Volume 12 - Issue 65
/ May 2023
131
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
DOI: https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.65.05.13
How to Cite:
Kononenko, V., Yaremenko, O., Zinko, Y., Lapshin, S., & Ostapenko, O. (2023). Formation of civil society in Ukraine in the post-
soviet period. Amazonia Investiga, 12(65), 131-140. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.65.05.13
Formation of civil society in Ukraine in the post-soviet period
Становлення громадянського суспільства в Україні у пострадянський період
Received: April 14, 2023 Accepted: June 01, 2023
Written by:
Valerii Kononenko1
Web of Science Researcher ID: M-5954-2018
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5177-2885
Oleksandr Yaremenko2
Web of Science Researcher ID: M-8814-2018
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3053-2257
Yurii Zinko3
Web of Science Researcher ID: AAE-7926-2022
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4772-6082
Serhii Lapshin4
Web of Science Researcher ID: N-1225-2018
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2578-8055
Oleksandr Ostapenko5
Web of Science Researcher ID: ADG-6218-2022
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1158-0146
Abstract
The article analyzes the main stages of formation
of civil society in Ukraine since independence.
Formation of the third sector, shown by the
authors against the background of state policy in
this area and political events in Ukraine. Based
on the analysis of Ukrainian legislation, the study
identifies the main stages of state policy in the
field of promoting the development of civil
society institutions. The analysis of statistical
sources helped to establish not only the
quantitative characteristics of the development of
civil society institutions, but also to identify the
main areas of their activities. Researchers
conclude that civil society in Ukraine has
developed over a long period of time against the
background of sometimes contradictory state
policy in this area and the lack of a broad social
base for the activities of public organizations. As
large masses of active, purposeful, motivated
citizens who were not members of public
1
Doctor of historical sciences, Рrofessor, Head of the Department of Public Management and Administration of the Faculty of Law,
Public Management and Administration of Vinnytsia Mykhailo Kotsiubynskyi State Pedagogical University, Ukraine.
2
Candidate of Science of governance, Associate Professor, Dean of the Faculty of Law, Public Management and Administration of
Vinnytsia Mykhailo Kotsiubynskyi State Pedagogical University, Ukraine.
3
Candidate of Historical Sciences, Professor, Dean of the Faculty of History of Vinnytsia Mykhailo Kotsiubynskyi State Pedagogical
University, Ukraine.
4
Candidate of Historical Sciences, Associate Professor of Public Management and Administration Department of the Faculty of Law,
Public Management and Administration of Vinnytsia Mykhailo Kotsiubynskyi State Pedagogical University, Ukraine.
5
Candidate of Science of governance, senior lecturer of the Department of Public - Legal Disciplines of the Faculty of Law, Public
Management and Administration of Vinnytsia Mykhailo Kotsiubynskyi State Pedagogical University, Ukraine.
132
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
organizations, became not only the driving force
of the two revolutions to return to the ideals of
freedom and equality, but also hinder the
emergence of authoritarianism, and now the
occupation of the country in Russian-Ukrainian
war.
Keywords: Ukraine, civil society, public
institutions, development, stages of formation,
state policy.
Introduction
The main problem of our research is the analysis
of the process of formation of civil society in
Ukraine in the post-Soviet period.
The purpose of the study is to prove that civil
society in Ukraine has specific features of its
formation, which are largely determined by the
general features of the formation of a political
nation, the features of the democratization of
society in the post-Soviet period and the features
of state policy in this area.
Ukraine, like other former Soviet republics and
other post-Soviet countries of Eastern Europe,
began to form civil society only after the collapse
of the Soviet regimes. The formation of civil
society in Ukraine had and has common
challenges and contradictions with other post-
Soviet republics, which often led to the
identification of these processes in scientific
thought. Despite the common features of our
historical past, we claim that the formation of
civil society in the post-Soviet period in Ukraine
has not only certain features, but also significant
differences, on which we emphasize our
attention.
To achieve the goal of the study, we focused on
several provisions:
1. Ukrainian civil society in the post-Soviet
period is characterized by excessive
politicization.
2. The unstructured politicized civil society,
which very often acted spontaneously,
became the main driving force behind the
formation of Ukrainian democracy and the
newest Ukrainian democratic state.
3. The activities of civil society institutions
were mainly directed at resistance to the
state, opposition to attempts to restore
authoritarianism, protection of human rights
and broad charitable activities.
4. It was the pressure of civil society that led to
changes in state policy regarding the forms
of participation of civil society institutions in
making political decisions.
