123Druæboslovne razprave, XIX (2003), 42: 123-143
Gojko Beæovan UDK 316.354.4(497.5)
Croatian civil society on the pathway
to becoming a legitimate public actor
ABSTRACT: This article deal with issue of civil society development in Croatia as transitional
and post war country during 1990s. Civil society development in this time is very much
related to the humanitarian crisis caused by the War and involvement of international
and foreign organisation. Beside that, civil society in Croatia has a poor tradition, its
development has been hindered by half a century of communism and totalitarian ideology,
coupled with the lack of experience with the concept of freedom of association. In the
second part of article, using the concept of CIVICUS Index on Civil Society Project, we
analyse four dimension of civil society in Croatia: the structure of civil society; the
legal, political and socio-cultural space in which civil society operates in the larger
regulatory, legal and social environment; the values civil society represents and
propagates and the impact civil society has on social and community development as
well as on the public policy process. The most critical area of civil society development
in Croatia is related to the limited space it has to operate, as defined by the legislative,
political and social-cultural framework. With legislation we do need to deal more with
public policy issues trying to institutionalise a place for CSOs social capital building
activities.  The negative attitude of the state, restrictive legislation, a lack of social
responsibility on the part of the corporate sector and the absence of a culture of
volunteering and public spiritedness are vital problems. Regarding its impact, civil society
organisations seems, at least in their own perceptions, to contribute significantly to
solving specific social, economic and political problems and furthering the public good.
However, influence on the public policy process is very limited.
KEY WORDS: civil society, non-profit sector, Croatia, post-communist countries
1. Introduction - development of civil society
in Croatia druing 1990s
Civil society in Croatia, the former Yugoslav Republic, has a poor tradition, its
development has been hindered by half a century of communism and totalitarian ideology,
coupled with the lack of experience with the concept of freedom of association. Citizens’
civil engagement, for solving both individual and community problems has not been a
common practice among the vast majority of citizens in Croatia. Most citizens consider
the government/ state responsible for solving their problems (Salamon, et al., 1999:
33). Thus passiveness and apathy exists in Croatia because of this belief.
124 Druæboslovne razprave, XIX (2003), 42: 123-143
Gojko Beæovan
Civil society in Croatia was substantially established during the Homeland War of
1991-1995, encouraged by the foreign organisations and foreign donors.1  Civil society
organisations, mostly associations, played a significant role in solving war-related
problems, assisting in overcoming crises related to refugees and displaced persons, and
in meeting the needs of losers from process of privatisation of economy. Such
development, the serious role of religious organisations, especially Catholic Church,
can be explained with supply-side theory (Salamon and Anheier, 1988). Government
failure/market failure theory is also applicable to some extend. At that time a sense of
solidarity among the citizens remained at a considerably high level. Researches have
found that in the mid 1990s this solidarity began to decline and citizens formerly engaged
in civil organisations began to withdraw, focusing instead on solving their personal
problems (Beæovan, 1995). The citizens’ withdrawal and declining sense of solidarity
was subject to both escalating economic crisis and focus on family problems, leading to
a standstill in civil society’s development.
Foreign organisations thus initiated the establishment of a number of associations
in Croatia, and provided these associations with much needed technical support.2
According to Stubbs (1996) these programmes emphasised relief-based activities, rather
than encouraging sustainable social development.
The development of CSOs in Croatia is largely driven by the non-critical acceptance
of foreign experiences and goals, that is not respond to the interests and needs of local
stakeholders, what is regional phenomena (Kuti, 2001). The problem is that these people
speak of civil society using foreign concepts and terms that are not necessarily applicable
to Croatian tradition (Stubbs, 2001). In this context only few individuals, with academic
background, in CSOs are able to advice the importance of civil society in general public.
Due to such an environment, civil society in Croatia had to be partially developed,
through foreign funding programmes, from above.
During 1990s the right wing government of Croatian Democratic Union had an
extremely negative attitude toward CSOs, especially these dealing with human right ad
democratisation issues, declaring them enemies of the state. Under these circumstances
some of the non-governmental organisations became an active part of the political
opposition.3  The fact that today, many citizens have a negative attitude toward non-
governmental organisations is partially a consequence of this past political environment.
According to research performed by the International Republican Institute (2001) 38%
of citizens report having a negative attitude to non-governmental organisations, 44%
positive, and 18% were ambiguous.4  The negative attitudes toward non-governmental
organisations among students and secondary school pupils, as well as the lack of
knowledge on the concept of civil society, was recognised in research of  LediÊ and
Mrnjaus (2000).
The 16 provisions of the Law on Associations, restricting the freedom of association,
were abolished by the Constitutional Court in February 2000.5  The inadequate legal
framework and the patronising attitude of the state toward the non-profit organisations
is, according to BariÊ (2000:47), a significant obstacle in the development of the sector.
Relatively small amount of philanthropic and charitable giving is largely due to the
125Druæboslovne razprave, XIX (2003), 42: 123-143
Croatian civil society on the pathway to becoming a legitimate public actor
absence of foundation tradition, unfavourable tax regulations and distrust toward civil
society felt by corporate sector and citizens (Beæovan, 2002).6
Activities of CSOs have been conditioned with the war, economic crisis, relief and
political crisis oriented foreign funding programmes. Real co-operation and partnership
with the Government, for a larger part of sector was impossible. Media controlled by
the Government made negative public image of CSOs getting funding from outside7
and it effects perception of ordinary citizens towards such organisations like public
enemy.8  Civil society is not a part of mainstream transition agenda in Croatia9 .
Limited missions of foreign funders were not supportive for conducting of empirical
researches on civil society development. Significant lack of literature on civil society
in the native language is evident, which poses an obstacle to systematic efforts to develop
curriculum for civil society on university level. The research by the World Bank (2000:32)
reveals that the main political and academic mainstream has little respect for the activities
of CSOs in the wide area of social care and consider them as not professional and rather
politically engaged.
Beside mentioned, the following aspects have been recognised as the most significant
issues for civil society development in Croatia: sustainability, transparency, effectiveness,
non-professional approach, leadership, identity, inexperience with civil society-oriented
advocacy activities, low level of co-operation between the organisations themselves
and with the mass media (Shimkus, 1996; BariÊ, 2000; Stubbs, 2001; LediÊ, 1997;
Beæovan, 1997; Coury, Despot-LuËanin and Beæovan, 1998).
