the</strong> work of professionals, but are not being compensated financially for it. Due to this problem<br />
greater efforts are required to find volunteers to serve in positions of responsibility for longer periods of time,<br />
such as on supervisory committees.<br />
The controversy over <strong>the</strong> remuneration of strategic volunteer work on foundation boards <strong>and</strong> supervisory<br />
committees is moving in a similar direction. ProFonds among o<strong>the</strong>rs, suggests, that work on such committees<br />
should become more professional following <strong>the</strong> trend at management level. This would justify a higher level of<br />
remuneration. For relief organizations in particular, periodic catastrophes such as <strong>the</strong> 2004 Indian Ocean<br />
tsunami are a problem due to lack of qualified personnel. This problem, however, is periodic <strong>and</strong> is part of <strong>the</strong><br />
everyday work of an NPO.<br />
e) Legal Framework<br />
Ano<strong>the</strong>r important change over <strong>the</strong> past 10‐15 years has been <strong>the</strong> development of <strong>the</strong> legal framework. First of<br />
all, it is important to recall that <strong>the</strong> Foundation <strong>and</strong> Fiscal Law for <strong>Nonprofit</strong> Organizations 57 in <strong>the</strong> Civil Code<br />
Book 58 has been revised. Although <strong>the</strong> revision was simple, it has been widely supported, especially since <strong>the</strong><br />
state supports private volunteer work. The fiscal framework has <strong>the</strong>refore been substantially improved as <strong>the</strong><br />
proportion of tax‐deductible donations has increased. The new Association’s Law 59 has also been well received,<br />
as it will no longer hold association members accountable for <strong>the</strong> association’s debts (in so far as <strong>the</strong> respective<br />
statute does not contain special regulations).<br />
V. SUMMARY<br />
Due to a long a tradition of co‐operative <strong>and</strong> voluntary associations <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> importance of <strong>the</strong> principle of<br />
subsidiarity, <strong>the</strong> Swiss Federal government, <strong>the</strong> cantons <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> municipalities have a generally positive stance<br />
toward <strong>the</strong> nonprofit sector. However, <strong>the</strong>re exists a lack of explicit policies regarding NPOs. In addition,<br />
although <strong>the</strong> political parties emphasize different functions of NPOs, most of <strong>the</strong>m support <strong>the</strong>m. Even <strong>the</strong><br />
Swiss People’s Party that criticizes <strong>the</strong> financial support of NPOs is itself well represented in <strong>the</strong> supervisory<br />
boards of NPOs in <strong>the</strong> sports <strong>and</strong> agricultural sector. The major areas where <strong>the</strong> Swiss government supports <strong>the</strong><br />
56<br />
Die Glückskette<br />
57<br />
Stiftungs‐ und steuerliches Gemeinnützigkeitsrecht<br />
58<br />
Zivilgesetzbuch<br />
59<br />
Vereinsrecht<br />
23
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
nonprofit sector are tax policies <strong>and</strong> financial support; thus, NPOs profit both from low taxes in comparison with<br />
for‐profit organizations <strong>and</strong> from subsidies if <strong>the</strong>y provide a public service.<br />
Since <strong>the</strong> 1990s, <strong>the</strong> nonprofit sector is, however, confronted with new legal restrictions due to <strong>the</strong> critique of<br />
neoliberal economists that <strong>the</strong> significant constitutional influence of Swiss NPOs (consultation process, initiative,<br />
referendum, complaint right), prevent economic growth. Also, <strong>the</strong> process of European integration has entailed<br />
a shift in political decision‐making authority from national capitals to Brussels. For this reason, Swiss NPOs have<br />
recently become more committed to <strong>the</strong>ir European umbrella organizations.<br />
According to an online survey <strong>and</strong> interviews with nonprofit sector experts, <strong>the</strong> following five issues are most<br />
important at <strong>the</strong> moment: restructuring of Swiss politics, cooperation with commercial organizations, state<br />