Literature Review
The theoretical basis of our research was the
concepts of civil society of the late 20th – early
21st centuries. In this period, representatives of
Western democracy faced certain crisis
phenomena of the functioning of civil society,
and the collapse of post-communist authoritarian
regimes in Eastern Europe and the emergence of
new democratic states prompted the process of
searching for a new effective model of
cooperation between the state and institutions of
civil society. It is important to emphasize that
civil society in developed democracies and civil
society in countries that do not have a historical
tradition of civil society have certain differences.
Likewise, the role of civil society in Western
countries today will be somewhat different than
it was a few decades ago. As
Philippe C. Schmitter rightly points out,
“Today’s citizens – even in polities that have
long suffered under authoritarian rule and have
no prior history of civil society – have quite
different organizational skills, are less likely to
identify so closely with partisan symbols or
ideologies, and defend a much more variegated
set of interests” (Schmitter, 1993, p. 7).
The concept of “civil society” is
multidimensional. For example, one of the
Ukrainian researchers singled out 57 definitions
of this concept (Berchenko, 2014, p. 21).
John Keane believes that the proliferation of
meanings of the term “civil society” is beginning
to proliferate to such an extent that it, like the all-
too-common advertising slogan, may “self-
destruct” from overuse. There is a growing
general belief in the importance of civil society,
but there is also growing inconsistency regarding
the meaning of this concept (Keane, 2000, p. 42).
The work uses the research of Jürgen Habermas,
Jean L. Cohen, Andrew Arato, John Keane,
Kononenko, V., Yaremenko, O., Zinko, Y., Lapshin, S., Ostapenko, O. / Volume 12 - Issue 65: 131-140 / May, 2023
Volume 12 - Issue 65
/ May 2023
133
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
Marc M. Howard, Nancy L. Rosenblum and a
number of Ukrainian researchers.
Thus, the ideas of civil society participation in
the democratic legitimization of state actions by
Jürgen Habermas (Habermas, 2012), the
understanding of civil society as the voluntary
character of a non-political association by
Jean L. Cohen and Andrew Arato (Cohen &
Arato, 1994) are important to us. We are
interested in Nancy Rosenblum’s thoughts on the
disordered, unsystematic “electoral civil society”
and the need for the government to create an
appropriate climate for the constant formation of
new associations and for the dynamic exchange
of members between them (Rosenblum, 1994).
The position of the Ukrainian researcher
Antonina Kolodii is particularly consonant for
us, who argued that since there was a pre-
revolutionary or revolutionary social reality in
the societies transitioning to democracy in the
1980s and early 1990s, the politicization of
public life and politicization became
characteristic of Ukrainian civil society concepts
of civil society. It is precisely the problems of
civil society’s resistance to the state that began to
be given more attention, to the detriment of
emphasizing its socializing functions (Kolodii,
2001).
Methodology
Our research is built on an interdisciplinary
approach using methods of history, political
science, sociology and law. Thus, following the
historical methods of periodization, historical-
comparative, chronological, the development of
civil society is shown taking into account various
stages in the formation of democratic Ukraine in
the post-Soviet period.
The formation of civil society in Ukraine was
closely related to taking into account the general
political processes in society, which in some
cases either inhibited the development of civil
society or became catalysts of this process.
Using sociological methods of collecting and
analyzing data on the total number of civil
society organizations and content analysis of
legal acts, the development and functioning of
Ukrainian civil society was shown, taking into
account the peculiarities of state policy at various
stages of the development of democracy.
The main legal research methods were
comparative legal and institutional, which
allowed to consider the civil society of Ukraine
as an institution of the state legal system of
Ukraine, which is recognized by the state at the
official level.
Results and Discussion
1. Formation of civil society in the
conditions of defective democracy
(1990s – 2004)
In our understanding, civil society is a social
element that exists between the state, society
itself, the economy and the political sphere of the
state and is a set of various institutions,
associations and organizations that represent the
interests and will of citizens, represent the public
initiative, control the authorities and oppose the
dominance of the state. Jean L. Cohen and
Andrew Arato understand “civil society” as a
sphere of social interaction between the economy
and state, composed above all on the intimate
sphere (especially the family), the sphere of
associations (especially voluntary associations),
social movements, and forms of public
communication (Cohen & Arato, 1994, ix). Here,
the question immediately arises whether the
concept of civil society should include the
intimate sphere (especially the family). In our
opinion, the family should not be considered the
element a civil society. Likewise, we do not
include in this concept elements of socio-
political relations – political groups.
