Written by Vanessa Herringshaw, Director of the Transparency and Accountability Initiative (T/AI).
However it’s framed, transparency and accountability (T&A) will need to be a vital part of the post-2015 agreement, and is relevant for all countries
ODI rightly points out that the momentum around T&A is strong and growing, and that’s for practical reasons – we can’t make maximum progress in fulfilling our goals unless there is openness and accountability.
Some key questions make the potential obvious: How can we – citizens and governments alike – know the progress we’re making towards our goals unless information is current and openly available? Won’t we learn better and faster from others if we can compare our performance? If we can see how our finite resources are being used and to what effect, won’t we make better use of them? When decision-makers and resource users can be tracked by citizens, won’t they work more for the public interest? And as ODI points out, if decision makers, service providers and users all have shared information and collaborate, won’t that produce more and better targeted action?
The answers to these questions illustrate the universality of the need for T&A. It makes no difference if a country is low, middle or high income, state-run or free-market, democratic or single party run – T&A has the potential to improve progress. They also illustrate how T&A will reinforce all sectoral goals and make progress more sustainable.
Transparency and Accountability – it’s not a silver bullet but it is a core ingredient.
So the rationale for addressing T&A as part of a post-2015 agreement is clear. But how should it be included in the new framework? There are three potential ways to do this:
- Have a stand-alone goal – related to openness, participation and accountability.
- Integrate openness and accountability into each of the targets and indicators.
- Integrate T&A into the performance monitoring of whatever goals, targets and indicators are agreed.
Debate is raging about the best approach, and the political trade-offs necessary to include all three. And we need to nurture that debate to get clear thinking about this crucial area.
But what is already clear is that the last one, having openness and accountability about performance is the absolute minimum needed if we are to not only set strong goals, but also have the tools and incentives needed to really fulfil them.
Vanessa Herringshaw is Director of the Transparency and Accountability Initiative (T/AI).
The views presented here are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of all members of T/AI.
It is great to see our call to take seriously issues of domestic politics and local institutions being picked up by the post-2015 agenda, as Vanessa highlights. As Alan Hudson recently posted, linked to on this website, this should not be seen as another “one-size fits-all, west-knows-best, story”. Our analysis – published today and linked in Vanessa’s blog – suggests that whether we end up with a global goal or not, there is a need to focus on the outcomes of politics and governance, not just the principles. This will also help to navigate the complex politics of the post-2015 consultation. A focus on outcomes requires better evidence on the conditions under which transparency and accountability initiatives can contribute to improved service delivery or other development outcomes. But it does not mean that it cannot be done! On the contrary, we should think creatively about how we can utilise these initiatives, and new forms of technology, particularly for monitoring performance on any globally agreed goals. I think this is more than a basic minimum – it would represent a significant step forwards and has the potential to realise longer lasting change than grand mentions of governance which have proven hard to operationalise so far.
What do others think?
Posted by Leni Wild | October 31, 2012, 12:54 pmReblogged this on blog.weitzenegger.de.
Posted by Karsten Weitzenegger | November 1, 2012, 11:10 am