financial support, professionalization, <strong>and</strong> legal framework.<br />
Despite a lack of explicit policies towards <strong>the</strong> nonprofit sector, <strong>the</strong> Swiss government is aware of <strong>the</strong> importance<br />
of NPOs <strong>and</strong> supports <strong>the</strong>m with legal privileges <strong>and</strong> financial subsidies. However, since <strong>the</strong> 1990s, <strong>the</strong><br />
nonprofit sector is continuously challenged by <strong>the</strong> neoliberal view that strong constitutional influence from<br />
Swiss NPOs is responsible for <strong>the</strong> low economic growth rate. Therefore, among o<strong>the</strong>rs challenges NPOs are<br />
currently faced with attempts from <strong>the</strong> government at different levels to constrain <strong>the</strong>ir political influence <strong>and</strong><br />
decrease <strong>the</strong>ir state financial support. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, competition from private organizations is growing.<br />
24
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
VI. REFERENCES<br />
Ammann, Herbert. ed. 2004. Freiwilligkeit zwischen liberaler und sozialer Demokratie. Zürich: Seismo.<br />
Ammann, Herbert <strong>and</strong> Peter Farago. ed. 2007. Freiwilligen‐Monitor der Schweiz. Zürich: Seismo.<br />
Armingeon, Klaus. 1997. Swiss Corporatism in Comparative Perspective. West European Politics 20: 164‐179.<br />
Armingeon, Klaus <strong>and</strong> Simon Geissbühler. ed. 2000. Gewerkschaften in der Schweiz: Herausforderungen und Optionen.<br />
Zürich: Seismo.<br />
Beobachter. 2000a. Freiwilligenarbeit. Ein H<strong>and</strong>buch. Zürich: Jean Frey.<br />
Beobachter. 2000b. Die «Ich AG» feiert Hochkonjunktur. Nr. 20: 20‐29.<br />
BFS. 2004. Studie zum Bericht zur Freiwilligenarbeit in der Schweiz. Expertenbericht im Auftrag des Bundesamts für Statistik.<br />
Bern: Bundesamt für Statistik.<br />
Borner, Silvio, Aymo Brunetti, <strong>and</strong> Thomas Straubhaar. 1990. Schweiz AG. Vom Sonderfall zum Sanierungsfall. Zürich: Verlag<br />
Neue Zürcher Zeitung.<br />
Caritas. ed. 2002. Von der katholischen Milieuorganisation zum sozialen Hilfswerk. Luzern: Caritas.<br />
Cattacin, S<strong>and</strong>ro, Cla Reto Famos, Michael Duttwiler, <strong>and</strong> Hans Mahnig. 2003. Staat und Religion in der Schweiz.<br />
Anerkennungskämpfe, Anerkennungsformen. Bern: Eidgenössische Kommission gegen Rassismus.<br />
Egger, Philipp, Bernd Helmig, <strong>and</strong> Robert Purtschert. ed. 2006. Stiftung und Gesellschaft. Eine komparative Analyse des<br />
Stiftungsst<strong>and</strong>ortes Schweiz. Basel: Helbing & Lichtenhahn.<br />
EFD. 1997. Subventionsbericht 1997 des Bundesrats. Bern: Eidgenössisches Finanzdepartement.<br />
EFD. 2008. Subventionsbericht 2008 des Bundesrats. Bern: Eidgenössisches Finanzdepartement.<br />
Ermatinger, Gerold. 1936. Kapital und Ethos. Die sozialen und kulturellen Taten des schweizerischen Privatkapitals im 19.<br />
und 20. Jahrhundert. Erlenbach‐Zürich und Leipzig: Rotapfel‐Verlag.<br />
Farago, Peter <strong>and</strong> Herbert Ammann, ed. 2005. Monetarisierung der Freiwilligkeit. Zürich: Seismo.<br />
Fluder, Robert, Heinz Ruf, Walter Schöni, <strong>and</strong> Martin Wicki. ed. 1991. Gewerkschaften und Angestelltenverbände in der<br />
schweizerischen Privatwirtschaft. Zürich: Seismo.<br />
Fluder, Robert. 1996. Interessenorganisationen und kollektive Arbeitsbeziehungen im öffentlichen Dienst der Schweiz.<br />
Zürich: Seismo.<br />
Helmig, Bernd, Christoph Bärlocher, <strong>and</strong> Georg von Schnurbein, ed. 2009. Defining <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong>. Johns<br />
Hopkins Comparative <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong> Project Working Paper Number 46, March 2009.<br />
Humbel, Kurt. ed. 1987. Treu und Glauben. Entstehung und Geschichte des Friedensabkommens in der schweizerischen<br />
Maschinen‐ und Metallindustrie. Partnerschaftsfonds der schweizerischen Maschinen‐ und Metallindustrie (Festschrift zum<br />
50. Jubiläum). Bern: Peter Lang.<br />
Hplus. Die Spitäler der Schweiz., ed. 2008. Festschrift zum 75‐Jahr‐Jubiläum von H+, die Spitäler der Schweiz, Data retrieved<br />
in August 2008 from <strong>the</strong> Web site: http://files.hplus.ch/pages/HPlusDocument6217.pdf.<br />