The Croatian pattern of civil society development was to larger extent similar to
that in other post-communist countries. During 1990s, in processes of civil society
development in Central Eastern European countries, very similar problems like in Croatia
were emerging ( Siegel and Yancey, 1992; Salamon, et al., 1999; Kuti, 2001; Pinter,
2001; Johnson and Young, 1997; Szeman and Horsanyi, 2000; Regulska, 1999 and
2001; Jenkins, 1995; KolariË, et al., 1995; Laiferva, 1995; PotuËek, 2000; Lagerspetz,
2002). Non-eligibility of Croatia for Phare programme, European Union support
programme for Central Eastern European counties (Laiferova, 1995), and the war made
a difference.
Civil society development in Croatia means democratisation of societal associations
which indirectly influence the state and economy, and promote idea of pluralism in
public sphere  (Cohen and Arato, 1992). In other aspect, civil society mobilising new
resource and took a limited part in restructuring of welfare state (Salamon, et al., 1999:
33).
2. Recent development in Croatian civil society
and the CIVICUS index
Since the elections of 2000, preceded by an extensive campaign involving a number
of CSOs,10  the new coalition government with the majority of Social Democratic Party
has, in early 2000 addressed the problems facing civil society development in Croatia
with more responsibility. The government adapted a new liberal Law on Associations.
126 Druæboslovne razprave, XIX (2003), 42: 123-143
Gojko Beæovan
Three persons, in earlier law ten, can establish association. Unregistered associations
are recognised as legal persons.  This new policy resulted in the design of the ”Programme
of Co-operation between the Government of the Republic of Croatia and the Non-
Government, Non-for-Profit Sector in the Republic of Croatia,” adopted in December
2000. Through the efforts of the Government Office of Associations, established 1998,
the government has developed a transparent National grant programme from the State
Budget with involvement of civil society representatives.
Since 2001 citizens and corporate sector can provide up to 2% of their income as
tax free donation to the non-profit organisations. The Government encourage foreign
funders and strengthened indigenous recipients with new tax provision of not paying
VAT of 22% for purchasing goods and services from foreign money. With such incentives
the government is increasingly aware of the merit of civil society.
In 2002 the Government Office for Associations initiated establishment of the Council
for Civil Society Development with mix membership of state administration
representatives and “elected” people from civil society. Council is advisory body of the
Government for implementation of mentioned Programme. Some critical observations
see such involvement as a top-down approach in this sensitive matter.
Stakeholders need a foundation of knowledge concerning the current state of civil
society in Croatia. Thus, CERANEO,11  in partnership with CIVICUS: World Alliance
for Citizen Participation has embarked on the CIVICUS Index on Civil Society Project.
The Index project is a diagnostic tool for assessing the current state and health of
civil society at a national level, and to provide a basis for dialogue among civil society
stakeholders so they might set goals and develop an agenda for the future development
of civil society. The project was carried out in two general phases:
1. All existing information and previous research concerning civil society in Croatia
was compiled and analysed
2. A stakeholder mail survey (April-May 2001) was conducted among 353 key civil
society stakeholders from a variety of sub-sectors. Table 1 (in Appendix) outlines
the sub-sectors and the number of respondents from each.12
The assessment process made use of the CIVICUS Diamond Tool13  as a general analytic
approach. This tool breaks the complexity of civil society into 4 dimensions:
1. The structure of civil society
2. The legal, political and socio-cultural space in which civil society operates in the
larger regulatory, legal and social environment
3. The values civil society represents and propagates
4. The impact civil society has on social and community development as well as on
the public policy process
To assess these dimensions, a set of indicators was chosen for each.14  The scores
obtained from the survey for each of these indicators are mapped to form a diamond
shape, lending itself to useful interpretations concerning the current state of civil society
in Croatia.
127Druæboslovne razprave, XIX (2003), 42: 123-143
Croatian civil society on the pathway to becoming a legitimate public actor
3. The findings of the CIVICUS index on civil society
in Croatia
3.1 The Civil Society Diamond
Civil society in Croatia, as a post war and transitional country, according to a
respondent, “…is still in the infant stage with a big progress made in the last ten years”.
The visual representation of the findings from the stakeholder survey form a status
diamond, representing the current state of civil society in Croatia as having a moderate
health (Figure 1) with respect to its structure and impact. Civil society’s values are also
rated rather positively, however its legal, political and socio-cultural space is regarded
as quite negative.
Figure 1: Croatian Civil Society Diamond
3.2 Structure of Croatian Civil Society
The structure of civil society in Croatia is not sufficiently transparent. Little attention
has been paid for collection and dissemination of respective data about civil society,
profiles, activities and its achievements.15
A respondent observed the following:
“ Civil society in Croatia undergoes the period of “children’s diseases“. However a
significant progress has been made in the last ten years, referring to both shaping and
organising of civil society and initiating network connecting and co-ordination between
organisations (inevitable for producing significant impact on society development).”
Impact
Structure
ValuesSpace
100
10
0
100
100
53.8
60.6
47.5
34.6
128 Druæboslovne razprave, XIX (2003), 42: 123-143
Gojko Beæovan
3.2.1 General features
Croatia has about 20.000 registered CSO, of which 18.000 operate on a local level.
A vast number of these organisations were established following the political shift in
1990. While these numbers exist for registered CSOs, there are currently no reliable
indicators to assess how many of these are really active. However, based on the previous
research experience of the author, the number of active associations should presumably
be assessed as significantly lower.
Croatia has about 60 registered foundations, and over 150 public benefit companies
with private status, having the status of non-profit organisations. Further data indicate
that the vast majority of associations in Croatia, that is some 10.000, are registered in
the area of sports and recreation. At the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare, 431
humanitarian organisations have been registered as for 2001.16  According to an estimate
by The Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe, Croatia has
some 290 associations active in environmental protection. Additionally, Croatia has
1.752 volunteer fire stations and 529 registered labour unions with approximately
550.000 members. Thus, domination of sport, recreational, fire station and cultural
organisations are like in other transitional countries (Salamon, et al., 1999; Jenkins,
1995; KolariË, et al., 1995).
An important part of the CSOs structure, resulting from foreign funding programmes,
are several training organisations, three regional resource centres and, in general,
innovative civil society organisation activities is part or regional development (Pinter,
2001).17
A national survey conducted by the CERANEO in 1997 of 548 newly established
CSOs indicated the following breakdown (Table 2) for fields of activities of CSOs in
Croatia what is very different from traditional, pre 1990 organisations.
