The Challenges of Managing the Third Sector: An Exploration of Emerging Themes
ABSTRACT
The third sector plays a critical role in addressing societal challenges, supporting vulnerable communities, and bridging gaps in public service provision. Managing third-sector organizations (TSOs) has become increasingly complex due to financial constraints, evolving governance structures, and heightened accountability demands, particularly during crises. Excluding this front-end, scene-setting paper, this Special Issue brings together five papers that apply innovative frameworks to examine participatory governance, public/third-sector partnerships, performance reporting, resilience, and membership dynamics within TSOs. The papers emphasize the importance of inclusive governance, strategic collaboration, and adaptability in enhancing social inclusion, sustainability, and organizational resilience. It also provides practical recommendations for policymakers and practitioners and identifies opportunities for future research to address unresolved questions in the field.
1 Introduction
The third sector, encompassing charities, nonprofits, and other voluntary organizations, plays a critical role in addressing societal challenges and fostering civic engagement that provides much-appreciated support, often within vulnerable communities. Frequently, the value and importance of third-sector organizations (TSOs) come to the fore at times of crisis, and this became particularly apparent during the COVID-19 pandemic and its aftermath, when TSOs provided essential support, frequently filling many gaps in public services (Intindola and Burke-Kolehmainen 2023; Paterson et al. 2023). However, responding to and tackling the social and economic consequences of any crisis, including the pandemic (and resultant economic recession), is rarely sufficiently dealt with by the third sector alone. For example, in recent years, there has been a growing emphasis on and uptake of public/third-sector partnerships and the coproduction of services (Mazzei et al. 2020).
While partnerships and coproduced services were utilized prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the pandemic altered how support services were managed and delivered, and this regularly led to an increased reliance by public-sector entities on TSOs for the provision of services. In several cases, this accelerated a transformation of the hybrid nature of these organizations (Enjolras et al. 2018). This metamorphosed state, combining third-sector service goals with public-sector objectives, presents unique challenges to the management of TSOs by exposing such organizations to uncertain economic and operational landscapes, evolving governance frameworks, regulatory constraints, and changing stakeholder expectations. All of these features place additional pressure on the sector's financial sustainability and adaptability (Dominowska 2016; Hyndman 2020).
In our call for papers for this Special Issue, we sought research that explores the contemporary challenges faced by TSOs and the innovative strategies they engage to mitigate potentially accompanying adverse consequences. Our contributors were encouraged to interpret this theme broadly and critically, applying diverse theoretical and methodological perspectives across various countries and regions. Consequently, and pleasingly, the papers included in the Special Issue present a wide and varied range of examples and reflections. Matters such as participatory governance, coproduction, public/third-sector partnerships, performance reporting, resilience, and membership dynamics are explored and examined as indicators of the array of challenges faced by today's TSOs.
In this opening paper, we critically reflect on the themes and issues raised in each of the other five papers that are included in the Special Issue. Collectively, they contribute to advancing our understanding of the financial, managerial, and governance complexities of the third sector while offering practical recommendations for enhancing its effectiveness and sustainability. They further underscore the importance of inclusive governance, strategic collaboration, and adaptability in ensuring the long-term viability of the third sector and its ability to meet the needs of diverse communities. This collection also contributes to advancing theoretical discourse and provides practical recommendations for policymakers and practitioners while identifying opportunities for future research to address some of the (many) unresolved questions in the field. The next section outlines the areas of investigation relating to third-sector challenges (as well as an overview of the specific papers) that are explored in the Special Issue. This is arranged in subsections with headings aligned with the main focus of each of the five Special Issue papers. In each case, following a brief review of the individual findings of a specific paper, suggestions for further-related research are presented. Collectively, these promptings combine to represent a call to academics and practitioners to engage in more relevant research to support the management and governance of TSOs, as well as underpinning policy development for the sector. This is followed by a section providing some concluding comments, including a “call to arms” to engage in third-sector research as a basis for underpinning a more caring and cohesive society. Finally, some important acknowledgments relating to the paper are made.
