11/10/2011
Implementing the APRM Views from Civil Society Reports: Process and Methodology Africa Forum on Civil Society and Governance Assessments 10 November 2011
Yarik Turianskyi (SAIIA) Yarik.Turianskyi@wits.ac.za
APRM Monitoring & Advocacy Template (AMAT) • AMP project team developed AMAT as a reporting template for use by civil society organisations to track – APRM National Programme of Action (NPoA) implementation – Overall APRM process status • Intended to complement and expand upon the NGC and government’s APRM Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) processes • 5 stages – – – – –
Desktop research Interviews Analysis, rating using the “robot” scale Identify priorities Advocacy strategy
• Aimed for a short, concise report
Background to AMP Reports • One-year project (July 2010-June 2011) • Key gap: Countries undergo the APRM, but national APRM implementation reports lack civil society voices & views, CSOs struggle to track progress, hold government and NGC accountable • AMP aims to empower CSOs to track progress on implementing the APRM, and jointly produce & publish a report, to complement national APRM monitoring & reporting efforts • Building on – – – –
SA and Lesotho launch event October 2010 SA training workshop January 2011/Lesotho training workshop March 2011 SA validation workshop May 2011/Lesotho validation workshop May 2011 SA report launch 28 June 28 2011/Lesotho report launch 13 September 2011
Methodology: differences • South Africa – Report divided into three thematic areas, with project managers responsible for each area – Process overseen by project head – Various CSOs (12 & more independent researchers) wrote submissions on specific issues – Mostly primary and secondary sources
• Lesotho – Report written by project head and two researchers – Mostly primary sources and interviews
Methodology: similarities • Reports do not cover all the APRM NPoA commitments • Training workshop participants identified crucial governance issues • Project team refined issues that made it into the final reports • Issues chosen were informed by relevance to the current governance situation and available expertise • For each issue, attempted to link it to the APRM objectives and NPoA items, describe the problem and present argument, use evidence & sources meticulously, make recommendations • CSOs asked to volunteer information and time • High level of participation and cooperation, tight timeframes
1