Table 2: Fields of activities of CSOs
3.2.2 Membership in CSOs
Previous research indicates that a few CSOs in Croatia have active membership
base. These organisations used to be represented by their leaders and had few active
 Field of activity Percentage of CSOs
 Advocacy 24%
 Social care 20%
 Environmental 13%
 Culture and arts 9%
 Professional associations 9%
 Community development/housing 8%
 Health care 7%
 Education and research 5%
 International organisations 3%
 Religious organisations 2%
129Druæboslovne razprave, XIX (2003), 42: 123-143
Croatian civil society on the pathway to becoming a legitimate public actor
members. They were thus considered organisations with a constituency and consequently
without a legitimate basis for their advocacy work. The Index project supports these
findings, but indicates that it is not as pronounced today as it has been in the past. The
indicator measuring the extent to which there are active CSO members scores 51.1 out
of a possible 100. 18  According to results of the World Value Survey 1995, 38% of the
Croatian population is a member of at least one association, which is significantly higher
than in most other post-communist countries of Central and Eastern Europe.
3.2.3 Geographic distribution
Within the dimension of structure the indicator assessing the distribution of CSOs
throughout all regions of the country turned to be extremely negative (24,5). This fact
is also recognised as a problem in the research undertaken by the World Bank. The
majority of civil society organisations are located in the four larger towns, with a lack
of CSOs in areas with less than 20 000 inhabitants (World Bank, 2000:33). Like in
other post-socialist states, (Kuti, 2001; Regulska, 2001; Lagerspetz, 2002) Croatia has
an insufficient number of community based organisations.
3.2.4 Network and alliances
Networking among CSOs has also been recognised as problem for civil society
development in Croatia by previous research. The findings here indicate that the existence
of umbrella bodies with specific scopes of interest is moderate, with stakeholders
providing an assessment of (58,5). These organisations, however, insufficiently
encourage membership and participation (42,61) and are rather unlikely to promote the
common interest of the sector they represent (41,92). The reluctance of civil society
organisations to associate, co-operate and represent common interests was also
recognised by LediÊ (1997). The networking process is blocked by the fear of most
organisations and their leaders that the activities of umbrella organisations might reduce
the autonomy of individual CSOs.
The fact that CSOs do not co-operate on issues of mutual interest is (47,85) not so
much due to mutual conflict, but to the lack of experience and awareness that information
exchange and mutual co-operation can be beneficial to all organisations involved. Also,
CSOs rarely join broader alliances of social forces. Larger organisations to not always
work closely together with local grassroots organisations. The smaller organisations
are marginalized and only partially join in activities of big organisations (44,14). Co-
operation inside civil sector is a weak side in transitional countries (Siegel and Yancey,
1992; Kuti, 2001).
Croatia lacks a tradition of co-operation between civil society organisations and the
private sector (40,96). The private sector hardly recognises its interests in civil society
and CSOs still lack the power to solicit attraction from the private sector. In order to
enhance such co-operation, as a significant indicator of civil society development in
Croatia, an award shall be granted for Croatian Donor of the Year in the Corporate
Sector, beginning in 2001.
130 Druæboslovne razprave, XIX (2003), 42: 123-143
Gojko Beæovan
3.2.5 Political Participation
Contacting political party officials from the side of CSOs to express their interests
in the public sphere is rather underdeveloped in Croatia as many CSOs are not acquainted
with the mechanism of interest representation and lobbying (50,15). The problem is
dependent on political parties as well, as their representatives lack a willingness to
listen to the citizens they represent and to take up their concerns.
Unlike trade unions, CSOs are hardly used to articulating their interests using non-
violent demonstrations or boycotting tactics (49,25). Such activities have recently been
adopted by some social groups as a means of attracting public attention to the problems
involved. The most active social groups here are environmental organisations,
organisations representing vulnerable social groups, women and human rights groups.
In the case of reduction of payment for maternity leave affected groups made a protest
that attracted the attention of the general public. On such occasions they seldom use
violent means, such as damage to property or personal violence to express their interests
in the public sphere (92,74).
3.2.6 Financial Resources
This research, similar to previous research (Beæovan 1997) indicates that financial
sustainability is one of the key problems facing CSOs. This problem, like in other
transitional countries (Kuti, 2001), has persisted during the last ten years; consequently,
a number of CSOs are forced to close their operations each year (42,77). The problem
very much lies with the burn out of the key persons, inadequate or inefficient management
structures of organisations, as well as the impossibility of CSOs for adaptation to the
actual needs of community. CSOs are not dependent on indigenous public funding
only. Previous research (Beæovan 1997) indicates that only 7% of organisations have
received state subsidies. It is important to note here that the system of state funds
allocation on various levels used to be completely non-transparent, although this has
improved over the past years. Findings also indicate that few CSOs depend on indigenous
private financial supports (83,23), largely because there was no favourable tax framework
for donations.
There is a growing consensus that CSOs mostly depend on foreign funding to
maintain operation, although the survey indicator shows a very positive picture of
availability. (74,62). Foreign funding programmes, as in other transitional countries
(Pinter, 2001; Kuti 2001), have such a fundamental role in financing CSOs that the
development of a civil society infrastructure strongly rests upon this source of funding.
The CSOs receiving foreign grants are mostly located in bigger towns or in areas affected
by the war. Only 12% of CSOs in Croatia received donations from foreign resources
(Beæovan 1997) and usually they are bigger and they create public opinion about
availability of foreign funding. It should be pointed out that 45% of organisations generate
income from membership dues and 15% from their own activities through service charges
etc. The problem of financial sustainability is likely to remain one of the vital issues of
each organisation. To improve this situation, CSOs will have to find indigenous financial
resources, like: donations, subventions and income from services.19
131Druæboslovne razprave, XIX (2003), 42: 123-143
Croatian civil society on the pathway to becoming a legitimate public actor
Evidence from this part of the research suggests developmental inconsistency in
Croatian civil society.
3.3 Space for Civil Society Development in Croatia
A respondent observed the following:
“The State provides only formal / symbolic support, both financial and other. It looks like
such support is likely to only meet the requests of the international community, and does
not reflect the real inclination to make the social-cultural environment in Croatia perceptive
for the operations and development of civil society.”
Space was an important developmental issue for CSOs during last ten years in
terms of legislation and polices, as well as socio-cultural norms. The problem of
legitimacy for civic actions and obstacles for civic culture development have been
primary factors in the inability of CSOs to expend the civic space and to build social
capital (Putnam, 1993).
