Search

Begin New Search Topic Accountability Author Jonathan Fox

1. Disentangling Government Responses: How Do We Know When Accountability Work Is Gaining Traction?

Author:
Jonathan Fox, Brendan Halloran, Alta Fölscher, and Rosie McGee
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Accountability Research Center (ARC), American University
Abstract:
Advocacy for public accountability aims to produce certain reactions from government officials or service providers. However, the reactions can be many and diverse, and it is not always clear to advocates how to interpret them and decide on next steps—whether to intensify efforts or back off; continue the same strategy or make adjustments. This paper presents a framework to help accountability advocates and practitioners interpret government reactions to their efforts and move forward appropriately. The framework arises from learning and reflection in the context of the International Budget Partnership (IBP)’s Strengthening Public Accountability with Results and Knowledge (SPARK) program. SPARK seeks to bolster the collective agency of marginalized communities and coalitions to advance democratic and equitable fiscal governance systems that channel public resources to services that address the priority needs of these historically excluded groups.
Topic:
Government, Governance, Accountability, and Financial Management
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2. Collective Protection for Communities and Rights Defenders at Risk: Lessons from Grassroots Advocacy in Colombia

Author:
Mauricio Parra Bayona, Elizabeth Moreno Barco, and Jonathan Fox
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Accountability Research Center (ARC), American University
Abstract:
Rights defenders around the world face unrelenting violent reprisals for their work protecting marginalized communities and their territories. Some governments respond by committing to protect these citizens at risk—mainly with individualized, police-style safeguards. Colombia’s government has Latin America’s largest protection agency by far and has gone beyond its many individual measures to also promise collective protection to communities at risk. In Colombia, the Community Council of the San Juan River region (ACADESAN), defends the rights of its 72 Afro-Colombian communities in areas affected by armed conflict. It has worked to hold the government accountable for delivering on its legal and policy commitments to protect communities at risk by providing comprehensive, collective measures. This Accountability Note describes ACADESAN’s breakthrough advocacy campaign for collective protection. It shares insights relevant for efforts to protect rights defenders and communities that go beyond conventional measures. It is based on the story told in Spanish by Mauricio Parra Bayona, ACADESAN human rights advisor, in his Accountability Working Paper, and the prefaces to that paper by former ACADESAN representative Elizabeth Moreno Barco and Jonathan Fox of ARC. Parra reflects on how collective protection must further be adjusted to better serve other at-risk communities and organizations in Colombia.
Topic:
Accountability, Land Rights, Advocacy, and Protection
Political Geography:
Colombia and South America

3. Activating Spaces, Scaling Up Voices: Community-based Monitoring and Planning of Health Services in Maharashtra, India

Author:
Abhay Shukla, Shweta Marathe, Deepali Yakkundi, Trupti Malti, and Jonathan Fox
Publication Date:
06-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Accountability Research Center (ARC), American University
Abstract:
From 2007, the Indian government’s National Health Mission (NHM) supported civil society networks to carry out large-scale participatory monitoring to improve health service access and quality under the Community-based Monitoring and Planning (CBMP) program. In the state of Maharashtra, this social accountability initiative endured more than a decade and a half, despite constraints and unpredictable government funding. The CBMP program in Maharashtra supported state-wide civil society networks to enable active citizen participation in health oversight committees. It was rooted in a broad network of diverse community-based organizations and civil society organizations that work with socially excluded communities, led by Support for Advocacy and Training to Health Initiatives (SATHI). The CBMP network combined many social accountability tools into a multilevel strategy, using community assessments of health services and local meetings with clinic staff to inform problem-solving efforts at local, district, and state levels of the health system. This government-funded civil society initiative worked with local officials to convene public dialogues and to activate previously dormant official oversight bodies, animated by a parallel network of autonomous monitoring committees. This Working Paper presents SATHI’s analysis of the CBMP program’s strategy and institutional dynamics, and documents its lasting effects on two participatory oversight institutions: Village Health, Sanitation, and Nutrition Committees (VHSNCs)—part of local government, and Rogi Kalyan Samitis (Patient Welfare Committees)—part of the health system. Field research, carried out shortly before the pandemic, compared the activation of these hybrid oversight bodies in areas with and without a legacy of intensive CBMP action. Key findings include: Official participatory spaces for citizen engagement with the health system were much more active in districts where CBMP networks had intensively promoted grassroots capacity for voice. Frontline health system responsiveness to issues that could be addressed locally—identified as ‘CBMP-sensitive’—was very high. But the health system’s degree of responsiveness to problem-solving efforts decreased at higher levels. The period of intensive CBMP effort to build grassroots awareness and capacity was limited to six years. Nevertheless, that effort had lasting effects on the levels of activity of local hybrid health oversight bodies. The pandemic revealed additional evidence of the medium-term survival and institutional impact of CBMP-enabled social networks.
Topic:
Civil Society, Health, Governance, Accountability, Community, Monitoring, Planning, Monitoring, and and Evaluation (PME)
Political Geography:
South Asia and India