Kriesi, Hanspeter. ed. 2005. Der Aufstieg der SVP. Acht Kantone im Vergleich. Zürich: NZZ‐Verlag.<br />
Linder, Wolf. 1999. Schweizerische Demokratie. Institutionen, Prozesse, Perspektiven. Bern: Haupt.<br />
25
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
Markwalder, Christa. 2005. Freiwilligenarbeit kennt <strong>and</strong>ere Marktgesetze: Trends der gesellschaftlichen Förderung der<br />
Freiwilligenarbeit. Data retrieved in January 2007 from <strong>the</strong> Web site: http://www.christa‐<br />
markwalder.ch/uploads/media/2005‐05‐31_Europ_ische_Freiwilligenuniversit_t.pdf<br />
Nadai, Eva. 1996. Gemeinsinn und Eigennutz: freiwilliges Engagement im Sozialbereich. Bern: Haupt.<br />
Nollert, Michael. 1996. Verb<strong>and</strong>liche Interessenvertretung in der Europäischen Union: Einflussressourcen und faktische<br />
Einflussnahme. Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft 6: 647‐667.<br />
Nollert, Michael <strong>and</strong> Christian Huser. 2007. Freiwillige Aktive in der Schweiz: Einflussfaktoren und typische Profile. In<br />
Freiwilliges Engagement in der Schweiz. ed. Peter Farago. Zürich: Seismo.<br />
Purtschert, Robert. ed. 2005. Das Genossenschaftswesen in der Schweiz. Bern: Haupt.<br />
SGG. 2005. Die Schweizerische Gemeinnützige Gesellschaft und ihre Geschichte. Zürich: SGG.<br />
Swiss NPO Code. 2006. Swiss NPO Code. Corporate Governance Richtlinien für <strong>Nonprofit</strong>‐Organisationen in der Schweiz.<br />
Date retrieved in January 2007 from <strong>the</strong> Web site: http://www.swiss‐<br />
npocode.ch/download/Swiss_NPO_Code%2020060410_ber.pdf<br />
Tschäni, Hans. 1986. Wer regiert die Schweiz? Eine kritische Untersuchung über den Einfluss von Lobby und Verbänden in der<br />
schweizerischen Demokratie. Zürich: Orell Füssli.<br />
Wagner, Antonin. 1999. Teilen statt umverteilen: Sozialpolitik im kommunitarischen Wohlfahrtsstaat. Bern: Haupt.<br />
Wagner, Antonin. 2002. Der <strong>Nonprofit</strong>‐Sektor in der Schweiz. In H<strong>and</strong>buch der <strong>Nonprofit</strong> Organisation. Strukturen und<br />
Management. ed. Christoph Badelt. Stuttgart: Schäfer‐Poeschel.<br />
Weng, Tanja Vanessa. 2002. Werte und Wertw<strong>and</strong>el bei Ehrenamtlichen und Freiwilligen in Hilfswerken. Zürich: Books on<br />
Dem<strong>and</strong>.<br />
ZEWO. 2006. ZEWO Bericht zum Spendenmarkt 06. Zürich: ZEWO.<br />
26
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
APPENDIX 1: CONSULTED EXPERTS<br />
The following people (positions in brackets) were qualitatively consulted:<br />
Ammann, Herbert. General secretary of <strong>the</strong> Swiss Society of Public Utility (Schweizerische Gemeinnützige Gesellschaft,<br />
SGG); manager; member of <strong>the</strong> Pro Juventute Foundations Convention<br />
Bühlmann, Cecile. President of <strong>the</strong> Swiss Greenpeace Foundation; management at <strong>the</strong> Christian Peace Service (Christlicher<br />
Friedensdienst); former National councilor of <strong>the</strong> Green Party (Grüne Partei der Schweiz, GPS)<br />
Daum, Thomas. Director of <strong>the</strong> Swiss Employers Union; member of SUVA board of directors<br />
Degen, Christoph. Chief executive of proFonds, umbrella organization of Swiss Foundations; member of <strong>the</strong> synode of <strong>the</strong><br />
Protestant Church 60 of <strong>the</strong> city of Basel<br />
Escher, Barbara von. President of Benevol; Free Green List (Grüne Freie Liste) in <strong>the</strong> canton of Berne<br />
Ferrari‐Visca, Bruno. Director <strong>and</strong> Federal Ombudsman for Foundations<br />
Graber, Hedy. Director of <strong>the</strong> social <strong>and</strong> cultural office, Migros Cooperative Alliance<br />
Gurtner, Bruno. Senior economist at <strong>the</strong> Swiss Alliance of Development) Organisations ‐ Alliance Sud; chair of <strong>the</strong> Tax<br />
Justice Network´s Global Board of Directors<br />
Haller, Ursula. Municipal councilor in Thun; National councilor of <strong>the</strong> Swiss Peoples’ Party (Schweizerische Volkspartei, SVP),<br />
member of numerous NPOs<br />
Knöpfel, Carlo. Director of <strong>the</strong> Department of Basics (Bereich Grundlagen) at Caritas Schweiz<br />
Kosch, Daniel. General secretary of <strong>the</strong> Swiss Roman Catholic Central Conference<br />
Levrat, Christian. Director of <strong>the</strong> Union of Swiss Communication (Syndiat de la communication Suisse Syndicom), president<br />