Most variables of the space dimension received a low score. This is a complex area,
deserving comprehensive analysis outside this paper. There is some pressure on CSOs
to join or endorse certain political groupings (50,32); however, the activities of several
CSOs can hardly be separated from those of political parties. In fact a number of political
parties have organised their own associations and have used them extensively in their
pre-election political campaigns.
3.3.1 Registration procedures
The only unquestionably positive indicator within this dimension is the unproblematic
registering of associations as civil society organisations (73,08). According to respondent
experiences, the association’s registration procedure requires 4,5 weeks on average.
Unlike associations registration procedure the process of foundation’s registration is
unnecessarily complicated and long. Favourable registration procedure has been
identified as important factor of increase of CSOs in Hungary (Jenkins, 1995).
3.3.2 Tax laws
The tax regulations in Croatia used to be a serious obstacle for the flourishing of
civil society. Mentioned fiscal changes promote Croatia as a very competitive county
in the region in this part of legislation.  In general, CSOs’ representatives have a problem
to understood tax system and, in fact, they are not satisfied with “taxation” of non-
profit organisation because of high pay-roll in Croatia.
3.3.3 Co-operation with the state and parliament
The local authorities and the national government usually do not invite CSOs to be
involved in public policy formulation (33,31), even at a local level, policy was rarely
influenced by CSOs. This is an indication how unreformed the Croatian system o public
administration is at present and how immune it has been from the influence of new
public management. Such poor impact on local levels is due to citizen perceptions that
the government is the most important decision maker.20  In government’s Strategy of
Croatia’s Development,21 8 the importance of civil society, the principle of subsidiarity22
132 Druæboslovne razprave, XIX (2003), 42: 123-143
Gojko Beæovan
and partnerships with civil society organisations have all been recognised as important
hallmarks of modernisation and civil society development in Croatian.
The problem of co-operating with government is evident in the fact that it is impossible
for CSOs to access the legislature to articulate their points of view (29,73). There are
some recent positive experiences recorded in this area, especially with Law on Associations,
and it is not likely that progress will be achieved soon. The proposals of various laws are
made through informal contacts with politicians and mostly in the last moment.23
3.3.4 General state attitude towards civil society
In the last ten years, the state has neither respected the activities of civil society
organisations nor recognised those who have shown great public service in civil society
(24,77). Only in the area of environmental protection does the ministry award prizes to
deserving persons for their achievements. Civic engagement with societal and community
problems is simply not valued, neither by the state nor by society, and correspondingly,
the state does not recognise individuals for their public spiritedness and dedication to
making Croatia a better society (25,22). The previous government neither recognised
the vast potential of CSOs in benefiting the public good, nor the need to invest in civil
society to better utilise its resources. According to a respondent:
“...work in civil society is not recognised by the authorities. Awards are rare, mostly
related to protocol purposes. This results from a troubled relation of the public authorities
with regards to an appraisal of social values.”
Additionally, a citizen who joins a civil society organisations is not respected for
that action by society (31,09). There is an absence of the use of  associations as a means
to solving both social and community problems, as well as an absence of individual
citizen attention to these problems. It seems that active citizenship is common issue in
transitional countries (PotuËek, 2000).  Consequently, volunteerism and work for the
public good are not recognised as positive social values. On the contrary, society mistrusts
and is suspicious of the motivation of citizens to engage in activities for public good. It
is obvious that in such an environment public spiritedness is not an admirable character
trait (36,04). A respondent comments that,
“...the main characteristic of the social - cultural space is a traditional, deep-rooted apolitical
attitude. The non-profit activities of private organisations (associations, public benefit
companies, funds, foundations) for the public purpose are hardly being recognised.”
3.3.5 The attitudes of businesses towards civil society
The links between businesses and CSOs in Croatia are poor. Companies almost
never support the role of their employees as activists in civil society organisations (17,81).
Following the experiences of socialism, privatisation of the economy and high pay-
roll, the business sector does not see any reason for supporting civil society. Businesses
are also not actively engaged in philanthropic programmes supporting civil society
organisations (21,99). Previous research (Beæovan, 2002 a) indicates that some
companies tend to support sports and recreation organisations, health care institutions,
cultural organisations, schools, the church and in rare cases, some small civil society
133Druæboslovne razprave, XIX (2003), 42: 123-143
Croatian civil society on the pathway to becoming a legitimate public actor
organisations. Some large companies have recently started inviting public tenders for
granting donations.
Evidence and comments of respondents suggest that in case of local governments
and public policy institutions willingness to develop partnership with CSOs they might
be too limited to fill-up the new opening space. Some recent debates raised issue of
CSOs capacities as key bottle neck in sector development.
3.4 Values of Civil Society in Croatia
Values are an important element of the foundation of CSOs. Compared to other
dimensions, the values dimension proved to be the most positive element of civil society
in Croatia.
3.4.1 Promoting Values
CSOs play a rather active role in promoting harmonious relations between different
political, cultural, religious and ethnic groups in society (62,83); their success in
achieving these relations received a slightly lower rating (54,07). We have to keep in
mind perception that Croatian society is not integrated and relatively divided among
different groups of people. Whereas CSOs do not promote conflicts between members
of different cultural and religious groups (86,62), they, however, should become more
engaged in the process of social integration. Human right groups could be seen as close
to the left parties and those representing war veterans and displaced persons as associated
with right party’s supporters. The written comments of respondents clearly indicate a
divisiveness of organisations into extreme left and extreme right political ideology.
Such experience exist in the region (Jenkins, 1995). Some respondents consider political
engagement of these organisations harmful to development of civil society:
“... in general CSOs in majority cases are not acting in autonomous and independent
way, in larger part they are servants of political ideologies while they use term “civil
society” to hide their real activities.,.., politisations of CSOs’ activities should be avoided.”
CSOs respect fundamental human rights (77,01) and are active in the promotion of
human rights (74,78). The latter is in fact a significant part of the mission for most of
civil society organisations.
The cultural groups in Croatia are relatively split up along the lines of ethnic
communities. The indicator measuring the peaceful promotion of their interests in civil
society receives a mixed rating (54,76). Intolerance between cultural groups in civil
society may appear only in respect to competitive cultural programmes of ethnic groups.
