Document Library

Key Text Carrying out a Joint Governance Assessment: Lessons from Rwanda

Author: Gareth Williams, Alex Duncan, Pierre Landell-Mills, Sue Unsworth and Tim Sheehy
Date: 2009
Size: 7 pages (145 KB)

Access full text: available online

Summary

Can a joint approach to governance assessment help to improve aid effectiveness? What can be learned from the first Joint Governance Assessment (JGA) undertaken in Rwanda during 2008? A JGA aims to bring government and development partners together to review governance performance based on commonly agreed indicators. This brief from The Policy Practice recommends that such an assessment can prove to be helpful to advancing dialogue, but is likely to be a long-term and difficult process that is only suited to particular circumstances where the process can address joint concerns of government and donors.

The model of a joint governance assessment has attracted interest as an alternative to conventional practice where donors have undertaken separate assessments with little or no government involvement. Ideally, such an exercise could be an important way to advance the Paris Principles for aid effectiveness. The Rwanda JGA has been recognised as an improvement on previous processes for governance dialogue and assessment, although it faced significant challenges.

A JGA carries inherent risks because the issues under discussion are likely to be sensitive. Difficulties may arise where expectations are raised beyond meeting the fairly narrow set of objectives that are 'joint concerns' of government and donors, and particularly where the JGA influences future aid flows. Raising the stakes of an assessment too high will push the results down to the lowest common denominator. There will always be a need for independent analysis of governance from many sources.

A JGA can set out a common framework for analysis, provide a forum for the discussion of the evidence base, bring about a meeting of minds on difficult issues, and establish a framework for ongoing monitoring. Appropriate goals include:

Reducing duplication of effort, fragmentation of knowledge, uncoordinated action and high transactions costs (consistent with Paris Declaration principles)
Testing the evidence basis for assessments, identifying and resolving misunderstandings and misinformation, and promoting better understanding of country specific considerations
Reducing donor-induced reform overload, and facilitating greater realism about the possible scope and pace of change
Identifying areas of overlap between the interests of donors and government
Providing a formal channel for communication through which governance issues can be collectively raised by donors
Building mutual accountability around a joint framework for performance assessment as a means to increase aid predictability and reduce aid volatility

In terms of assessment scope and depth, initially a wide-ranging study is likely to be required, including human rights, safety and security, political competition, accountability and voice and effective administration. Non-state bodies could be included, including donors themselves. Some other recommendations for implementation relate to:

Willingness to disagree: An assessment should not conceal differences in viewpoint between donors and the government.
Political economy analysis: Political sensitivity may limit the extent to which a political economy analysis can be presented in the report, but emphasis on informal institutions, power structures and incentives is important.
Country-specificity and international norms: Local norms can be used as a basis for setting objectives. An assessment that is both internationally credible and sensitive to local realities will require a balanced approach that avoids being overly prescriptive, but also provides a clear sense of direction for improvement.
Indicators: The indicators selected should capture the range of priority issues, but be neither too costly nor too burdensome on statistical capacities. Triangulation of sources is essential.

Access full text: available online

Source: Williams G., Duncan A., Landell-Mills P., Unsworth, S., and Sheehy, T., 2009, 'Carrying out a Joint Governance Assessment: Lessons from Rwanda', The Policy Practice, London
Author: Gareth Williams , gareth.williams[at]thepolicypractice.com
Organisation: The Policy Practice, http://www.thepolicypractice.com/