At the same time, we share the opinion of
John Keane, who believed that for the complete
independence of civil society, it cannot do
without political institutions, including the state.
Since it is impossible to do without regulating
social relations, overcoming conflicts with the
help of laws (Keane, 1988, p. 1).
The development of civil society in Ukraine has
been going on for a long time along with the
transformation of the political model of the state
and continues today. Sometimes, for the next
stage of its development, it was even necessary
to go through political and social upheavals. The
Velvet Revolution of 1989-1991, the Orange
Revolution of 2004 and the Revolution of
Dignity at the turn of 2013-2014 became
significant catalysts for the formation of civil
society and launched new approaches of public
policy in this area.
The first sprouts of civil society institutions
emerged in the late 1980s, when the authoritarian
Soviet regime partially weakened ideological and
party control.
134
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
The formation of public activity and self-
organization of citizens directly depended on
state policy in this area. Unfortunately, we can
say that the state did not have the will to create
an appropriate climate for the development of
civil society. That is, the conditions that,
according to Nancy L. Rosenblum, the
government should create for the constant
formation of new associations and for the
dynamic exchange of members between them,
simply did not exist (Rosenblum, 1994).
However, it was at the beginning of the 1990s
that the Law of Ukraine “On Association of
Citizens” was adopted, which defined the legal
status of public organizations (Law of Ukraine
No. 4572-VI, 1992).
Also, the development of civil society was
largely determined by the type of political regime
that functioned in the republic. The fall of the
Soviet Union and the proclamation of Ukraine’s
independence do not mean the final victory of
democracy. Thus, the presidency of L. Kravchuk
(1991 – 1994) was spent looking for prospects
for the development of society and ways to
combine market mechanisms with state methods
of protecting the population, ways to combat the
economic crisis, market formation and
democracy in a country that has long been
unaware of these institutes.
The political regime of L. Kuchma (1994 – 2004)
was undemocratic for most researchers, but there
were significant differences in determining its
type. Yu. Matsievsky, who studied different
approaches to characterizing the regime of this
period, believes that the political regime in
Ukraine under Kuchma’s presidency is defined
by most researchers as undemocratic in the range
from neo-totalitarian to competitive semi-
authoritarian (Matsievsky, 2006, p. 22).
M. Minakov and M. Rojansky believe that
“through the 1990s, the country’s political
system developed along two parallel paths,
combining a liberal democratic facade with post-
soviet oligarch-controlled distribution of power
and resources” (Minakov & Rojansky, 2015).
During this period, the state took several steps to
bring civil society institutions out of the
shadows, but their participation in the formation
of public policy was minimal. They were not
heard or noticed. In the period before the early
2000s, the authorities showed almost no interest
in these forms of self-organization of the
population (apparently, not seeing them as
particularly useful or threatening). Normative
acts legally regulated the activities of various
organizations, which were registered an masse,
but did not determine their place in the systems
“state – society”, “state power – people”.
In addition, the crisis was in civil society itself.
There were several reasons for this. The first
reason was that Ukrainian civil society was
highly politicized. The first wave of its
politicization took place when the independence
of Ukraine was fought for and consolidated, and
the second was aimed at protecting democracy.
Therefore, the most of the NGOs that emerged in
the late 1980s and early 1990s were primarily
focused on democracy, the restoration of
Ukraine’s statehood, and the protection of
national-cultural life. With the proclamation of
independence in 1991 and the beginning of
democratic transformations, these tasks were
fulfilled for them. A. Kolodii believes that the
reasons for the politicization of Ukrainian civil
society are not only the youth of Ukrainian
democracy, but also the so-called “catch-up
model” of the development of the country, in
which the spiritual and intellectual elite – the
intelligentsia, which seeks to “tighten up” its
people to the achievements of world civilization
(Kolodii, 2001).
The second reason that hindered the active
development of the civil sector in the 1990s was
the preservation of the post-Soviet mentality in a
large part of the citizens. There was also a
significant mistrust of various kinds of
organizations, since in the previous communist
period they were all necessarily connected to the
state and official ideology.