2 Areas of Investigation and Overview of the Papers
In our call for papers on this special issue we invited scholars and practitioners worldwide to examine the contemporary challenges in managing TSOs. The authors of the papers included here rose to this call and delivered novel theories, methodologies, and perspectives in a variety of settings. With each of the five papers, and to provide context, a brief overview of some of the general literature/theory relating to an area of investigation covered by a particular paper is first given. This is then followed by a summary of the contribution and key findings of the paper, and finally, in each case, some further related research possibilities are sketched. For convenience, the material is arranged in subsections under the headings: participatory governance and coproduction; partnerships, sustainability, and performance; performance reporting and new governance; resilience and adaptation; and, finally, membership and public image.
2.1 Participatory Governance and Coproduction
Service-user participation in public-service delivery and related enhanced accountability processes have been recent and growing features of public-service provision, this being particularly the case in coproduction arrangements (Mazzei et al. 2020). Coproduction and participatory governance characterize an inclusive approach to service provision where service users and stakeholders actively collaborate with government entities in decision-making and service delivery. While this process aims to give service users and stakeholders a greater voice in service decision-making and delivery, improve equity of service provision, and enhance accountability, it is also exposed to challenges and power imbalances that can undermine the level of participation and may underrepresent marginalized groups in the process (Bussu et al. 2022). Variations in member expectations, issues of trust, and ineffective communication can further undermine coproductive efforts (Bonner 2020). Understanding the different forms and balance of service-user participation in the design and delivery of coproduced services is crucial for improving the quality and effectiveness of public services. Likewise, the processes and strategies for embedding participatory governance and its effectiveness deepen the inclusion of marginalized service users and are required.
In this Special Issue, Lambert et al. (2025) contribute to our understanding of these issues by investigating the extent to which dialogic-accountability structures and their integration of coproduction enable social inclusion within a single Scottish-based charity. This organization, referred to by the pseudonym “Sycamore,” provides support services for individuals with learning difficulties and other needs. The study adopted a longitudinal case-study approach, which specifically examined the governance evolution of the case from 1989 to 2019. Drawing on data collected through a multimethod approach involving semi-structured interviews, focus groups, and document analysis (and nonparticipant observation), their study demonstrates how meaningful beneficiary participation can be operationalized within the governance structures of charities, particularly focusing on marginalized groups such as individuals with learning difficulties.
The study presents an innovative framework of “cocreated inclusion” that combines two previously unconnected frameworks: critical-dialogic accountability and coproduction. This moves the emphasis from traditional hierarchical governance to one where beneficiaries actively shape accountability and decision-making processes. Their analysis found that by placing beneficiaries at the center of governance and accountability processes, greater social inclusion could be fostered. Their findings emphasize the interdependence of accountability, service design, and social inclusion. It also explores how such integration provides a comprehensive approach to participatory governance that addresses power imbalances and fosters genuine beneficiary engagement, thus offering new insights into participatory governance in charities.
These observations indicate that inclusive governance that extends beyond the organization, enabling beneficiaries to become active participants in their broader communities, can enhance social capital and contribute to broader social inclusion goals. The findings have both theoretical and practical implications. First, they contribute to the theoretical discourse on participatory governance in charities by proposing new pathways for integrating experiential knowledge with organizational governance. This contributes to both charity governance and social inclusion fields. Secondly, from a practical perspective, the findings offer some practical guidance for charities, informing policy development and highlighting the importance of inclusive governance practices for empowering marginalized groups and enhancing social inclusion.
Regarding further related research possibilities associated with this paper, this study could be expanded to investigate how the cocreated-inclusion framework can be adapted and implemented in charities of varying sizes. Moreover, other areas of need (beyond a focus on the learning-difficulty context) could be examined, as well as other geographical and jurisdictional settings beyond the Scottish scene. Such would facilitate useful comparative work as the basis for generating more generalizable findings. Understanding the underlying forces of participatory governance in small, medium, and large charities could provide further insights into how organizational size influences power structures, as well as highlighting the probability of symbolic effort.
2.2 Partnerships, Sustainability, and Performance
Partnerships between public-sector organizations and TSOs have become essential components in dealing with complex social challenges. They combine the foundation of the third-sector community focus and their expertise with the public sector's resources, governance, and policy-making authority. Furthermore, they frequently allow for more responsive solutions that enhance service delivery and promote inclusivity (Paterson et al. 2021a, 2021b). Such partnerships also facilitate the sharing of costs and risks of some aspects of service provision (Smith and Grønbjerg 2006). Additionally, they can open up access to public finance and expert services and thus help in the promotion of social change and sustainability (Young 2000; Vogel et al. 2021). However, partnerships can pose risks. Reliance on time-limited funding can jeopardize the long-term sustainability of particular activities. Also, such partnerships may lead to a loss of independence, resulting in conflicts or misalignment of goals, performance, and governance (Henderson and Lambert 2018). At present, there is still limited research on the contradictions, tensions, and paradoxes of partnership agreements on performance and sustainability.