4. Accountability Keywords

Author:
Jonathan Fox
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Accountability Research Center (ARC), American University
Abstract:
‘What counts’ as accountability, and who decides? Accountability is often treated as a magic bullet, an all-purpose solution to a very wide range of problems—from corrupt politicians or the quality of public service provision to persistent injustice and impunity. The concept has become shorthand to refer to diverse efforts to address problems with the exercise of power. In practice, the accountability idea is malleable, ambiguous — and contested. This working paper unpacks diverse understandings of accountability ideas, using the ‘keywords’ approach. This tradition takes everyday big ideas whose meanings are often taken for granted and makes their subtexts explicit. The proposition here is that ambiguous or contested language can either constrain or enable possible strategies for promoting accountability. After all, different potential coalition partners may use the same term with different meanings—or may use different terms to communicate the same idea. Indeed, the concept’s fundamental ambiguity is a major reason why it can be difficult to communicate ideas about accountability across disciplines, cultures, and languages. The goal here is to inform efforts to find common ground between diverse potential constituencies for accountable governance. This analysis is informed by dialogue with advocates and reformers from many countries and sectors, many of whom share their ideas in blogposts on the Accountability Keywords website (see also #AccountabilityKeyword on social media). Both the working paper and blogposts reflect on accountability-related words and sayings that resonate with popular cultures, to get a better handle on what sticks. The format of the working paper is nonlinear, designed so that readers can go right to the keywords that spark their interest: The introduction maps the landscape of accountability keywords. Section 2 addresses what counts as accountability? Section 3 identifies big concepts that overlap with accountability but are not synonyms- such as good governance, democracy, responsiveness and responsibility. Section 4 shows the relevance of accountability adjectives by spelling out different ways in which the idea is understood. Section 5 unpacks widely used, emblematic keywords in the field. Section 6 considers more specialized keywords, focusing on examples that serve as shorthand for big ideas within specific communities of practice. Section 7 brings together a range of widely-used accountability sayings, from the ancient to the recently-invented—illustrating the enduring and diverse nature of accountability claims. Section 8 makes a series of propositions for discussion.
Topic:
Corruption, Accountability, and Keywords
Political Geography:
Global Focus