In the context of low civic activity found almost
everywhere in post-communist Europe, the main
argument, according to Marc M. Howard,
remained three factors. 1) Past experience of
citizens’ participation in organizations and traces
of distrust in all formal organizations. 2) The
stability of the informal circle of communication,
which replaces participation in official
organizations. 3) Disappointment with the
current democratic and political systems, which
pushes many away from the public sphere
(Howard, 2009, p. 45). In general, confirming the
author’s conclusions, we would like to
emphasize the importance of the Ukrainian
Maidans. We consider the Ukrainian Maidans
(revolutions) as a certain phenomenon not only
in the recent history of Ukraine, but also as a
special stage of the formation of democracy in
Ukraine in comparison with other post-
communist countries. Ukrainians protested not
so much against someone, but for something –
for certain values. It is important for Ukrainians
to prevent the spread of authoritarianism. When
Volume 12 - Issue 65
/ May 2023
135
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
liberal and democratic institutions cannot cope
with it, it is political non-indifference that
prompts Ukrainians to go to the streets and
protest, defending their rights and freedoms
(Yakovliev & Haran, 2015, p. 24).
The socio-economic crisis has also significantly
affected the development of the “third sector”.
NGOs were forced to seek foreign financial
support for their activities. Funding from abroad
was important and supported the existence of
certain public organizations, but did not
significantly change the ways of civil society
formation. Sometimes, the use of foreign aid had
certain disadvantages. Public organizations were
formed that lived on foreign aid. They were
contemptuously called “grantoids”.
S. Henderson described this problem in detail. He
noted that instead of forming developed
horizontal networks and supporting grassroots
initiatives, vertical, isolated public communities
were formed (Henderson, 2002, p. 140). This
organizations rented offices, bought equipment,
hired accountants, translators, etc. In other
words, the funds went to the maintenance of the
organizations themselves, and not to the
development of civil society itself. However, it is
worth noting that often the word “grantoids” was
also used to form a negative opinion about the
role of public organizations.
Nevertheless, despite all the challenges, the
network of public organizations, as one of the
largest segments of civil society, was constantly
growing.
If in 1991 there were about 300 all-Ukrainian
public organizations, in 1997 their number grew
to 800 (Tokar, 2020, р. 127). In 2000, the number
of public organizations with all-Ukrainian status
reached 1267 (State Statistics Service of Ukraine,
2011).
Thus, in the period of the 1990s, the legal
framework for the activities of civil society
institutions was formed. However, the state
authorities did not actually notice its existence.
On the other hand, NGOs themselves have not
yet gained sufficient influence on social
processes. This can be explained by the fact that
with the creation of a strong state apparatus of
Ukraine and overcoming the socio-economic
crisis in the second half of the 1990s, their role
has significantly decreased. Moreover, non-
governmental institutions did not attract public
attention during this period. Confidence in them
was extremely low. In fact, despite the growth in
the number of registered public associations, the
number of people involved in the work of the
organizations actually remained at the same
level. Yes, on the question “Which public or
political organization are you a member of?”
answered negatively: 1994 – 82.2%, 1996 –
86.7%, 1998 – 86.6%, 2000 – 82.9% of
respondents (Reznik, 2019, p. 99).
What was missing for the full development of
civil society? Here we absolutely share
M. Howard’s conclusion: stabilization of the
economic situation, growth in the well-being of
the population and a reassessment of the role of
the state and its relationship to civil society
organizations (Howard, 2009, p. 171-172).
In the early 2000s, a growing socio-political
crisis in Ukraine led to an increase in the level of
politicization of the social movement. The
establishment of oligarchic governance and the
attempt to establish an authoritarian
consolidation of power in the last term of
Kuchma's presidency provoked mass opposition
in civil society.
Between 2000 and 2001 in the republic was
protest campaign “The Ukraine Without
Kuchma”, organized by the political opposition.
The protest was joined not only by opposition
political parties but also by some non-
governmental public organizations. After the
aggravation of the situation and a series of
violent confrontations between the police and the
protesters, Kuchma for the first time at the
national level took some steps to meet non-
governmental organizations. In our opinion, the
beginning of the dialogue with the institutions of
civil society was aimed, on foot, at removing the
degree of political tension. This calls into
question the sincerity of the government’s
intentions to promote the development of an
independent civil society that would influence
public policy and control government activities.
The government’s attempts to level and limit the
role of non-state institutions in the processes of
governing the state by supporting only the
activities of third-sector structures loyal to the
regime were also noticeable (Ivaniuk, 2013,
р. 44).
However, even under these conditions, the
number of public organizations was constantly
growing.
136
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
Figure 1. The number of officially registered civil organizations by the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine.
Source: Formed by the author based on the research of M. Tokar (Tokar, 2020, р. 127) and the statistical
bulletin of the State Statistics Service of Ukraine (State Statistics Service of Ukraine, 2011).