The work of Amelio et al. (2025) in this Special Issue is timely, as it addresses the impact of COVID-19 on public services and the increased role of TSOs in providing essential services. Their study contributes to narrowing the gap in the ongoing debate on the development of a performance and risk-management system that could measure continuous change in the sustainability and performance evaluation of public/third-sector partnerships. Using the Turin Fast Track City project as a case study, their study focused on the co-planning and codesign model, which aims to measure value creation and achieve common objectives. The study employed a longitudinal method that enabled the measurement of change performance within the context of an objective measurement of results based on long-term data. The data analysis involved an abductive process to overcome interpretative gaps, and Social Impact Assessment (SIA) and integrated social accounting were used to evaluate the project performance.
This methodology facilitated a detailed exploration of hybrid forms of collaboration between the public and third sectors through which the sustainability and performance of public/third-sector partnerships could be evaluated. The study findings reveal that public institutions, on their own, often do not have the expertise and capability to address community needs efficiently. The authors’ analysis demonstrated that public/third-sector collaborations can be resilient and effective in addressing contemporary challenges in public administration and facilitating the serving of public needs. Their findings also show how shared governance systems and performance measurement tools have the potential to drive sustainable outcomes. This is achieved by offering up a framework for evaluating the sustainability and value generation of such partnerships.
The results of this research offer both a practical and theoretical contribution to our understanding of public/third-sector partnerships. The application of SIA and integrated social accounting to evaluate such partnerships contributes to the understanding of hybrid governance structures and how sustainability and social impact can be measured in these contexts. It contributes to the literature on performance measurement by demonstrating the need for new performance measurement systems that combine financial and nonfinancial elements, including those relating to social value and community benefits. This enables the full impact of collaborations to be captured. It further adds to the theoretical discussion on public/third-sector partnerships, performance measurement, sustainability, and hybrid-organizational models, thus offering insights into the effectiveness of public/third-sector partnerships, which are valuable for the development and assessment of future public administration and third-sector collaborations.
In connection to additional research ideas that might flow from this paper, research examining sustainability and performance evaluation of public/third-sector partnerships in different contexts and countries, as well as investigations exploring the impact of variable legislative and bureaucratic environments, might complement the results of this study. Additionally, useful work exploring the role of direct-user involvement in co-planning and codesign processes and assessing how user feedback and participation influence the effectiveness and sustainability of public/third-sector collaborations could provide valuable insights into how these collaborations evolve and adapt over time.
2.3 Performance Reporting and New Governance
The governance and performance reporting of TSOs is a complex field that is shaped by regulatory dialectics (i.e., ongoing exchanges between regulators and regulatees). It requires a balance between operational autonomy and regulatory oversight that does not compromise the agility needed for TSOs to fulfill their missions effectively (Chaidali et al. 2022). The core objective of governance and performance-reporting regulations is to provide safeguards for accountability, ethical decision-making, and strategic alignment with an organization's mission. Departures from these expectations can result in major negative outcomes for the organization, including loss of public trust and funding (Hyndman et al. 2024). Indeed, due to several high-profile financial scandals, such as the inquiry into the Captain Tom Foundation (Charity Commission 2022), the sector has faced both increased scrutiny regarding financial transparency and reporting practices and amplified calls for more robust governance structures (Connolly et al. 2021). Consequently, third-sector governance structures and performance-reporting regulations are continually changing in response to concerns over financial sustainability, risk management, and shifts in societal expectations. Continually evolving regulatory frameworks create challenges for charities, especially smaller organizations that may struggle with resource-intensive compliance demands (Bunea and Ibenskas 2017). Further challenges also surround negotiating compliance while maintaining adaptability and flexibility for innovation, particularly in light of changes in digital technology, adjustments in stakeholder-engagement processes, and the revision of statutory reporting requirements.
