GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Research
    • Governance
      • Democracy & elections
      • Public sector management
      • Security & justice
      • Service delivery
      • State-society relations
      • Supporting economic development
    • Social Development
      • Gender
      • Inequalities & exclusion
      • Poverty & wellbeing
      • Social protection
    • Conflict
      • Conflict analysis
      • Conflict prevention
      • Conflict response
      • Conflict sensitivity
      • Impacts of conflict
      • Peacebuilding
    • Humanitarian Issues
      • Humanitarian financing
      • Humanitarian response
      • Recovery & reconstruction
      • Refugees/IDPs
      • Risk & resilience
    • Development Pressures
      • Climate change
      • Food security
      • Fragility
      • Migration & diaspora
      • Population growth
      • Urbanisation
    • Approaches
      • Complexity & systems thinking
      • Institutions & social norms
      • Theories of change
      • Results-based approaches
      • Rights-based approaches
      • Thinking & working politically
    • Aid Instruments
      • Budget support & SWAps
      • Capacity building
      • Civil society partnerships
      • Multilateral aid
      • Private sector partnerships
      • Technical assistance
    • Monitoring and evaluation
      • Indicators
      • Learning
      • M&E approaches
  • Services
    • Research Helpdesk
    • Professional development
  • News & commentary
  • Publication types
    • Helpdesk reports
    • Topic guides
    • Conflict analyses
    • Literature reviews
    • Professional development packs
    • Working Papers
    • Webinars
    • Covid-19 evidence summaries
  • About us
    • Staff profiles
    • International partnerships
    • Privacy policy
    • Terms and conditions
    • Contact Us
Home»GSDRC Publications»CSOs holding governments to account

CSOs holding governments to account

Helpdesk Report
  • Claire Mcloughlin
November 2015

Question

What is the range of interventions that CSOs currently deliver to help people in developing countries hold governments and others to account and influence decisions that affect poor people’s lives?

Summary

This report summarises interventions by more than 30 civil society organisations (CSOs) to increase government accountability in varied sectors and contexts. CSOs use a wide variety of different media to gather information from citizens, which they then use to press for accountability. Their strategies and tactics for engaging with local and national government include: informal networking; formal engagement in parliamentary committees; high-profile meetings with political figures; and collaborating directly in government-led programmes (as formally-contracted monitoring agencies). Choice of intervention is likely to depend on political context. The range of interventions includes:

  • legal mechanisms
  • media campaigns
  • public hearings/social audits
  • citizen report cards
  • community scorecards
  • community monitoring
  • research and advocacy
  • open data
  • crowdsourcing
  • coalition-building.

Impact

The examples included in this review provide evidence that CSO interventions have:

  • Changed government policy: In Mexico, FUNDAR monitored the distribution of farm subsidies, highlighting that most of the subsidies were going to large agro-business, rather than small-scale farmers as the government had claimed. This helped usher in reforms to ensure small-scale producers benefited in the future. In India, Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS) successfully lobbied for social audits to become part of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act.
  • Increased transparency: In DRC, a coalition of 300 CSOs – Réseau Gouvernance Economique et Démocratie – produced a citizens’ budget and successfully lobbied for more budget data to be published. In Brazil, another large-scale coalition convened by the Instituto Brasileiro de Análises Sociais e Econômicas was effective in improving the financing and transparency of a large publicly-owned bank.
  • Improved education, health and livelihoods outcomes: One rigorous impact evaluation showed that community scorecards increased teacher effort in the Anantapur district in India. In Ghana, the Social Enterprise Development Foundation’s monitoring of the child feeding programme motivated the government to perform its mandated functions. Research by the Urban Resource Centre in Karachi helped prevent the construction of an expressway that would have uprooted 100,000 people and caused immense environmental damage. A coalition of religious groups, health professionals and CSOs – the Social Justice Coalition – successfully advocated changes in policies governing sanitation in Cape Town, with important health implications.
  • Exposed and reduced local-level corruption: Community groups are sometimes best placed to identify whether projects (e.g. roads, infrastructure) that have been reported as ‘completed’ are in fact completed. In one social audit process convened by Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan in Rajasthan, Rs. 20 million of programme funds were recovered. Monitoring of the Health Department of the Eastern Cape by the Public Service Accountability Monitor (PSAM) helped reduce the discrepancy between budgets and actual expenditures from R1.9 billion in 2009-10 to R0.8 billion in 2011-12.
file type icon See Full Report [PDF - 731 KB]

Enquirer:

  • DFID

Suggested citation

Mcloughlin, C. (2015). CSOs holding governments to account (GSDRC Helpdesk Research Report 1299). Birmingham, UK: GSDRC, University of Birmingham.

Related Content

Trends in Conflict and Stability in the Indo-Pacific
Literature Review
2021
Faith-based organisations and current development debates
Helpdesk Report
2020
Responding to popular protests in the MENA region
Helpdesk Report
2020
Support for civil society engagement in peace processes
Helpdesk Report
2019

University of Birmingham

Connect with us: Bluesky Linkedin X.com

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2025; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2025; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2025

We use cookies to remember settings and choices, and to count visitor numbers and usage trends. These cookies do not identify you personally. By using this site you indicate agreement with the use of cookies. For details, click "read more" and see "use of cookies".