Even with an unfavorable legal framework for
NGOs and the government’s efforts to discredit
foreign-funded organizations, the overall rating
of civil society has improved over the years.
According to the study “Nations in Transit”
(Sushko, 2005) of the Freedom House, if in 1998
it was 4.25, in 1999 – 4.00, in 2001 – 3.75, in
2002 – 3.75, in 2003 – 3.50, in 2004 – 3.75, then
in mid-2005 – 3 (Sushko, 2005).
It is important to note that even in these
conditions, Ukrainian civil society has shown a
fairly high level of maturity and organization,
which came as a surprise for many political
experts. The main locomotive at that time was
non-governmental organizations that existed
with international support and were focused on
the development of democracy, protection of
human rights and freedom of journalism. A new
impetus was achieved through self-organization
citizens, the development of youth and student
movements and journalists’ associations (Kurt et
al., 2005, р. 27).
2. Development of civil society in Ukraine
after the Orange Revolution
The Orange Revolution of 2004, as a mass public
resistance to the falsification of the presidential
election in Ukraine, was a new impetus for the
establishment of civil society institutions. The
new state policy on the development of the
independent civil sector also contributed to this.
The ideals of the Maidan, among which the main
postulates were freedom, justice, independence
and unity of Ukraine, prompted the state
authorities to start an open dialogue between the
government and society. In our opinion, the
Orange Revolution can be called a revolution of
civil society, even if the level of political
participation of Ukrainian citizens remained low
during this period. For example, in 2007 83.7%
of Ukrainian citizens were not members of
public, political organizations and movements,
while in 1994 such citizens were 82% (Panina,
2005, p. 26). However, it was during this
revolution that the middle class took an active
part in political events. Entrepreneurs, managers,
and company employees not only provided
material support to the protesters, but also
provided food, clothing, housing, and so on.
On September 15, 2005, the Decree of the
President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko “On
Ensuring Public Participation in the Formation
and Implementation of State Policy” was issued
(Decree of the President of Ukraine No. 32/2012,
2005). It was aimed at establishing effective
mechanisms of the state with the institutions of
civil partnership, improving the activities of
public authorities and local governments,
ensuring its transparency and openness. It was
during Yushchenko’s presidency that a list of
civil society institutions was formed. For the first
time at the level of normative acts it was
determined that civil society institutions include:
public organizations, trade unions, employers’
organizations, charitable and religious
organizations, self-organization organizations,
non-governmental media and other non-profit
associations and institutions legalized.
In the post-revolutionary period, the number of
political parties and public organizations grew
Volume 12 - Issue 65
/ May 2023
137
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
steadily. In 2007, 141 political parties and 2,678
public organizations were registered in Ukraine,
of which 2,086 had an all-Ukrainian status and
592 an international one (Osaulenko, 2008,
p. 22). As of January 1, 2011, 185 political
parties and 3,344 public organizations were
already registered in Ukraine, of which 2,619 had
an all-Ukrainian status and 725 an international
one (Osaulenko, 2011, p. 22). In total, in 2010 the
number of all non-governmental organizations
was about 52 thousand.
In general, in 2010 the Civil Society
Organizations Sustainability Index (CSOSI) was
3.5. It was higher than the index of former post-
Soviet countries, except for the Baltic countries
(Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia). For example, in
Armenia it was 4.0, in Azerbaijan – 4.7, in
Belarus – 5.9, in Georgia and Moldova – 4.2, in
Russia – 4.3, while in Estonia – 2.0 (USAID,
2010, p. 4).
At the end of 2010, Viktor Yanukovych was
elected the new President of Ukraine. On the one
hand, in the first years of Viktor Yanukovych's
presidency there was a positive trend of
cooperation between the government and civil
society. The slogan of his election campaign is “I
will hear everyone!” contributed to the spread of
faith in society in the further development of civil
society, and Viktor Yanukovych himself at the
beginning of his presidency repeatedly stressed
the need for cooperation between government
and civil society. At least outwardly it was so
perceived by society. On the other hand, at the
beginning of his term, he began a gradual
concentration of power in his hands, which in
turn negatively affected the functioning of civil
society in the future. Already in April 2010, two
months after Yanukovych was elected president,
former PACE Co-Rapporteur on Ukraine Hanne
Severinsen was struck by the level of coagulation
of democracy in Ukraine (Ukrinform, 2010).
