Understanding Governance from the Margins: What Does It Mean In Practice?

Summary Motivation Attempting to increase authorities' accountability for their actions has become a mainstay of development practice in recent decades. Yet commentators suggest that these efforts have reached an impasse, in part because of conceptual fuzziness regarding the core ideas of public accountability. Purpose This article explores what we can learn about accountability processes and practices from recent multi‐country research into citizen–state relations. I explore three concepts that emerge as important from this material and which might also be useful in broader thinking and development practice: obligations, scrutiny, and consequences. Methods and approach The empirical material analysed comes from the five‐year Action for Empowerment and Accountability (A4EA) research programme, which focused on Mozambique, Myanmar, Nigeria, and Pakistan, and explored a range of experiences of people interacting with public authorities, and the efforts of international donors and activists to improve these interactions. Findings The analysis suggests the advantage of paying more attention to (1) the range of obligations from which accountability emerges; (2) what enables citizens to engage in active scrutiny of authorities; and (3) a broad set of consequences of accountability claims. Within this framing, the A4EA material highlights the relative importance of felt obligations and the social contract over formalized entitlements, development of capacities and spaces for informed citizens to actively question authorities, and of outcomes where authorities accept responsibility for their actions or the status quo as well as experience direct sanctions. Policy implications Efforts for greater public accountability might be sharpened by identifying what would represent effective scrutiny against felt accountability obligations, and what spaces, capacities, and opportunities are required for that. Incorporating a better understanding of the consequences that come about from accountability claims could help create better measures and understandings of success, and what generates it.

Section: Analytical Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Obligationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding accountability in practice: Obligations, scrutiny, and consequences

Anderson

2023

“…In Myanmar, in 2017 during a country scoping visit, the A4EA research team heard that people believe rumours from trusted sources more readily than official pronouncements. Local intermediaries then become an important channel for the most marginalized to access public authorities (Barnes et al, 2021). This suggests that when formulating strategies for empowerment and accountability we need to pay greater attention to social norms, beliefs, informal institutions, and sources of trust and legitimacy.…”

Section: What Are the Impacts Of Increased Contestation On Accountabi...mentioning

confidence: 99%

What makes “difficult” settings difficult? Contextual challenges for accountability

Joshi

2023

Self Cite

Motivation: It is increasingly common for international development actors to work in difficult and fragile settings, yet much of our understanding of accountability through social and political action comes from more stable settings. As an increasing percentage of the world's population live in places characterized by fragility, it is essential to understand the context for accountability in these settings. Purpose: This article proposes a framework based on three domains of contestation: natural resources, identity, and legitimacy. Based on this framework, it unpacks the constraints towards progress on accountability in difficult settings, and the challenges in creating an environment for citizen claim-making. Methods and approach: The article draws on research from a five-year Action for Empowerment and Accountability (A4EA) programme which focused on examining social and political action in Mozambique, Myanmar, Nigeria, and Pakistan. Research papers from the programme were analysed together with a close reading of existing literature to decipher the common traits hampering citizen action and state response in difficult settings. Findings: The core argument is that a weak state and the prevalence of non-state groups vying for power are fundamental to difficult contexts in three different domains: natural resources, legitimacy, and identity, in which underlying contestation generates conflict, violence, and fragility. The three domains are set within two structural factors: historical legacies and social norms. The article traces how contestation in these domains within structural factors influences the behaviour of powerholders as well as the outlook of citizens who could make accountability claims. Policy implications: The article concludes by suggesting that lessons for development actors attempting to promote accountability in these settings are: to "work with the grain", e.g. recognize the context and work with it; explore possibilities for change at the local level, e.g. where alliance building and networking might be more feasible; and look for the small wins-because in a context fraught with difficulties, small achievements such as overcoming fear should be counted as a success.

“…However, these claims are fewer than men's in the communities studied. Women's access to services is mediated through male family members and mostly male intermediaries within their community (Barnes et al, 2021).…”

Section: Individual Agencymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the political barriers, I draw on research from Nigeria (Oladapo et al, 2021) and Pakistan (Cheema et al, 2022) on the gender gap in voting and on male gatekeeping in urban governance. To explore the role of women intermediaries, I use findings from the governance at the margins comparative study from Mozambique, Myanmar, and Pakistan (Barnes et al, 2021).…”

Section: Of 17mentioning

confidence: 99%

Women's political agency in difficult settings: Analysis of evidence from Egypt, Nigeria, Mozambique, and Pakistan

Nazneen

2023

Motivation: Male gatekeeping and biased social norms in difficult settings characterized by fragility, authoritarianism, and conflict create challenges for women's political participation. This article explores the nature of challenges experienced by women and how they exercise political agency in such settings-as voters, claimants, and brokers of services, and as activists. Purpose: I investigate the range of expressions of women's political agency and responses they secure from public authorities in difficult settings. I ask the question: how and to what effect do women exercise political agency in difficult settings? Analysis of the range of expressions of political agency allows a broader view of women's engagement in politics. Methods and approach:The article develops a framework to identify the range of expressions of women's individual and collective agency from Action for Empowerment and Accountability (A4EA) studies conducted in Egypt, Mozambique, Nigeria, and Pakistan. This synthesis explores social norms and male gatekeeping; strategies women use to navigate these and limit backlash; and the changes that result from women taking action. Findings: Evidence shows that social norms and male gatekeeping limit women's engagement in politics and their relations with multiple public authorities that operate in difficult settings. Women use gender-specific repertoires to organize protests and make claims on authorities and specific strategies to reduce the risk of backlash from their own communities and security agencies. The findings show that, while there is some success in claim-making on specific issues and that at a personal level women feel more empowered, these do not necessarily lead to systemic change. Policy implications: Donors and local authorities need to develop interventions that tackle male gatekeeping within political parties and communities to facilitate women's political engagement. Flexibility in funding will enable donors to work directly or indirectly with grassroots and national women's rights groups in difficult settings for developing contextualized, bottom-up interventions. Strengthening pro-gender-equality alliances and spaces for deliberation will help to ensure that gender equality is not co-opted by authoritarian leaders and populist groups and will sustain counter-narratives.