Mutual Aid in a Time of Diminishing Government Safety Nets

The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ASPA as an organization.

By Renée Cardarelle
December 1, 2025

Love it or hate it our governing systems have changed dramatically this past year with many of the programs people have come to depend on being defunded or disbanded altogether. This significant shift in governments’ role as a central funder of social services has left communities scrambling to figure out new strategies for meeting those needs and public administrators are wondering how they can respond.

This is where mutual aid comes into play. Mutual aid is the idea of people collaborating together, exchanging resources and providing services for the common benefit of all. It happens in neighborhoods and communities within governing agencies and across national borders and it is an activity which has always existed within our society. From barn raising parties and sharing farm equipment in rural communities to volunteer fire departments and road maintenance in cities or towns, the idea of people collaborating around mutual needs is a huge part of the history of the United States.

Early on these mutual aid systems were informal and locally based. However, as our nation grew more complex and the problems in our communities became more interconnected, these systems of mutual aid were slowly integrated into our governing agencies. It started with public health needs such as city managed sewage systems which were desperately needed to keep the diseases which plagued the cities of the 1800s in control and infrastructure challenges such as public fire departments which were previously managed by a patchwork of volunteer and private entities sometimes with disastrous results. Think of the Great Chicago Fire in 1871.

Then came the era of the Great Depression when up to 25 percent of the working population was unemployed and community solutions such as soup kitchens and churches were unable to keep up. Once again people turned to our governing systems to help manage the pressing human welfare needs and safety net programs such as unemployment and social security were developed. Over time these systems grew and expanded government which has gone through many iterations in its provision of these public services.

However, the move to embed the management of social service programs into our governing systems was not without its resistance. While most people want to help those who are disabled elderly or have fallen onto hard times, there are many who believe it is better to embed aid programs into our families, communities or religious institutions not the government. They have consistently called for government to step back from providing these services.

By the late 1900s this back and forth about governments’ role in providing for the health and welfare of society eventually resulted in what is commonly called new public management. This system moved service provision, the implementation and management of programs, to private entities but left the funding of these services with government entities. It resulted in a wide range of social service programs funded in great part (but never fully) by tax dollars but implemented through networks of public and private entities such as businesses and nonprofits. It is this system of public private partnerships which is currently in transition as government funding for these programs is rolled back in the ongoing effort to remove government from the role of stewards of wellbeing.

Throughout all these changes public administrators have been on the front line constantly responding to the changing legislative landscape. They are the ones challenged to manage complex networks of social service provision. They are the ones who bear the burden of the problems which arise from the rollback of social service programs. They are the ones who have to give the bad news when sustainable funding is gone. They also are the ones who are left feeling powerless to address the needs of individuals being left behind.

So how can public administrators respond to this ever evolving landscape and what can they do to help those being affected? While it may feel as though bureaucratic red tape prevents public administrators from taking action, there are things which can be done. In New Public Service (Denhardt & Denhardt 2015), the authors argue public administrators are in the perfect position to serve as facilitators of public participation, not in a superficial we want your opinion way but as true partners in the governing process.

This type of authentic public participation is not that different than the idea of mutual aid. It is about bringing people together to work towards the common benefit of all. However, it requires public administrators to reimagine their role as facilitators of the public process. Rather than seeing individuals in the public as clients or consumers, it encourages public administrators to work with them as partners. In practice this might look like key community navigators distributing information or it may be more complex with public administrators convening regular meetings of informal networks. In my next article I’ll explore some of these ideas in more detail.

Of course, building networks of mutual aid can feel daunting. However, with the changing government landscape it is all of our roles to consider different ways of building systems of mutual support and public administrators have a crucial role to play in their development.

---

Author: Renée Cardarelle has a PhD in Management and Public Service from Hamline University with a focus on public participation in the governing process. In addition to her work in academia Renée has also worked in the nonprofit sector and in grassroots organizing for more than twenty five years.

(No Ratings Yet)
Loading...