Here it is worth mentioning the words J. Keane:
“The birth and revival of civil society is always
associated with dangers. It grants freedom to
despots and democrats equally” (Keane, 2000,
р. 51). During this period, the main shortcomings
of the young democracy were clearly manifested:
the immaturity of the democratic political
system, the lack of a system of deterrence against
the usurpation of power, and the weakness of
civil society institutions. However, we fully
agree with the view that resistance to
authoritarianism has already been embedded in
the political consciousness of Ukrainian society
and “this is a bottom-up phenomenon, spurred on
by Ukraine’s vibrant civil society, the rising class
of independent journalists and local activists who
have strengthened their voice and power since
the Orange revolution” (Jarabik & Shapovalova,
2010, p. 2). In our opinion, the Maidan
phenomenon should be considered as a form of
civil disobedience of civil society in a democratic
society. This is what Jean L. Cohen,
Andrew Arato considered possible and desirable
for radical institutional reforms. They thought
“сivil disobedience, aimed at further
democratization of the institutions of
constitutional democracy, strengthens the
principles of majority rule” (Cohen & Arato,
2003, p. 519, 546).
At the beginning of his presidency, Viktor
Yanukovych repeatedly stressed the need for
cooperation between the government and civil
society. However, in our deep conviction, since
2012, cooperation and the level of trust between
third sector institutions and public authorities has
significantly decreased, which later led to a
political crisis, new social upheavals, revolution
and war.
In 2013, on the basis of the Law of Ukraine “On
Public Associations”, there were 67,155 in the
republic, of which 409 had all-Ukrainian status
(Kalachova, 2014, p. 7). The increase in the
number of public organizations is due to partial
liberalization of the creation and registration of
organizations. On the other hand, Ukrainian
society remained politicized. In general, citizens
were poorly informed about the activities of the
non-governmental sector. With the report U.S.
Agency for International Development in 2013
only 15 percent of Ukrainians say that they know
of CSOs that are active in Ukraine, while 59
percent say they do not know any, and a further
19 percent said that they do not know what a CSO
is (USAID, 2013, p. 230).
Civil society reacted sharply to socio-economic
problems and the collapse of democratic
processes. In addition, the most active public
organizations, whose activities were aimed at
protecting democratic procedures and upholding
the rights and freedoms of citizens, were formed
at the expense of international and private
donors.
With the victory of the Revolution of Dignity
2013-2014, a new stage in the formation of state
policy in the field of civil society development
began. It is connected, first of all, with the
legislative consolidation of Ukraine’s movement
towards the European Union, where the role of
civil society institutions in public administration
is extremely high. In 2016, the “Strategy for
promoting the development of civil society in
138
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
Ukraine for 2016-2020” was adopted (approved
by the Decree of the President of Ukraine “On
promoting the development of civil society in
Ukraine”). She noted Strategy for Promoting
Civil Society in Ukraine for 2016-2020” noted
that “The Revolution of Dignity opened a new
stage in the history of civil society, demonstrated
public influence on socio-political
transformations, was the impetus for the renewal
and reformatting of power” (Decree of the
President of Ukraine, 2016).
In 2005-2021 the CSO Sustainability Index that
measures the strength and overall viability of
civil society sectors, constantly grew. We will
remind that seven different dimensions of the
CSO sector are analyzed in the CSO
Sustainability Index: legal environment,
organizational capacity, financial viability,
advocacy, service provision, infrastructure,
public image. The assessment is based on a scale
from 1 to 7, with a score of 1 indicating a very
advanced civil society sector with a high level of
sustainability, and a score of 7 indicating a
fragile, unsustainable sector with a low level of
development.
Figure 2. USAID’s Civil Society Organization Sustainability Index (the Index or CSOSI).
Source: The graph is based on the annual reports of the United States Agency for International Development
(USAID, 2013).
We believe that after the revolution in Ukraine, a
strong civil society began to form, which was a
participant or even an initiator of positive
changes in recent years. It influences the agenda
of the state, controls the activities of the
government, as well as formulates its own reform
proposals.
While writing this article, Ukraine and the
Ukrainian people faced a new challenge – the
war with the Russian Federation. We can say
with confidence that the tragic events of the war
showed the maturity of Ukrainian civil society.
Forgetting about political disputes and
dissatisfaction with the lack of rapid change in
certain areas, political parties and NGOs have
united around the government to defend the
homeland.
