Networking and Collaborative Research

 The final day of the conference was spent discussing the future of the work of the groups represented, and the role of the International Budget Project in supporting this work.  During a plenary session four examples of existing projects were shared, from networks in Africa and Russia and two examples of cross-country research into transparency from Latin America, to give ideas of how collaborative work has developed and lessons learned.  Subsequently groups were formed to discuss various areas of future work and collaboration and form recommendations for the future direction and strategy of the IBP.   

Developing a national network of budget groups in Russia:
After the last conference of the International Budget Project in Cape Town, Strategy, an NGO from St Petersburg, started work on developing a network of groups throughout the country.  Alexander Sungurov spoke about the development of this network, problems faced and lessons learned.

Alexander Sugurov gives a presentation on the Russia network

Support for transparency and participation in the budget process is not strong in Russia.  NGOs understand the need to participate in the budget process mainly in terms of their own material needs, as an opportunity to receive money for their own programs or areas of work.  Rarely does the interest of these organizations lie in the achievement of transparency and participation to deepen democracy, in citizen’s control over their development.  Public officials don’t like relinquishing control to the public, partly through fear of public incompetence.  Neither is the public generally interested in participating in government affairs.  

Strategy runs a project called ‘creating a budget people can understand and influence’, which aims to make the budget process more transparent and expand the participation of NGOs.  The work began in St Petersburg, working directly with key people in the finance department who understand the need for transparency. They also act as a mediator for the needs of NGOs and the public for information about the budget and participation, running awareness raising programs through public hearings and publications to demystify the budget and raise important issues.  

St Petersburg was used as a testing ground for applying the IMF code for transparency in the budget process analysis. After this the project was rolled out in three more Russian regions and a training program was implemented for NGOs and local officials on encouraging participation in the budget process.  Over the last year the network has continued to grow and links between organizations have been strengthened through mutual exchange visits, electronic information exchange and a conference.

Cross-country research into transparency:
Research into transparency and participation has been taking place in many countries, with collaboration between countries within regions.  Warren Krafchik spoke about the work of the IBP and IDASA to develop and test a scorecard methodology for assessing transparency, which is now being adapted to sub-national and other national contexts.  While initial reports show that organizations find it a useful tool for debate on the issues, there has as yet been no evidence of the impact of the studies.  The IBP will be working to broaden and deepen the work, and formalize the initiative through development of methodology, cross-fertilization of ideas and possibly strategic partnerships supported by multi-lingual technical support teams. 

The issue of transparency for good governance has become increasingly important in the region as the promise of growth nurtured by reforms in the early 1990s failed to succeed.  Good governance is based on transparency in the regulation of government policy and the allocation of financial resources according to these priorities.  Accountability depends on the free access to information on the government's activities.  

Using the transparency scorecard for Latin America:  Juan Pablo Guerrero of CIDE, Mexico, and Joao Sucupira of IBASE, Brazil, gave a presentation on the development of the transparency scorecard methodology for the Latin American context.  The project is taking place over ten months, with two international meetings and will develop the methodology for the research.  The IMF transparency code is a good framework for the research, but it fails to deal with the social perception of transparency, the role of social actors in exploiting the opportunities provided where there is transparency. This project is trying to compensate for this, and is currently working on three guides for assessing transparency:

1.      Where and how can transparency be measured? Looking at the formal rules and roles on which transparency depends.  It will explore where information is available on this and assess clarity of roles and functions in the process. 

2.      Social perception of transparency:  Looking at the extent to which transparency is useful from a social perspective, how profitable it is for social intervention, participation and impact on corruption and other problems.  This will explore perceptions through interviews, and emphasize the role of mass media, unions, NGOs, social associations and academics.

3.      Reporting the findings:  establishing a methodology for pulling together the information from the two previous studies into useful and comparable formats.

Funding comes from Ford Foundation with institutional support from participating organizations who already have funds for budget work. 