CSOs promote gender equity, both within their organisations and in the wider social
environment (gender equity (1) 67,39). According to the result of this survey, gender
equality is mostly accepted value in civil society organisations (gender equity (2) 66,67).
It is very hard to estimate to what extent do they really do this.
3.4.2 Accountability & transparency
Many CSOs make information about their general and programmatic activities
publicly available (57,30). By informing the public of the activities and achievements
134 Druæboslovne razprave, XIX (2003), 42: 123-143
Gojko Beæovan
of civil society, public awareness of significant social issues is being created. Informing
the public is highly dependent on the interest of the mass media to co-operate with
CSOs. CSOs are facing serious problems in this regard.24
The most problematic indicator in the value dimension is that of financial transparency
of civil society organisations (36,03).25  Few organisations make their financial reports
publicly available; the financial reports may be not available even to the members of the
organisation. It is suspected from some sides that by having non-transparent financial
reports, CSOs actually try to cover high wages and honorariums paid to staff. Public and
political confidence is vital for sector development. This is likely to become a significant
concern of CSOs in the future, as corruption within CSOs or self-interest regarding their
internal management is also regarded as a sensitive issue (45,67). These problems used to
generate severe conflicts and consequently instability in some organisations. Scandals in
larger organisations is a part of development in the region (Kuti, 2001).
3.4.3 Internal Democracy
Previous research has shown that there is insufficient involvement of members in
activities of CSOs and weak organisational structure and consequently a series of
problems related to management and decision-making within CSOs exist (63,85). The
role of boards and the participation of the members in the management of an organisation
omit management were the most critical issues. Results from this survey do not identify
the involvement of members and stakeholders in CSO activities as a problem (63,85).
The internal democracy in these organisations seems to be of no big concern, as many
CSOs use elections to select leaders (60,57).
The level of trust among CSO members in Croatia is, according to the World Value
Survey, at a rather low level. Only 30% generally trust others, still this is a 7%-higher
score than for non-CSO members indicating the positive role civil society can play in
generating social trust. According to a respondent,
“Mutual links between CSOs and the public are insufficient and the so called ”civil
society” in Croatia has no support in public, that is in ”society” in wider terms. The
prerequisite for effective participation in civil society and creating of its system of values
from the ”bottom” is a developed social and civil commitment, i.e. a civil society of
responsible individuals. The Croatian society can hardly be considered as a responsible
society, involving just a part of ”socially committed elite” (and those who make bad(?)
copies) in creating of civil society values.”
3.5 Impact of Croatian Civil Society
There is always a problem in Croatia in explaining how CSOs benefit society and to
whom they can contribute solutions for problems. A large part of general public sees
members or activists in CSOs acting for their own benefits (Siegel and Yancey, 1992).
3.5.1 Public Policy Impact
In the following, we present findings on the perceived impact of civil society on the
several stages of the public policy process, namely agenda-setting, policy-making, policy-
implementation and policy-monitoring.
135Druæboslovne razprave, XIX (2003), 42: 123-143
Croatian civil society on the pathway to becoming a legitimate public actor
According to the survey, CSOs only partially succeed in representing their
constituents’ interests and putting these interests on the public policy agenda (45,39).
Linked to this finding, representatives of civil society are rarely invited to participate in
the generation and discussion of legislation (26,08). Legislation, vital to the interests of
CSOs, is most often passed without their involvement (24,03). Civil society’s
participation in the generation and discussion of legislation is only recently being
recognised as important by CSOs in Croatia. Generally, it can be said that CSOs have
no impact on government’s policy. According to a respondent,
“Government and the responsible ministries are rather shut off from civil society
organisations willing to co-operate, particularly regarding the passing of vital laws and
resolutions.”
Within the impact dimension the indicators measuring successful co-operation of
CSOs with government in implementing policies is at the lowest level (22,28).
Government people do not trust capacity of CSOs and they see them like artificial
institutions (Kuti, 2001) There are only a few areas where the government is actively
co-operating with CSOs, like: environment protection, social issues, gender issue, victims
of the war. Current process of social policy decentralisation is caring out from above
without consultation with local authorities or civil society representatives (Beæovan
and ZrinπËak, 2001).
CSOs are also not very successful in monitoring government commitments and
policies (47,09). This area of activities requires a lot of additional effort and mutual
understanding. People from the Government do not like any independent monitoring
and they do have idea about importance of such CSOs’ roles.
3.5.2 Service delivery
The respondents agree that CSOs are able to provide services in a manner that would
not be possible for the state or for businesses (73,60). This is an encouraging point,
requiring additional analysing, however, someone who is better informed can be
suspicious about this score. Such development require trust created by social legitimacy
grounded in cultural norms and tradition. CSOs are insufficiently critical and objective
on capacity they have and achievements they made.
3.5.3 Public Image
CSOs have been presented in a rather unfavourable way by the mass media (49,42)
and have also not attracted enough media attention (46,17) with respect to their
contribution to society. These findings are related to a not very respectable public image
of civil society organisations (51,89). According to a respondent: ”The only way for
civil society organisations to get support and create more favourable public image is to
achieve concrete results.”
CSOs play only a modest role in resolving conflicts in Croatian society (38,87).
This potential field of work for CSOs is not considered to lie within their area of
competence, neither by the public nor by most of the organisations themselves.
136 Druæboslovne razprave, XIX (2003), 42: 123-143
Gojko Beæovan
3.5.4 Effectiveness
The vast majority of respondents believe that the goods and services produced by
CSOs reflect the needs and priorities of their constituents and communities (59,71).
CSOs are seen as succeeding in improving the lives of the people they are working with
i.e. users of their services (71,06). They also are considered as successful in benefiting
the public good (64,12). In contrast to the positive contribution in creating public good,
they are less successful in mobilising the disadvantaged groups in society to take part in
public life (44,42). Most of these groups have a passive position, being a scope of activities
and interest of different organisations and initiatives. It means that most of CSOs take
such groups as objects of their activities without efforts to mobilise them for public life.
According to a respondent:
“Growing democratisation of social and economic relations is inconceivable without
development of civil society. The necessity to develop initiatives is in our country still not
adopted as means of civil organisations’ operations, and the Government considers them
accordingly as opposition or frequently as undesirable competition”.
A respondent with experience in international relations concludes that “... no
accession to Europe could be imagined without developed civil society.”
On the side of impact, besides the problem of co-operation with other stakeholders,
effectiveness of CSOs is key developmental issue.