<strong>and</strong> National councilor of <strong>the</strong> Swiss Social‐Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei der Schweiz, SPS)<br />
Markwalder‐Bär, Christa. President of forum freiwilligenarbeit.ch; president of <strong>the</strong> New European Movement (Neue<br />
Europäische Bewegung); National councilor of <strong>the</strong> Liberal‐Democratic Party (Freisinnig‐Demokratische Partei, FDP)<br />
Marty, Franz. Chairman of <strong>the</strong> board of <strong>the</strong> Swiss Raiffeisen Banks; former president of <strong>the</strong> Conference of Cantonal Finance<br />
Directors; president of <strong>the</strong> Mountain Relief Organisation (Schweizer Berghilfe); Christian‐Democratic Peoples’ Party<br />
(Christlichdemokratische Volkspartei, CVP)<br />
Roos‐Niedermann, Rita. Director of Pro Infirmis; former Cantonal governing councilor of St. Gallen; Christian‐Democratic<br />
Peoples’ Party (Christlichdemokratische Volkspartei, CVP)<br />
Schärer, Werner. Director of Pro Senectute<br />
Ziegerer, Martina. Chief executive of <strong>the</strong> Zewo Foundation<br />
60 Evangelisch‐reformierte Kirche<br />
27
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
APPENDIX 2: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS<br />
Qualitative interview questions:<br />
• What were <strong>the</strong> most important topics <strong>and</strong> issues in <strong>the</strong> nonprofit sector over <strong>the</strong> last 10‐15 years?<br />
• Which issues did you have to deal with in your specific area?<br />
• Which issues will you have to deal with <strong>the</strong> coming few years?<br />
• How different are <strong>the</strong> issues in <strong>the</strong> various areas?<br />
• To what extent can differences between cantons be identified?<br />
• How would you rate <strong>the</strong> relationship between <strong>the</strong> state <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> nonprofit sector?<br />
• How would you rate political system’s (government & political parties) willingness to support <strong>the</strong><br />
nonprofit sector?<br />
• How would you rate <strong>the</strong> economic system’s (unions & for‐profit organizations) willingness to support<br />
<strong>the</strong> nonprofit sector?<br />
28
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
THE JOHNS HOPKINS COMPARATIVE NONPROFIT SECTOR PROJECT<br />
Academy of Finl<strong>and</strong><br />
Aga Khan Foundation<br />
Arab Gulf Fund (AGFUND)<br />
The Atlantic Philanthropies<br />
Australian Bureau of Statistics<br />
Australian Research Council<br />
Austrian Science Foundation<br />
Canadian Fund (Slovakia)<br />
Charities Aid Foundation (United Kingdom)<br />
Civil Society Development Foundation (Czech Republic)<br />
Civil Society Development Foundation (Romania)<br />
Civil Society Development Foundation (Slovakia)<br />
Colombian Center on Philanthropy<br />
The Combined Community Trusts (New Zeal<strong>and</strong>)<br />
Department of Welfare (South Africa)<br />
Deutsche Bank Foundation (Germany)<br />
FIN (Ne<strong>the</strong>rl<strong>and</strong>s)<br />
Fondation de France<br />
Fondation Roi Baudouin (Belgium)<br />
Ford Foundation<br />
Foundation for an Open Society (Hungary)<br />
Fundación Andes (Chile)<br />
Fundación Antonio Restrepo Barco (Colombia)<br />
Fundación Banco Bilbao Vizcaya (Spain)<br />
Fundación FES (Colombia)<br />
Fundación Minera Escondida (Chile)<br />
Gerbert Rüf Stiftung (Switzerl<strong>and</strong>)<br />
Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation (Portugal)<br />
Humboldt Foundation/Transcoop (Germany)<br />
Imagine Canada<br />
Industry Commission (Australia)<br />
Institute for Human Sciences (Austria)<br />
Instituto de Desarrollo Agropecuario (Chile)<br />
Inter-American Development Bank<br />
Inter-American Foundation<br />
Juliana Welzijn Fonds (Ne<strong>the</strong>rl<strong>and</strong>s)<br />
Kahanoff Foundation (Canada)<br />
W.K. Kellogg Foundation<br />
Project Director: Lester M. Salamon<br />
Senior Research Associate: S. Wojciech Sokolowski<br />
Project Coordinator: Megan Haddock<br />
Communications Associate: Mimi Bilzor<br />
PROJECT FUNDERS<br />
Körber Foundation (Germany)<br />
Luso-American Development Foundation (Portugal)<br />
Ministry of Church <strong>and</strong> Education (Norway)<br />