According to a poll conducted by the Rating
Sociological Group on March 1, 2022, 93% of
Ukrainian citizens support the activities of
President Zelensky, and 84% support the actions
of heads of local governments (Sociological
group Rating, 2022, p. 9-11). Also, support for
the foreign policy vector of public policy, in
particular Ukraine's accession to the EU and
NATO, is extremely high. Thus, 86% of
respondents supported joining the European
Union, and 76% supported membership in the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (Sociological
group Rating, 2022, p. 16).
Today, in response to the challenges of wartime,
many NGOs are reformatting their activities and
setting themselves other goals and objectives
than those set out in their founding documents.
The most common are, for example, financial
and organizational assistance to the Armed
Forces of Ukraine and Territorial Defense,
organization of assistance to injured people and
animals, coordination of assistance centers for
internally displaced persons, organization of
humanitarian assistance, car volunteering and
more.
Volume 12 - Issue 65
/ May 2023
139
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
The Orange Revolution of 2004 and the
Revolution of Dignity of 2013-1014 were turning
points in defining state policy on civil society
development, determining the place of civil
society institutions in the country's political
system and creating a real opportunity to
influence state policy and ensuring sistem of
public control.
Since the early 1990s, civil society in Ukraine
has gone from an expression of public interest to
a truly influential political institution.
Conclusions
Thus, we can say that the civil society of Ukraine
has developed over a long period of time against
the background of sometimes contradictory state
policy in this area and the lack of a broad social
base for the activities of public institutions. For a
long time, the government not only did not
promote the formation of civil society
institutions, but also tried to suspend the
formation of the third sector, take it under
control, contributed to the formation of “manual”
public organizations. First of all, the public sector
was deprived of the functions of real influence on
public policy and effective control over
government activities. In the absence of true
democracy, the only thing that NGOs could hope
for in their activities was to outline the range of
issues that needed to be addressed. At the same
time, with the gradual resolution of socio-
economic problems since the late 1990s, the
number of active middle-class members has
grown, becoming the social base of civil society
and the driving force behind future revolutions.
The existence of these citizens outside public
associations has led to a low assessment of the
development of civil society by Ukrainian and
foreign experts on the eve of the Orange
Revolution. However, it was the pressure of
millions of representatives of small
entrepreneurs, business, officials, intellectuals,
students, not only led to significant changes in
the socio-political sphere, but also gave the
opportunity to talk about the formation of civil
society.
The Orange Revolution of 2004 and the
Revolution of Dignity of 2013-1014 were turning
points in defining state policy on civil society
development, determining the place of civil
society institutions in the country’s political
system and creating a real opportunity to
influence state policy and ensuring of public
control.
In our opinion, it was the strength of civil society
institutions that hindered the country’s attempt to
return to the oligarchic authoritarianism of the
Yanukovych era and moving away from the pro-
European course of development of country. The
period from 2014 was marked by a rapid increase
in the number of citizens and public associations
involved in charity, charitable and volunteer
activities, and monitoring, analytical practices.
Today, civil society in Ukraine has become a
cementing intermediate link between the political
power and society, which by all means
contributes to the fight against the aggressor and
the struggle for the preservation of statehood. At
the same time, even in wartime, civil society
institutions actively monitor the government and
demand that it be cleansed of corruption.
Bibliographic references
Berchenko, H. (2014). Civil society in Ukraine:
constitutional aspects: monograph. Kharkiv:
Yurait, 208 p.
Cohen, J.L., & Arato, A. (1994) Civil Society
and Political Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press Ltd, 800 pp.
Cohen, J.L., & Arato, A. (2003). Grazhdanskoe
obshchestvo i politicheskaya teoriya
(translation into Russian of the work «Civil
Society and Political Theory»). Moscow:
Publishing house "Ves Mir", 2003. 784 p.
Decree of the President of Ukraine No. 32/2012.
On Ensuring Public Participation in the
Formation and Implementation of State
Policy. Verkhovna Rada Ukrainy, 2005.
Recovered from
https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1276/2
005#Text
Decree of the President of Ukraine. On
promoting the development of civil society in
Ukraine. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2016.
Recovered from
https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/487/20
21#Text
Habermas, J. (2012). Ah, Europe. Small political
essays / Translation from German of the work
«Ach, Europa: Small Political Writings».
Moscow: Ves Myr, 160 р.
Henderson, S. L. (2002). Western Aid and the
Nongovernmental Organization Sector in
Russia. Comparative political studies, 35(2),
139-167.
Howard, M. M. (2009). The Weakness of Civil
Society in Post-Communist Europe
(translation into Russian of the work “The
Weakness of Civil Society in Post-
Communist Europe”, 2003). Moscow:
Aspekt Press, 191 p.