3. Conclusion
This research provide us with the very useful facts and framework for analysis of
civil society  development in Croatia. It should be important to do it on the longer term
base. Croatian civil society developmental issues are very similar to the other transitional
countries.
This research has evidenced that the most critical area of civil society development
in Croatia is related to the limited space it has to operate, as defined by the legislative,
political and social-cultural framework. With legislation we do need to deal more with
public policy issues trying to institutionalise a place for CSOs social capital building
activities. Socio-cultural norms in fact currently inhibit civic engagement and active
citizenship. This problem is very much related to the status of middle class people in
Croatia. Frustrations with everyday life problems and decreasing living standard are
not fertile soil for the flourishing of civil society.
The negative attitude of the government during 1990s, restrictive legislation, a lack
of social responsibility on the part of the corporate sector and the absence of a culture
of volunteering and public spiritedness are vital problems. Further step in civil society
development are related to the real commitment of CSOs and how prepared and willing
some of them are to take responsibility, with acceptable level of knowledge and skills,
for some problems in society. New changes in the National grant program are targeted
for sustainable development of the better developed organisations in hopes of
encouraging and supporting such development. Without partnership with local authorities
this concept will have limited achievements.
137Druæboslovne razprave, XIX (2003), 42: 123-143
Croatian civil society on the pathway to becoming a legitimate public actor
Regarding its impact, civil society organisations seems, at least in their own
perceptions, to contribute significantly to solving specific social, economic and political
problems and furthering the public good. However, influence on the public policy process
is very limited. Openness of government and local authorities to CSOs on the whole is
only on a declarative level. Mobilising of more respective human resource and prominent
persons through a collaborative approach is one way that CSOs can have real influence
in public policies and in mobilisation of the new resource for the sector.
The structure of civil society needs to be improved by stimulating the establishment
of CSOs in rural areas and small towns. Funders should encourage larger organisations
to develop their programs in the regions knowing the importance of CSOs’ activities
for mobilisation of resources on the local level. Development of CSOs in small
communities could be a part of innovation in the National grant program.
The financial transparency and accountability of civil society organisations should
contribute to enhancing their reputation and credibility. It can be helpful if funders
dedicate more attention to this issue by requiring an evaluation plan as a part of the
funding application process.
We would like to end with two opposing comments made by two survey respondents.
A 25 years old male makes the following observation:
“The civil society in Croatia is still developing. However, recording a slight progress
after the change of government, we should be optimistic with respect to further development
of civil society in Croatia.
In order to continue the development, i.e. progress of civil society in Croatia a lot of work
has to be done both by authorities and activists in civil society organisations as well as
the pubic in the whole. This is the only way to enhance the development of civil society in
Croatia, what should be the common concern.”
A female respondent, 40 years old concludes:
“I think that people living in Croatia have little concern in creating and developing civil
society and do not care about it. Having a 23% unemployment rate, the basic needs are
to be met. Only people who have met their existential needs and the needs of their family,
who have time and mood for it, can survive through engagement in development of civil
associations. In the first place people are concerned for solving of economic issues. It
seems that development of civil society in Croatia shall have to wait for better times.”
A majority of the Croatian population considers that the Government is responsible
for solving their own personal problems. They are without experience or a sense that
individuals along with the people from their community can associate and mobilise
some resources to help themselves. This research give us evidence to conclude that
civil society development in Croatia, like in other transitional countries, is very much
path dependent (Putnam, 1993). Beside that, it is clear that the number of citizens who,
being members of CSOs, have gained such experience and feelings do not have continual
problems in legitimating their initiatives and actions. They are the ones who are able to
freely say that it is everyone’s own obligation and responsibility to join in CSO
endeavours for the public good. More and more citizens are taking it seriously. Because
of that, we can say that Croatian CSOs are on the pathway to become a legitimate
public actor even though certain important scores of diamond are low.
138 Druæboslovne razprave, XIX (2003), 42: 123-143
Gojko Beæovan
Acknowledgement:
This article is a part of CIVICUS research project “The CIVICUS Index on Civil Society”.
The author would like to thank CIVICUS for their financial and technical assistance. The
author is grateful for comments made on an earlier draft of this article by Siniπa ZrinπËak,
University of Zagreb; Finn Heinrich, CIVICUS; Joanne Coury, State University of New
York at Buffalo and Arthur Williamson, University of Ulster, Coleraine.
Appendix
Table 1: Sub-sectors in survey
Subsector Sub-sectors Quantity Percent
number
1 Faith-based organisations 13 3,68
2 Trade unions 16 4,53
3 Grant-making foundations 11 3,12
4 Training & research 18 5,10
5 Environmental CSOs 22 6,23
6 Advocacy CSOs 19 5,38
7 Women’s associations 13 3,68
8 Student and youth associations 20 5,67
9 Social service and health associations 38 10,76
10 Ethnic/traditional/ethno-cultural/indigenous CSOs 13 3,68
11 Culture & arts CSOs 15 4,25
12 Social and recreational CSOs & sport clubs 14 3,97
13 Professional and business organisations 18 5,10
14 Community-based and informal associations 22 6,23
15 Victims of war, war veterans, displaced persons 12 3,40
16 Other 1 0,28
17 Respondents from other stakeholders 78 22,10
Total 353 100,00
139Druæboslovne razprave, XIX (2003), 42: 123-143
Croatian civil society on the pathway to becoming a legitimate public actor
  Values Diamond Impact Diamond
  tolerance 1 62,83 policy agenda 45,39
  tolerance 2 54,07 policy drafting 26,08
  human rights 1 77,01 policy making 24,03
  human rights 2 74,78 policy implementation 22,28
  Cultural diversity 1 61,46 comparative advantage 73,60
  Cultural diversity 2 54,76 policy monitoring 47,09
  gender equity 1 67,39 media image 49,42
  gender equity 2 66,67 media attention 46,17
  sustainable development 63,76 public profile 51,89
  Public accountability 57,30 conflict resolution 38,87
  financial transparency 36,03 responsiveness 59,71
  Internal democracy 1 63,85 mobilizing marginalized 44,42
  Internal democracy 2 60,57 popular support 53,66
  social conflict (rescaled) 86,62 service impact 71,06
  corruption (rescaled) 45,67 public good 64,12
  Trust (World Value Survey) 29,80 Impact (USAID) 44,00
  Tolerance (World Value Survey) 68,00
  Diamond score 60,62 Diamond score 47,61
Indicators
  Structure Diamond Space Diamond
  Membership 51,14 polit pressure 50,32
  Distribution 24,54 policy involvement 33,31
  umbrella body 1 58,50 legislative access 29,73
  umbrella body 2 42,61 state recognition 24,77
  umbrella body 3 41,92 general state attitude 25,22
  Alliances 52,79 social recognition 31,09
  Links 44,14 public spiritedness 36,04
  coop business 40,96 business recognition 17,81
  internal cult diversity 55,69 business philanthropy 21,99
  Pol part 1 50,15 regulation(rescaled) 73,08
  Pol part 2 49,25 tax 1 (rescaled) 35,65
  Pol part 3 (rescaled) 92,74 tax 2 (rescaled) 34,19
  financial sustainability (rescaled) 42,77
  Public funding (rescaled) 76,85
  private funding (rescaled) 83,23
  foreign funding (rescaled) 74,62
  Co-operation (re-scaled) 47,85
  Membership (World Value Survey) 38,10 Legal Environment (USAID) 17,00
Corruption Perception Index 37,00
Civil Rights Index 50,00
Press Freedom 37,00
  Diamond score 53,77 Diamond score 34,64
140 Druæboslovne razprave, XIX (2003), 42: 123-143
Gojko Beæovan
Notes
1. Croatia  4,5 million population, per capita GDP $4,500. During the War 54% of territory has
been affected by war operations. Croatia lost 13.583 people, 37.180 were wounded.  The
number of displaced persons and refugees was from 550.000 in 1991 to 386.264 in 1995.