Transparency research and comparisons across five Latin American countries:  

Eduardo Morón (left) and Arlette Beltrán (center) from the Universidad del Pacífico in Peru gave a presentation about the evolution of a research project looking at transparency issues in Argentina, Chile and Peru.   

This research project was designed to foster a proper access to the information required to enhance the participation of civil society in governance.  Researchers will develop a database of public expenditure in the four areas of defense, environment, youth and gender.  This involves collecting data, designing indicators to measure the efficiency and impact of spending and comparing across the four countries.  This research will yield quarterly reports.  Additional papers on the state of art of each of the four issues and on how budgets affect human development will be produced.

… challenges and limitations:  The nature of the research has made analysis very slow and complex.  It is difficult to disentangle expenditure across sectors and issues, budget headings are not clear and some of the issues, such as gender, are crosscutting.  Access to information is another problem.  Comparing across countries is even more difficult as different countries have different formats for budget documentation, and different governance structures shifting emphasis between national and sub-national levels. The choice of topics was done before analyzing the reality of the countries and inevitably the issues are of varying relevance between countries, and the indicators are not always a good base of comparison. 

Establishing a budget network in Africa:
Alta Fölscher of the Institute for Democracy in South Africa (IDASA) spoke about the Africa Budget Project, a recent initiative aiming to support organizations in building more open and responsive systems in their respective countries through capacity building and information exchange.  

Although the groups are varied in their focus and structure, they work on the shared value that it is the basic right and obligation of citizens to participate in the crucial decisions being made through and about the budget.  The network is loose and informal, currently coordinated by IDASA, and grows organically, with a focus on the quality of collaboration rather than the extent or coverage of the network. 

The network concentrates on four main areas of work:

Training                            The network began through relationships built during a conference bringing together a group of African organizations doing applied budget work.  Since then there have been several training workshops held by organizations involved in the network, and technical assistance for this has been shared between organizations.  

In Ghana in early 2000 45 organizations from across Africa came together for a training course on people-centered budget advocacy organized and facilitated by ISODEC, NCAS and ActionAid with technical assistance from IDASA.  This was then replicated in Nigeria and Ghana for the specific country contexts.  The participatory methodology and range of organizations from civil society and government enabled the development of alliances between activists and technical experts.  IDASA has also run a training course for journalists in Zambia.

Technical assistance:       Several of the groups in the network have received support to work with their legislatures building capacity for budget analysis, or strategizing around the role of parliament in the budget process.  Technical assistance is also being given to ISODEC in setting up a dedicated budget center.

Information:                      The network will soon have its own website bringing together budget information and research from across the continent.  This will include the result of current research with the organizations looking at how the budget is organized in different countries.  A newsletter will also be introduced in the new year.

The ABP is also producing a resource book with information about all the organizations who have participated in the various workshops to encourage mutual exchange and collaboration.

Joint research:                  A comparative transparency study is currently underway in Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa and Zambia.

… future directions:  The network is new and has been growing fast in response to demand, “like going downhill on roller skates” as Alta described the experience so far. IDASA’s Budget Information Service has taken the lead in developing the network and providing capacity.  Coalitions between countries have been building and between activist and policy-oriented organizations within countries but this is a slow process.  It is important for the sustainability and effectiveness of the network that the groups involved take more ownership of the network and the institutional base is broadened.  A major value of the network is in sharing what works and what doesn’t between and across countries.  However, it is difficult to encourage new avenues for budget work when competition for funding is fierce and members may also be competing with each other for public space.  

To enable the expansion of the network to all African countries there are some fundamental issues that need to be addressed, particularly for those countries which do not have the principles of democratic institutions or are in conflict situations.  The Project will be working with organizations in Sierra Leone and Angola to explore the meaning of budget work in these different contexts.  

To further encourage decentralization of the network, strengthen relationships and share learning it is proposed that a mutual exchange or fellowship scheme be initiated.  The introduction of the website and newsletter will also strengthen the network and it is planned to institutionalize the training sessions which have been carried out this year with a replicable curriculum applicable to different country contexts and audiences.   

Moving the work of the
network and groups forward