140
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
Ivaniuk, M. (2013). Institutes of civil society in
the Western region of Ukraine during the
period of independence. Lviv: East European
National University, 102 p.
Jarabik, B., & Shapovalova, N. (2010). 100 days
of President Yanukovych: Ukrainian
democracy on hold? Police brief, 49, pp. 1-5.
Recovered from
https://www.academia.edu/19456034/Ukrain
ian_democracy_on_hold_FRIDE_Policy_Br
ief_49_2010
Kalachova, I. (2014). Activities of public
associations in Ukraine in 2013. Statistical
bulletin. Kyiv: State Statistics Committee of
Ukraine, 151 p.
Keane, J. (1988). Democracy and civil society.
London: Verso, 253 p.
Keane, J. (2000). Civil society. Old images, new
vision / Translation from English. Kyiv:
K.I.S., 192 р.
Kolodii, A. (2001). Historical evolution of civil
society and ideas about it (ideal formation).
Independent Cultural Journal «Y», 21.
Recovered from
http://www.ji.lviv.ua/n21texts/kolodij.htm
Kurt, H., Kempe, I., & Andriiko, V. (2005).
Presidential elections and the Orange
Revolution: impact on transformational
processes in Ukraine / Friedrich Ebert
Foundation. Kyiv: Zapovit, 148 p.
Matsievsky, Yu. (2006). Between
authoritarianism and democracy: political
regimes after the “Orange Revolution”.
Political management, 5, pp. 18–32.
Minakov, M., & Rojansky, M. (2015).
Democracy in Ukraine: Are We There Yet?
Wilson Center. Recovered from
https://acortar.link/uApwFn
Law of Ukraine No. 4572-VI. On Associations of
Citizens. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 1992.
Recovered from
https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2460-
12#Text
Osaulenko, O. (2008). Statistical Yearbook of
Ukraine. 2007. Kyiv: State Statistics
Committee of Ukraine, 571 p.
Osaulenko, O. (2011). Statistical Yearbook of
Ukraine. 2010. Kyiv: State Statistics
Committee of Ukraine, 559 p.
Panina, N. (2005). Ukrainian society 1994-2005:
sociological monitoring. Kyiv: “TOV
Vydavnytstvo Sofiia”, 160 p.
Reznik, O. (2019). Sociological dimension of
civil society in Ukraine. Kyiv: Instytut
sotsiolohii NAN Ukrainy, 288 p.
Rosenblum, N. L. (1994). Civil Societies:
Liberalism and the Moral Uses of Pluralism.
Social Research, 61(3), pp. 539-562.
Schmitter, P. C. (1993). Some Propositions about
Civil Society and the Consolidation of
Democracy. Irihs. Recovered from
https://irihs.ihs.ac.at/id/eprint/705/
Sociological group Rating. (2022). National
survey: Ukraine in conditions of war. March
1, 2022. Recovered from
https://ratinggroup.ua/files/ratinggroup/reg_f
iles/rg_ua_1200_032022_war_press.pdf
State Statistics Service of Ukraine. (2011).
Public organizations in Ukraine in 2010:
Statistical bulletin. Recovered from
https://ukrstat.gov.ua/druk/publicat/Arhiv_u/
15/Arch_go_bl.htm
Sushko, O. (2005). Nations in Transit. Freedom
House. Recovered from
https://www.refworld.org/docid/473aff1350.
html
Tokar, M. (2020). Civil organizations of Ukraine
in the system of development of public-
management relations. Lviv: LRIDU NADU,
412 p.
Ukrinform. (2010). How the Revolution of
Dignity changed Ukraine: 10 achievements.
Recovered from
https://www.ukrinform.ua/rubric-
antifake/3354127-ak-revolucia-gidnosti-
zminila-ukrainu-10-zdobutkiv.html
USAID (2010). The 2010 NGO Sustainability
Index for Central and Eastern Europe and
Eurasia. Washington: U.S. Agency for
International Development, 239 p. Recovered
from http://surl.li/iotnw
USAID (2013). The 2013 CSO Sustainability
Index for Central and Eastern Europe and
Eurasia. Washington: U.S. Agency for
International Development, 239 p. Recovered
from http://surl.li/iotom
Yakovliev, M., & Haran, O. (2015). Ukraine
after Euromaidan: achievements and
challenges. Kyiv: Fund "Democratic
Initiatives" named after Ilka Kucheriva, 132
p.