Ministry of Culture <strong>and</strong> Sports (Norway)<br />
Ministry of Education, Culture <strong>and</strong> Science (Ne<strong>the</strong>rl<strong>and</strong>s)<br />
Ministry of Environment (Norway)<br />
Ministry of Family <strong>and</strong> Children (Norway)<br />
Ministry of Family/World Bank (Venezuela)<br />
Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Norway)<br />
Ministry of Health, Sports <strong>and</strong> Welfare (Ne<strong>the</strong>rl<strong>and</strong>s)<br />
Ministry of Social Affairs (Denmark)<br />
Ministry of Social Affairs <strong>and</strong> Health (Finl<strong>and</strong>)<br />
Ministry of Social Development (New Zeal<strong>and</strong>)<br />
C.S. Mott Foundation<br />
National Department of Planning (Colombia)<br />
National Research Fund (Hungary)<br />
Norwegian Research Council<br />
OPEC<br />
Open Society Foundation (Slovakia)<br />
David <strong>and</strong> Lucile Packard Foundation<br />
Ilídio Pinho Foundation (Portugal)<br />
Productivity Commission (Australia)<br />
Research Council of Norway<br />
Rockefeller Bro<strong>the</strong>rs Fund<br />
Joseph Rowntree Foundation (United Kingdom)<br />
Sasakawa Peace Foundation (Japan)<br />
SENAC (National Commercial Training Service – Brazil)<br />
Servicio de Cooperación Técnica (Chile)<br />
The Skoll Foundation<br />
Telefonica CTC Chile<br />
The Tindall Foundation (New Zeal<strong>and</strong>)<br />
United Nations Development Program (Chile)<br />
United States Agency for International Development<br />
United States Information Service<br />
University of Witwatersr<strong>and</strong> (South Africa)<br />
Yad Hadaniv Foundation (Israel)<br />
Center for Civil Society Studies website: www.ccss.jhu.edu
Nollert <strong>and</strong> Budowski <strong>Government</strong> <strong>Policy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
Argentina<br />
Australia<br />
Austria<br />
Belgium<br />
Brazil<br />
Canada<br />
Chile<br />
Colombia<br />
Czech Republic<br />
Denmark<br />
Egypt<br />
Finl<strong>and</strong><br />
France<br />
Germany<br />
Ghana<br />
Hungary<br />
India<br />
Irel<strong>and</strong><br />
Israel<br />
Italy<br />
Japan<br />
Kenya<br />
Korea, Rep. of<br />
Lebanon<br />
COUNTRY COVERAGE<br />
Mexico<br />
Morocco<br />
Ne<strong>the</strong>rl<strong>and</strong>s<br />
New Zeal<strong>and</strong><br />
Norway<br />
Pakistan<br />
Peru<br />
Philippines<br />
Pol<strong>and</strong><br />
Portugal<br />
Romania<br />
Russia<br />
Slovakia<br />
South Africa<br />
Spain<br />
Sweden<br />
Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
Tanzania<br />
Thail<strong>and</strong><br />
Ug<strong>and</strong>a<br />
United Kingdom<br />
United States<br />
Venezuela<br />
THE COMPARATIVE NONPROFIT SECTOR PROJECT WORKING PAPERS<br />
Please visit our Web site to view <strong>the</strong> full text of <strong>the</strong>se papers <strong>and</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r reports from <strong>the</strong> Comparative <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong> Project.<br />
Defining <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Switzerl<strong>and</strong><br />
Defining <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: New Zeal<strong>and</strong><br />
Defining <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Chile<br />
Defining <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Portugal<br />
Defining <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: South Korea<br />
Volunteering in Cross-National Perspective: Evidence<br />
From 24 Countries<br />
Defining <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: The Philippines<br />
Social Origins of Civil Society: An Overview<br />
The <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: For What <strong>and</strong> for Whom?<br />
Defining <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Pol<strong>and</strong><br />
History of <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong> in <strong>the</strong> Ne<strong>the</strong>rl<strong>and</strong>s<br />
Defining <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Finl<strong>and</strong><br />
Defining <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Argentina<br />
Defining <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Romania<br />
Philanthropy, Nationalism, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> Growth of Civil<br />
Society in Romania<br />
