This report reviews civil society-initiated social accountability practices in the public budgetary process of 10 Anglophone African countries. It finds that, while the practice of social accountability in these countries is still in its infancy, demand for it is high. However, the staff of civil society organisations need greater technical skills. They need to be able to develop and implement innovative and credible tools and methodologies to give weight to the results of social accountability initiatives. Capacity building is therefore crucial.
Social accountability is a form of vertical accountability. Vertical accountability involves public mechanisms for enforcing accountability, both before and during the exercise of public authority, and includes citizen groups and a vibrant independent media.
The study covers three mechanisms for social accountability in the cycle of public expenditure: independent budget analysis and advocacy (IBA); participatory public expenditure tracking (PPET); and participatory performance monitoring (PPM). IBA refers to the research, advocacy and dissemination of information on issues related to official budgets by civil society and other actors independent of the government. PPET involves civil society’s tracking of public sector spending. PPM involves citizen and community scorecards that solicit user feedback on public services.
Social accountability approaches have yielded positive results. Aware that their actions are being monitored by citizen groups, public officials know that they may be held accountable for budget discrepancies or failure to deliver adequate services:
- New budget monitoring skills have led, in some cases, to budgetary adjustments and funding shifts to support higher citizen priorities.
- In the case of the Public Service Accountability Monitor (PSAM) and the Institute of Democracy, both from South Africa, monitoring has led to improvements in public financial reporting and reduced the need for audit disclaimers by government officials.
- The credibility and influence of civil society, as the force driving these improvements, have grown as a consequence.
Nevertheless, the effectiveness of many initiatives is impaired by civil society’s lack of technical expertise in financial management and budget analysis. In addition:
- The lack of consistency in how different departments of the same government record financial data has frustrated efforts to assess effectiveness accurately.
- Several initiatives included in the stocktaking cited gaps in countries’ judicial systems for enforcing punishment if violations in public expenditures are found.
- The perception by many African governments that civil society organisations sympathise with opposition parties has sometimes bred government mistrust and lack of cooperation.
Such challenges need urgent attention. Civil society organisations need to boost their capacity for research and analysis by attracting and retaining skilled personnel. Staff need to be capable of lobbying and advocacy and of devising credible indicators. (Indicators that accurately capture the impact of social accountability initiatives are particularly needed). Further:
- Capacity building could involve face-to-face training, distance learning, exposure to good practices, and resources for the piloting and scaling up of good practices.
- Sustainability needs to be enhanced by addressing the lack of both financial and non-financial resources and dependency on donors.
- Clear rules and legal frameworks are needed that allow civil society to act as a watchdog and that ensure access to information and the sustainability of social accountability initiatives. Reliable information dissemination tools, such as community radio, could help to expand access to information.