McConville and Cordery's (2025) examination of regulatory dialectics in charity performance-reporting regulation in New Zealand and the United Kingdom, appearing in this Special Issue, provides some insights into how regulation evolves through repeated interactions between regulators and regulatees. Through an in-depth comparative analysis, the researchers investigated the different approaches and outcomes in these jurisdictions and explored how new governance-type regulation of charity performance has developed. The paper examines the role of stakeholder engagement in the regulatory process and how formal consultations (as well as informal dialogues) can facilitate the development of more accepted and effective regulation.
The study adapts Kane's model of regulatory dialectics, originally developed to explain traditional command and control banking regulation, to the context of new governance in charity-performance reporting. From this, a framework to analyze how regulation evolves through repeated interactions between regulators and regulatees was developed. The researchers’ analysis demonstrates how regulation can develop through a series of proposition, opposition, resolution, and incorporation stages. The new governance performance reporting approach is shown to involve co-regulation and stakeholder engagement in a less adversarial and more collaborative way than previously seen in other settings and underscores the value of engaging actively in regulatory processes.
The findings offer both a theoretical and practical contribution to knowledge and understanding of the sectoral challenges of performance reporting and new governance regulation. Through the adaptation of Kane's model of regulatory dialectics to produce a new model of governance regulatory dialectics, the paper contributes to the under-theorized areas of regulatory dialectics and nonprofit/charity regulation research. This new theoretical model, by incorporating the principles of new governance, advances the understanding of the regulatory processes beyond the traditional command and control framework. The model facilitates wide and inclusive consultations with a variety of stakeholders. It is argued that this may be helpful to regulators when developing and implementing regulatory reforms; it may also reduce confrontation and help to build legitimacy and compliance with new regulation.
While this new theoretical framework provides some useful empirical evidence, it also signals the scope for further research into regulatory processes within the charity sector and, more widely, in other third-sector settings. For example, comparative studies that investigate stakeholder dynamics, the impact of fast-changing technology, and responses to policy adjustments could potentially contribute to the development of more inclusive and effective regulatory frameworks.
2.4 Resilience and Adaptation
TSOs are highly valued for their philanthropic nature. Indeed, many TSOs provide essential support to the most vulnerable in society and fill many gaps in public service provision. During the COVID-19 pandemic, TSO became increasingly prominent in society, playing a crucial role in supporting communities at various levels. Throughout the pandemic, charities experienced substantial growth in demand for their services (Hyndman 2020; SCVO 2022), a demand that has not waned post pandemic (Lambert and Paterson 2024). However, major segments of the third sector also face significant financial challenges and capacity constraints due to their limited and unstable funding streams (Onxy 2008; Buffett and Eimicke 2018). In the continually changing landscape of social, economic, and political challenges that TSOs face, resilience and the ability to adapt are critical for their survival. Understanding how TSOs survive and sometimes flourish despite such unstable environments has given rise to an increased interest in the resilience and adaptability of these organizations.
The contribution of Fagbemi et al. (2025) in this Special Issue provides some insights into the resilience and adaptability of TSOs in West Africa. Their study explored how TSOs in Nigeria managed the uncertainties triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic and the strategies they deployed to build and strengthen their resilience. Through a qualitative, interview-based research methodology, rich data was generated that reflected the experiences, perspectives, and strategies of TSOs during this uncertain period. This allowed an appreciation of the unique strategies and influences that contribute to the resilience of TSOs in West Africa during crises to be gleaned. The data uncovered the distinctive strategic approaches Nigerian TSOs deployed (including digital citizenship, cultural dynamics, and community participation and cooperation) to manage the uncertainties emerging from the crisis. Moreover, the authors explored how these strategies helped TSOs build and strengthen their resilience. Their findings suggest that some potentially threatening situations can be predicted through internal risk management and mitigated through the development of response plans that involve collaborative engagement with relevant stakeholders. They further identified a positive correlation between digital solutions and the resilience and adaptability of TSOs.
Through the application of resilience theory and network theory in the context of TSOs during crises, they shed light on how they confront economic fluctuations, political instability, and cultural diversity while highlighting the importance of adaptive responses, collaboration, and the utilization of local resources and networks to sustain their services. They further demonstrated how TSOs strategically deploy their networks to access critical resources (e.g., funding, expertise, and information) to build their resilience, thus emphasizing the importance of strategic capabilities, digital transformation, cultural sensitivity, and community engagement to achieve such a goal.
