1

UNDP’s Global Programme on Country-Led Governance Assessments

Oslo Governance Centre

90888682 84 96 98 00 02 0492 94 0678761974

Global governance indicators

0880

CPIA Freedom in the

World

Commitment to Development

Bertelsmann Transformation

Index

Global Accountability

Report

Index of Economic Freedom

Journalists killed

Open Budget Index

PolityOpacity Index

Integrity Index

BEEPSPress

Freedom Survey

Political Terror Scale

Global Competitiveness

Index

World Governance Assessment

World Values Survey

State Failure Dataset

Women in Parliament

Governance Matters

Gender Empowerment

Measure

Index of Democracy

World Democracy

AuditFailed

States Index

Press Freedom

Index

Democracy Index

Institutional Profiles

Database

Weberian Comparative State Project

International Country Risk

Guide

Human Rights

Indicators

GAPS in Workers’ Rights

Corruption Perceptions

Index Bribe Payers

Index

Indicators of Local

Democratic Governance

CIRI Human Rights

Databse

Countries at the Crossroads

Civil Society Index

Economic Freedom of the World

Global Corruptio

n Baromete

rRule of Law

Index

Governance and

Democracy Processes

Global Peace Index

Index of Human Rights

The programme

Offers guidance, technical assistance, financial support aimed at strengthening national capacity to conduct democratic governance assessments.

● Tajikistan

● Djibouti● Nigeria

● Senegal

● Angola● Malawi

● Indonesia

● Bhutan

● Nicaragua

● Chile

Barbados & ● Eastern Caribbean● Mexico

● Macedonia● Morocco

● Egypt

● Mongolia

Support to 16 countries (2009-11)

• Strengthens the demand side of governance (an accountability mechanism)

• Strengthens the supply side of governance (evidence base for national decision making)

The dual purpose of country-led assessments

6

What are “country-led assessments”?

• Undertaken by a country on its own initiative

• Can be initiated by government, civil society, research institutes

• Range in focus (comprehensive or sectoral)

• Active participation of state and non-state actors

• Results feed into policy-making processes

How do Principles Apply to Assessments?

• Accountability: Country-led assessments act as a critical accountability mechanism for governance performance to local stakeholders.

• Participation: A broad and representative range of national actors have opportunities to input into key stages of the assessment process.

• Transparency: National actors have unbiased access to information on the assessment process and the results of the assessment are made available to the public as a public good.

• Legitimacy: National actors agree that the assessment process and its results are legitimate.

Key steps in conducting a country-led governance assessment

Identify key stakeholders

Establish a steering

committee

Identify national institution or civil

society organisation

as ‘coordinator’

Conduct multi-stakeholder dialogue on governance

priorities

Raisefunds

Decide on

samplingDecide

on indicator

s

Decide on assessment framework

Decide on who will do

the research

Select type of

assessment

Decide on how to collect data

Analyse results Disseminate

resultsConduct multi-

stakeholder consultation

Develop policy

recommendations

Implement policy reform or advocate for reform

Institutionalize the assessment and repeat at

regular intervals

9

Ten features of an effective country-led governance assessment

1. Alignment to national political priorities and processes

2. Assessment is country contextualized3. Methodology is rigorous4. Selection of indicators is transparent and

participatory5. Results are stored in a public national database6. Indicators are pro-poor and gender-sensitive7. Capacity of national stakeholders is developed8. Cost-effective and timely9. The results are widely communicated10. The assessment is repeated

UNESCO/Loock F.

10

• Follow-up to ICNRD (2003): establish mechanism to monitor progress of democratic development

• Requested support from UNDP • Adapted IDEA’s State of Democracy assessment framework • Led by national team of researchers; national consultations

throughout• Quantitative sources: national survey; MP survey; expert

survey; admin stats• Qualitative sources: focus groups discussions, ‘free

dialogues’, narratives• Elicited views of 1200 citizens + + • Core (117) vs. satellite indicators (14) • Results presented & debated at national conference• Nat’l Plan of Action to Consolidate Democracy

Mongolia’s experience

www.gaportal.orgwww.gaportal.org