The issue is to name the relationship for what it is and ensure that it is negotiated fairly. One size does not fit all, nor does it need to. In the short term, partnerships may not be the most efficient way of accomplishing the goals of individual organizations, as they require additional time, energy, and costs that can only be recovered in the long run. Partnerships may be seen as a means to specific development objectives, but sometimes these development objectives cannot be achieved without a partnership. It maybe seen as an end in itself, for example, where development interventions seek to foster a partnership between citizens and governments, aiming at good governance.
Partnership is both a means to creating social capital, and an end, representing social capital.
Partnership is crucial for trust, and trust is essential to achieving sustainable development. This trust is built through an instrumental view of partnership, where comparative advantages of the partners are recognized and engaging partners is a way to overcome conflicting objectives and methods of operations. In addressing this question contributors examined the power relations among partners. Because there is often a power asymmetry between partners, there is a need for analytic tools to assist civil society organizations to determine whether it is appropriate, dangerous, or inevitable for them to partner with states, corporations, and development agencies. Another concern expressed was that social, economic, and political clout determines the balance of partnerships.