Official estimation of direct war damage is $29,2 billions (PerkoviÊ and Puljiz, 2001).
2. The most active organisations were: UNHCR, International Rescue Committee, Catholic
Relief Service and several American organisations involved in USAID programs. Capacity
of these organisations in the term of  human resource, foreign and indigenous staff,  used to
be a critical point in programs performance.
3. Civil society is considered as opposition in other transitional countries (Jenkins, 1995; Osborne
and Kaposvari, 1997).
4. Such attitudes are partially connected to the use of the term non-governmental organisation.
The organisation in negative connotation to the Government of young nation is not accept-
able to the ordinary citizen.
5. The request for review of constitutionality regarding parts of the provisions of the Law on
Associations was submitted in 1999 by representatives of CSOs. Group of  people involved
in this initiative comes from  University of Zagreb and their opinion has influence at a high
level.
6. In 1993 the Croatian Parliament discussed tax benefits for public welfare donations. The
then Minister of Finance refused the proposal considering it a form of money laundering,
explaining that both tax collection and allocation of funds to those who need them is the role
of the state. The Minister was reluctant to count on citizens’ responsibility and confide in
their civil engagement.  After that the tax regulations were amended, allowing for non tax-
able donations to sport purposes (the suspected money laundering is likely to be justified
here) and not, for instance, to humanitarian organisations.
7. Suspicious about the missions of foreign funders of civil society in the region was an issue
and obstacle for effective co-operation. (Deakin, 2001; Deakin, 2002).
8. Very often, without arguments, the national TV was accusing organisations dealing with
human rights issues for anti-governmental activities.
9. Such position of civil society has been documented in Poland (Regulska, 1999) and in other
transitional countries (Kuti, 2001).
10. Four larger coalition groups of CSOs, more than 400 organisations, took a part in the cam-
paign.
11. CERANEO- Centre for Development of Non-Profit Organisations, since 1995 to 2000 re-
source centre for Croatian CSOs, now think tank in a public policies issues.
12. In the mailed survey we sent 525 questionnaires.
13. The CIVICUS Diamond Tool and analytic framework was developed for CIVICUS by  Helmut
Anheier, Centre for Civil Society, London School of Economics. For more information on
the Diamond Tool, please see R. Holloway, (2001) Using the Civil Society Index: A Hand-
book for using the CIVICUS Index on Civil Society as a Self-Assessment Tool, CIVICUS,
and  Helmut K. Anheier, Civil Society: Measurement and Policy Dialogue,  Earthscan,  Lon-
don, forthcoming.
14. List of indicators with scores are in the Appendix.
15. E. Kuti (2001) pointed it as a problem in other Eastern European countries.
16. Data available an the web site of the Ministry of  Labour and Social Care, http://www.mrss.hr
141Druæboslovne razprave, XIX (2003), 42: 123-143
Croatian civil society on the pathway to becoming a legitimate public actor
17. Resource centres are in Split, Rijeka and Osijek. It was a program of American organisation
Academy for Educational Development.
18. The scores of individual indicators are provided in brackets projected into a common metric-
typically from 0 (most negative) to 100 (most positive). Thus, the higher the score, the better
the situation of civil society with regards to the respective indicator. List of indicators is in
Appendix.
19. There is a key role here for a university in providing courses and research opportunities.
Different departments from universities should be important stakeholders for civil society
development.
20. On that topic see Hungarian similar experience in Szeman and Harsanyi (2000).
21. More details are available on www.vlada.hr
22. This principle originated from social teaching by the Catholic Church with regards to public
welfare in the industrializing Germany in the late 19th century. It principles states that the
smallest social unit capable of delivering the respective social service, should be in charge
and thus places a premium of importance on civil society organizations at the local level.
23. At the end of 2002 CSOs have serious problems to get Bill on Consumer Protection and also
Amendments on Law on Croatian RadioTV.
24. In early 2001 Vjesnik (daily newspaper) showed growing interest in systematic monitoring
of civil society development.
25. Transparency of CSOs is lasting issues in other transitional countries (Regulska, 2001;
Salamon, et. al., 1999; Siegel and Yancey, 1992)
Bibliography
Anheier, H. K. Civil Society: Measurement and Policy Dialogue, Earthscan, London, forthcom-
ing.
BariÊ, S. (2000). Pravni sustav suradnje neprofitnih organizacija s vladom i tijelima lokalne
samouprave i uprave u Republici Hrvatskoj, B.a.B.e., Zagreb.
Beæovan, G. (1995). Croatia, The Profile of the Voluntary Sector in Eastern Central European
Countries, Druæboslovne rasprave, 11, 29-44.
Beæovan, G. (1997). Problemi i potrebe neprofitnih organizacija u Hrvatskoj, CERANEO, Zagreb.
Beæovan, G. (2002). Zaklade  i dosezi njihova razvitka u Hrvatskoj, Zbornik Pravnog fakulteta u
Zagrebu, 52, 619-649.