Defining <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Australia<br />
Defining <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Colombia<br />
Defining <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Irel<strong>and</strong><br />
Defining <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: The Czech Republic<br />
Defining <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Israel<br />
The Third World’s Third <strong>Sector</strong> in Comparative<br />
Perspective<br />
Defining <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: The Ne<strong>the</strong>rl<strong>and</strong>s<br />
Social Origins of Civil Society: Explaining <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong><br />
<strong>Sector</strong> Cross-Nationally<br />
The <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: A New Global Force<br />
<strong>Nonprofit</strong> Law: Ten Issues in Search of Resolution<br />
The International Classification of <strong>Nonprofit</strong><br />
Organizations - ICNPO. Revision 1.0<br />
Caring <strong>Sector</strong> or Caring Society? Discovering <strong>the</strong><br />
<strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong> Cross-Nationally<br />
Defining <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Sweden<br />
Defining <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: Hungary<br />
The <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong> in <strong>the</strong> United Nations System of<br />
National Accounts: Definition, Treatment, <strong>and</strong> Practice<br />
Toward an Underst<strong>and</strong>ing of <strong>the</strong> International<br />
<strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong>: The Johns Hopkins Comparative<br />
<strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong> Project<br />
The Emerging <strong>Sector</strong>: A Statistical Supplement<br />
(1990 data)<br />
Center for Civil Society Studies website: www.ccss.jhu.edu
The Johns Hopkins Comparative <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong> Project<br />
The Johns Hopkins Comparative <strong>Nonprofit</strong> <strong>Sector</strong> Project is a systematic effort to analyze <strong>the</strong> scope, structure,<br />
financing, <strong>and</strong> role of <strong>the</strong> private nonprofit sector in a cross-section of countries around <strong>the</strong> world in order to<br />
improve our knowledge <strong>and</strong> enrich our <strong>the</strong>oretical underst<strong>and</strong>ing of this sector, <strong>and</strong> to provide a sounder basis<br />
for both public <strong>and</strong> private action towards it.<br />
The Project utilizes a comparative empirical approach that features heavy reliance on a team of Local Associates<br />
in <strong>the</strong> target countries, a common framework, set of definitions, <strong>and</strong> information-ga<strong>the</strong>ring strategies; <strong>and</strong> a<br />
network of national <strong>and</strong> international advisory committees to oversee progress <strong>and</strong> help disseminate results.<br />
Project work began in 1990 in 13 countries <strong>and</strong> now extends to more than 40 countries spanning all <strong>the</strong> regions<br />
of <strong>the</strong> world.<br />
The Johns Hopkins Center for Civil Society Studies<br />
The Johns Hopkins Center for Civil Society Studies seeks to improve underst<strong>and</strong>ing <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> effective functioning<br />
of not-for-profit, philanthropic, or “civil society” organizations in <strong>the</strong> United States <strong>and</strong> throughout <strong>the</strong> world in<br />
order to enhance <strong>the</strong> contribution <strong>the</strong>se organizations can make to democracy <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> quality of human life. The<br />
Center is part of <strong>the</strong> Johns Hopkins Institute for <strong>Policy</strong> Studies <strong>and</strong> carries out its work through a combination of<br />
research, training, <strong>and</strong> information-sharing both domestically <strong>and</strong> internationally.<br />
Center for Civil Society Studies<br />
Institute for <strong>Policy</strong> Studies<br />
3400 North Charles Street, Wyman Building<br />
Baltimore, MD 21211, USA<br />
Phone: +1.410.516.5463<br />
Fax: +1.410.516.7818<br />
www.ccss.jhu.edu