By integrating resilience and network theories, the paper provides a contribution to the theoretical discourse and understanding of how TSOs navigate crises and build resilience using strategic capabilities and network dynamics. It also provides novel insights into the link between cultural heritage and organizational resilience. In addition, the findings highlight some practical implications for stakeholders and policymakers. It emphasizes the need for initiative-taking scenario planning, development of strategic collaborations, exploration of diverse funding sources (including crowdfunding and social media campaigns), and continuous training and capacity building for staff and volunteers. It further recommends that policymakers should be cognizant of the critical role of TSOs in community support and sustainable development, as well as the cultural contexts and local dynamics in which TSOs operate. Further, on a country-wide basis, the authors encourage the development of a supportive regulatory framework that facilitates the operations of TSOs while acknowledging the need to both reduce existing bureaucratic hurdles and increase financial and logistical support in pursuit of creating an effective governance framework for the sector.
While the findings of this study are illuminating, they also particularly point to the need for more research into resilience and adaptation strategies of TSOs within different regions and development stages that track the long-term effectiveness and evolution of strategies to cope with crises. Such studies could also facilitate a greater understanding of the influence of varying cultural, economic, and political contexts. Researchers might also explore the role of government as a stakeholder to enhance and underpin the resilience of TSOs in dealing with crisis as a way of facilitating greater social cohesiveness. Moreover, investigation into the barriers to digital adoption in TSOs and the effectiveness of different digital tools and platforms in developing resilience would offer valuable insights for enhancing their capacity to navigate crises and support vulnerable communities.
2.5 Membership and Public Image
Service clubs (i.e., associations of business/professional people that aim to promote community welfare and goodwill) are inextricably linked to the support of many charitable activities and are particularly recognized for their active contributions to community service. Typically, such organizations consist of groups of local people who work voluntarily to improve their communities and contribute to larger, and sometimes international, charitable projects (Donahue et al. 2006). Their members and volunteers are frequently relied upon by charities to support and close service-delivery gaps (Martin and Kleinfelder 2011). Volunteers and members are essentially the lifeblood of connected TSOs, as they regularly play a critical role in steering and sustaining charitable endeavors. Collectively, they bring enthusiasm, support, and a variety of skills that often fill a resource gap and aid charities’ connection to the community, their purpose, and their stakeholders (Tadajewski 2017). During and post COVID-19, many service clubs have faced challenges in recruiting and retaining members and volunteers. The transition from pandemic-altered lifestyles to normality has required adaptations to accommodate hybrid working models, affecting staffing, volunteer management, and service-delivery processes (MHA 2020). Recruitment by service clubs has also been tempered by the subsequent financial challenges that many people faced as a consequence of the pandemic (as well as wider austerity-related difficulties). While many studies have been conducted to investigate the barriers to volunteering, particularly in relation to recruiting younger members, little attention has been given to examining the relationship between ideological influences and practices and how these impact organizational image (Davies 2018; Dean 2013; Gray and Stevenson 2020).
Yates (2025), in this Special Issue, provides some useful insights into UK service club membership and public image. He examined challenges faced by UK service clubs in recruiting and retaining members, particularly younger individuals, and the ideological forces at play within service clubs (and their impact on membership dynamics). The study employed a qualitative approach based on 42 semi-structured interviews with service club members and external stakeholders. This methodology facilitated a detailed exploration of the participants' experiences and perceptions, eliciting rich insights into the issues and challenges of recruiting and maintaining club members.
Through the application of Lacanian psychoanalysis and Žižek's analysis of ideology, the paper provides a novel assessment of the recruitment and retention challenges faced by service clubs. This facilitated a deep understanding of the symbolic and imaginary orders that influence service club membership dynamics. The paper argues that service clubs’ public image and internal systems are strongly shaped by conservative, royalist, and loyalist ideological influences. This creates a symbolic order that is unattractive to younger prospective members. The findings further indicate an element of resistance to changing these deeply engrained ideologies, which creates a significant barrier to improving service clubs’ public image and their ability to attract new members.
