Implementation of the African Peer Review Mechanism Kojo Busia Chief, APRM Support Section Governance and Public Administration Division (UNECA) Second Meeting of the Committee on Governance and Popular Participation Addis Ababa, 9-10 March 2011

Outline I.Background and Context of APRM II.The Political/Developmental Vision behind the APRM III.APRM Structure and Process IV.Implementation: Progress to Date V.Challenges and Opportunities VI.Lessons Learned & the Way Forward

I. Background and Context APRM NEPAD adopted in 2001 as a vision and framework to address Africa’s myriad development challenges APRM as a governance tool to verify adoption of codes and standards for achieving NEPAD’s objectives. APRM Declaration on good governance... in 2002 ECA, ADB, and UNDP/Africa designated as Strategic Partners. The APRM brings together the GPAD analytical and operational work in support of governance in Africa

II. Political & Developmental Vision From the Principle of Non-interference to Non- indifference – AU Constitutive Act The search for a new paradigm: failure of previous reform strategies (SAPs); driving reforms from within rather than from without to achieve policy ownership APRM: more ambitious and innovative than OECD peer review – political not just technocratic exercise

III.APRM Structure Continental APR Forum APR Panel APR Secretariat African Governance Architecture: APRM a core framework for for promoting African Shared Values National APR Focal point Governing Council

10/26/20156

III.APRM Review Process Democracy and Political Governance Economic Governance and Management Corporate Governance Socio-Economic Development Preparations of the Country Self Assessment Review / Report Country Review Mission by APRM Panel and External African Experts Compilation of a final Country Review Report Submission to the APR Forum for Heads of State Peer Review Report made available to the Public and tabled at pan- African institutions

IV.Implementation Progress: Process and Engagement 29 Countries voluntarily acceded to MoU 13 countries have been “peer reviewed” Algeria, Angola, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Djibouti, Egypt, Ethiopia, Gabon, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mozambique, Nigeria, Republic of Congo, Rwanda, Sao Tome & Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Sudan, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda and Zambia

IV. Implementation Progress: Harmonizing NPoA and Other NDPs National Plan of Action (NPoA) main output of APRM NPoA implementation has been challenging due to: Analyzing and costing of the NPoA to avoid duplication Evaluating the links between the NPoAs, the MTEF and the NDPs Financing of NPoAs highly dependent on donors Need for donors to align funding of PRSPs with NPoAs Need for participatory processes of Monitoring and Evaluation frameworks

IV. Implementation Progress: Cross- cutting and Emerging Systemic Issues APRM have proven an effective tool for diagnosing systemic and structural issues: Managing Diversity Corruption Land Resource Management Governance & Elections APRM has showcased and highlighted best practices of governance which has tremendous impact on peer countries APRM an Early Warning System APRM leading to domestic Accountability systems

V. Challenges facing the APRM Need to accelerate enlisting of AU members states Less and less dynamism in the APRM Heads of States Forum Institutional/organizational challenges of the APRM Secretariat APRM Country Self-Assessment Methodology is viewed as “cumbersome, unwieldy, repetitive” Need for follow-up country process through the NPoA Lack of political will at national level to truly implement the spirit and letter of the MoU

V. Opportunities for Real Change The APRM is allowing real popular participation - legitimate space to discuss how development policy is being done, what it constitutes and whether or not the needs of the citizens are being met by the chosen strategies and policies.

VI. Lessons learned & the Way Forward Presidential/political leadership as a prerequisite for success Consultation with all stakeholders essential before making decisions on the process and governing structures Need for an “informal” means of pushing countries to accede and also go through the process soon after accession Encouraging domestic financing of NPoA Early integration of NDPs into Plan of Action Decentralizing participatory monitoring systems

Thank you for your kind attention