5. Movement-building for Accountability: Learning from Indonesian Women’s Organizing

Author:
Nani Zulminarni, Valerie Miller, Alexa Bradley, Angela Bailey, and Jonathan Fox
Publication Date:
07-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Accountability Research Center (ARC), American University
Abstract:
Perempuan Kepala Keluarga (Women-Headed Family Empowerment, known as PEKKA) is an Indonesian organization whose work is rooted in a vision of women’s collective power and participation for social change. Since 2001, PEKKA has addressed entrenched social exclusion through popular education, intensive leadership development, and social accountability and policy advocacy. Thousands of marginalized women have overcome stigma and entered the public sphere to engage in politically savvy, sustainable collective action. This emphasis on autonomous grassroots voice is grounded in 2,559 village-level cooperatives that are also scaled up to district, provincial and national levels (PEKKA 2017). PEKKA’s combination of national advocacy with grassroots organizing and countervailing power has influenced national social programs and broadened women’s access to the legal system. Improved access to the courts allows women to obtain legal documentation of their own civil status. This allows women to legalize a marriage that was valid under Islamic law or file a divorce case that will enable her to be recognized as the head of her family. The experience of gaining legal documents may build the knowledge and confidence required to obtain a birth certificate for their children, thereby securing opportunities and access to social services, including education, for the next generation. PEKKA engages in cross-sector alliance-building with local government, Islamic authorities, national policymakers, and international development agencies. This creates the political space and legitimacy needed to navigate complex cultural and political dynamics and deflect those forces opposed to public accountability and social inclusion. PEKKA’s grassroots members promote social accountability, monitoring access to services and solving problems through collaborative engagement with authorities—though without using those terms. What makes PEKKA’s approach to social accountability distinctive is its emphasis on building a broad, autonomous social base as the foundation for projecting grassroots women’s voices, combined with its multi-level approach to advocacy. PEKKA takes scale into account by engaging with authorities from the village level to national and international levels. PEKKA’s long-term efforts to build a broad-based organization with more than 31,447 members have brought fresh and reimagined language, analysis, and strategy ideas to the transparency, participation, and accountability (TPA) field. Key lessons from PEKKA’s accountability strategies include the following: 1. Address underlying institutional and cultural causes of social exclusion to create the confidence and space needed for women to exercise their voices and take collective action. 2. Use economic empowerment to build social foundations for autonomous voice and civic engagement. 3. Build countervailing power through action strategies that scale up member voice, leadership skills, and opportunities for participation in all aspects of the work. 4. Produce diverse forms of evidence for multiple audiences to advance advocacy strategies and maximize impact. 5. Cultivate allies and relationships inside and outside government, and at multiple levels, to expand impact and deflect opposition.
Topic:
Social Movement, Women, Accountability, and Community Organizing
Political Geography:
Indonesia and Southeast Asia

6. Movement-building for Accountability: Learning from Indonesian Women’s Organizing

Author:
Nani Zulminarni, Valerie Miller, Alexa Bradley, Angela Bailey, and Jonathan Fox
Publication Date:
10-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Accountability Research Center (ARC), American University
Abstract:
Perempuan Kepala Keluarga (Women-Headed Family Empowerment, known as PEKKA) is an Indonesian organization whose work is rooted in a vision of women’s collective power and participation for social change. Since 2001, PEKKA has addressed entrenched social exclusion through popular education, intensive leadership development, and social accountability and policy advocacy. Thousands of marginalized women have overcome stigma and entered the public sphere to engage in politically savvy, sustainable collective action. This emphasis on autonomous grassroots voice is grounded in 2,559 village-level cooperatives that are also scaled up to district, provincial and national levels (PEKKA 2017). PEKKA’s combination of national advocacy with grassroots organizing and countervailing power has influenced national social programs and broadened women’s access to the legal system. Improved access to the courts allows women to obtain legal documentation of their own civil status. This allows women to legalize a marriage that was valid under Islamic law or file a divorce case that will enable her to be recognized as the head of her family. The experience of gaining legal documents may build the knowledge and confidence required to obtain a birth certificate for their children, thereby securing opportunities and access to social services, including education, for the next generation. PEKKA engages in cross-sector alliance-building with local government, Islamic authorities, national policymakers, and international development agencies. This creates the political space and legitimacy needed to navigate complex cultural and political dynamics and deflect those forces opposed to public accountability and social inclusion. PEKKA’s grassroots members promote social accountability, monitoring access to services and solving problems through collaborative engagement with authorities—though without using those terms. What makes PEKKA’s approach to social accountability distinctive is its emphasis on building a broad, autonomous social base as the foundation for projecting grassroots women’s voices, combined with its multi-level approach to advocacy. PEKKA takes scale into account by engaging with authorities from the village level to national and international levels. PEKKA’s long-term efforts to build a broad-based organization with more than 31,447 members have brought fresh and reimagined language, analysis, and strategy ideas to the transparency, participation, and accountability (TPA) field. Key lessons from PEKKA’s accountability strategies include the following: Address underlying institutional and cultural causes of social exclusion to create the confidence and space needed for women to exercise their voices and take collective action. Use economic empowerment to build social foundations for autonomous voice and civic engagement. Build countervailing power through action strategies that scale up member voice, leadership skills, and opportunities for participation in all aspects of the work. Produce diverse forms of evidence for multiple audiences to advance advocacy strategies and maximize impact. Cultivate allies and relationships inside and outside government, and at multiple levels, to expand impact and deflect opposition.
Topic:
Social Movement, Women, Accountability, Community Organizing, and Grassroots Organizing
Political Geography:
Indonesia and Southeast Asia