The research also offers both a theoretical and practical contribution to knowledge and understanding of some of the challenges faced by membership organizations generally and service clubs in particular. The theoretical framework facilitates a deeper understanding of the symbolic and imaginary influences at play, contributing to the broader literature on organizational ideology and membership dynamics. From a practical perspective, the findings signal that service clubs need to be aware of and understand the implications of their embedded ideologies. In doing this, it is suggested that they should then reflect on how they can create a friendlier and more relatable image for prospective new members. It is opined that this requires finding a balance between maintaining their heritage and modifying practice to meet contemporary societal values and expectations as a basis for ensuring long-term sustainability and growth.
Reflecting on this paper, a range of related and complementary research would seem potentially valuable. For example, further research to understand how particular factors affecting membership may vary across diverse types of membership organizations and cultural contexts. In addition, in a modern world, investigations into the effectiveness of strategies to achieve greater diversity and inclusion within service club membership would seem laudable. Moreover, comparative studies could provide greater insights into how ideology shapes membership dynamics in various settings and could take into consideration the influence/impact of the role of leadership in influencing membership development and organizational culture. Such studies could provide insights into how leaders can effectively drive change and support membership growth, especially among younger demographics.
3 Concluding Remarks
The papers included in this special issue provide valuable insights into some of the unique challenges TSOs face. Their responses to questions connected to, among other things, participatory governance, public/third-sector partnerships, performance reporting, resilience, and membership dynamics will affect TSOs’ ability to both maintain relevance and support decisions relating to facilitating their valuable mission imperatives. Collectively, the papers in this special issue help to advance understanding of the financial, managerial, and governance complexities of the third sector while offering practical recommendations for enhancing its effectiveness and sustainability. However, as is almost always the case (and is specifically showcased in the above segments of section two of this paper), they raise more questions than have been explored within this collective piece. As such, they suggest related issues that have the potential to provide opportunities for further research.
Through this collection, and when complemented with other recent Financial Accountability & Management (FAM)-published TSO reflections (e.g., Hyndman et al. 2024; Hyndman 2025), we seek to stimulate further research and dialogue on the evolving role of TSOs in society. This is particularly the case in times of crisis and uncertainty, as is focused upon in this Special Issue. The findings presented here underscore the importance of inclusive governance, strategic collaboration, and adaptability in ensuring the long-term viability of the third sector. The ability of the third sector to meet the needs of a range of diverse communities and stakeholders is particularly emphasized.
A healthy and growing third sector is vital to the establishment of a caring, cohesive, and collaborative society. It is a sector that must always strive both to “do good” and to “be good” (Hyndman 2018); it is a sector that is best facilitated by overarching governance and regulation structures that view it as being “on the side of the angels” (Hind 2011); and it is a sector that has the capacity to unlock massive volunteer resources for the benefit of individual beneficiaries, society at large, and even the well-being of those who volunteer (Dostál 2020). More research into the accounting, accountability, governance, and management of TSOs, as well as the more general oversight of the sector as a whole, has the potential to improve the operations and mission focus of such organizations, in addition to steering broader policy formulation. May this paper and this special issue be a contribution to encouraging those with a motivation to journey towards such a valuable goal.
Acknowledgments
In writing this lead paper, we wish to acknowledge the roles played by a number of individuals. First, we thank (and commend) the authors of this collection of papers for their research efforts and contributions to enhancing our knowledge and understanding of the many contemporary issues and challenges of managing TSOs. We particularly thank them for supporting FAM and this special issue. We also thank them for their engagement with the European Institute for Advanced Studies in Management (EIASM) Workshop (which was hosted and delivered at the University of Aberdeen), which provided the original platform for many of the papers in this Special Issue. In addition, we are extremely grateful to all of our reviewers for their valuable and much-appreciated support of the journal. We also acknowledge the excellent contribution of the editor of FAM (Professor Ileana Steccolini) for her constructive comments and support during the compilation of this special issue. Finally, we would like to thank (and pay tribute to) the enormous contribution of Professor Irvine Lapsley (who sadly passed away in April 2024) over many years. Not only was Irvine a longstanding editor of FAM prior to Professor Ileana Steccolini assuming responsibility as his health faded, but he was also the founding chairperson (with Professor Bernd Helmig from the University of Mannheim and Professor Marc Jegers from the Vrije University in Brussels) of the series of EIASM Third-sector Workshops from which this particular Special Issue emerged. He was a tremendous scholar, encourager, and friend to the community of third-sector researchers who is sadly missed.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Open Research
Data Availability Statement
The authors have nothing to report.