Beæovan, G. (2002 a). Socijalna odgovornost gospodarstva i iskustva u Hrvatskoj, Revija za
socijologiju, 33, 17-32.
Beæovan, G., and ZrinπËak, S. ( 2001). MoguÊnosti decentralizacije u socijalnoj politici i nove
uloge lokalnih vlasti, Revija za socijalnu politiku, 8, 239-258.
Cohen, J. L., and Arato, A. (1992). Civil Society and Political Theory, The M.I.T. Press, Cmbridge,
MA.
Coury, J. M., Despot- LuËanin, J., and Beæovan, G., (1998). A Real Alternative? How the Debate
over Third Sector Development is Shapring Up in Croatia, ARNOVA Conference, Seattle.
Deakin, N. (2001).  In Search of Civil Society, Palgrave, Ney York.
Deakin, N. (2002)  Interview of Author with N. Deakin.
Johnson, A. K., and Young, D. K. (1997). A Profile of the Non-Profit Sector in Romania, Voluntas,
8, 303-322.
142 Druæboslovne razprave, XIX (2003), 42: 123-143
Gojko Beæovan
Holloway, R. (2001). Using the Civil Society Index: A Handbook for using the CIVICUS Index
on Civil Society as a Self-Assessment Tool, CIVICUS, Washington DC.
Jenkins, R. M. (1995). Politics and the Development of the Hungarian Non-Profit Sector, Voluntas,
6, 183-201.
KolariË, Z., MegliÊ-»rnjak, A. and Svetlik, I. (1995). Slovenia, The Profile of the Voluntary
Sector in Eastern Central European Countries, Druæboslovne rasprave, 11, 77-94.
Kuti, E. (2001). Different Eastern European Countries at Different Crossroads. In H. K. Anheier,
and J. Kendall (eds.), Third sector Policy at the Crossroads: An International Nonprofit Analy-
sis, Routledge, London and New York.
Lagerspetz, M., Rikmann. E., and Ruutsoo, R. (2002). The Structure and Resource of NGOs in
Estonia, Voulntas, 13, 73-87.
Laiferova, E., (1995). Slovakia, The Profile of the Voluntary Sector in Eastern Central European
Countries, Druæboslovne rasprave, 11, 65-76.
LediÊ, J., (1997). Croatia. In L. W. Poinier (ed.), The New Civic Atlas- Profiles of Civil Society in
60 Countries, CIVICUS, Washington DC.
LediÊ, J., and Mrnjaus K. (2000). “Gangs, Mafia and Groups of Renegades”: (Mis)conceptions
about Civil Society and Third Sector in Croatia, ISTR 4th International Conference, Dublin.
Osborne, S. P., and Kaposvari, A. (1997). Towards a Civil Society? Exploring its Meaning in the
Context of Post-Communist Hungary, Journal of European Social Policy, 7, 209-222.
Pinter, F. (2001). The Role of Foundations in the Transformation Process in Central and Eastern
Europe. In A. Schlüter, V. Then, and P. Walkenhorst (eds.), Foundations in Europe: Society
Management and Law, Directory of Social Change, London.
Putnam, R. D. (1993).  Making Democracy Work: Civic Tradition in Modern Italy, Princeton
University Press, Princeton.
PerkoviÊ, M., and Puljiz, V. (2001). Ratne πtete, izdaci za branitelje, ærtve i stradalnike rata u
Republici Hrvatskoj. Revija za socijalnu politiku, 8, 235-238.
PotuËek, M., (2000). The Uneasy Birth of Czech Civil Society, Voluntas, 11, 105-121.
Regulska, J. (1999). Building Local Democracy: The Role of Western Assistance in Poland,
Voluntas, 10, 39-57.
Regluska, J. (2001). NGOs and their Vulnerabilities During the Time of Transition. In H. K.
Anheier, and J. Kendall (eds.), Third sector Policy at the Crossroads: An International Non-
profit Analysis, Routledge, London and New York.
Salamon, L. M.,  Anheier, H. K., List, R., Toepler, S., Sokolovski, S.W. and associates  (1999).
Global Civil Society: Dimensions of the Nonprofit Sector, Johns Hopkins University Press,
Baltimore.
Salamon, L. M.,  Anheier, H. (1998). Social Origins of Civil Society: Explaining the Nonprofit
Sector Cross-Nationally, Volumtas, 9, 213-248.
Shimkus, D., (1996). Development of the Non-governmental Sector in Croatia, 16th Organisational
Development World Congress, Cairo.
Siegel, D., and Yancey, J. (1992).  The Rebirth of Civil Society : The Development of the Non-
profit Sector in East Central Europe and the Role of Western Assistance, Rockefeller Brothers
Fund, New Yourk.
Stubbs, P. (1996). Nationalisms, Globalisation, and Civil Society in Croatia and Slovenia, Re-
search in Social Movements. Conflict and Change, 19, 1-26.
143Druæboslovne razprave, XIX (2003), 42: 123-143
Croatian civil society on the pathway to becoming a legitimate public actor
Stubbs, P. (2001). PolitiËka ekonomija civilnog druπtva. In M. MeπtroviÊ (ed.), Globalizacija i
njene refleksije u Hrvatskoj, Ekonomski institut, Zagreb.
Szeman, Z., and Harsanyi, L., (2000). Caught in the Net in Hungary and Eastern Europe: Part-
nership in Local Welfare Policy, Institute of Sociology of the Hungarian Academy of Sci-
ences, Budapest.
Office for Associations. (2000). Program of Cooperation between the Government of the Repub-
lic of Croatia and the Non-government, Non-for-Profit Sector in the Republic of Croatia,
Zagreb.
World Bank. (2000). Croatia. Economic Vulnerability and Welfare Study. (Draft) Poverty Re-
duction and Economic Management Unit Europe and Central Asia Region. June.
Avtorjev naslov:
dr. Gojko Beæovan,
Faculty of Law , Department of Social Work
University of Zagreb
Nazorova 51, 10000 Zagreb, CROATIA
Phone 385 1 48 95 808, Fax 385  1 48 21 206
E-mail: ceraneo@zg.tel.hr
The author is also the President of Centre for
Development of Non-Profit Organisations- CERANEO.
Rokopis prejet  januarja 2003.
»lanek je po mnenju uredniπtva uvrπËen v kategorijo:
izvirni  znanstveni Ëlanek (s kvalitativno/kvantitativno  argumentacijo).