ANSA-EAP

Login | Register

What is social accountability?

"Social accountability" refers to actions initiated by citizen groups to hold public officials, politicians, and service providers to account for their conduct and performance in terms of delivering services, improving people's welfare and protecting people's rights.

Do you mean participating in elections or taking to the streets for popular revolt ("people power")?

Elections and "people power" are traditional types of citizen action. But the social accountability approach represents a different - and, some say, higher - level of citizen engagement. It involves citizens (especially poor citizens):

• gathering information about government programs so that they have solid evidence,
• analyzing this information,
• and then using this information judiciously to directly engage with public officials, politicians, and service providers and demand that they serve the public interest efficiently, effectively, and fairly.

What are the four pillars of social accountability?

The four pillars are: (1) organized and capable citizens groups; (2) an enabling environment, with government champions who are willing to engage; (3) cultural appropriateness; and, (4) access to information.

What actions would fall under the social accountability approach?

Actions include participatory public policy-making, participatory budgeting, public expenditure tracking, citizen monitoring and evaluation of public service delivery (preparing 'report cards'). They also include efforts to enhance citizen knowledge and use of conventional mechanisms of accountability (for example, through public education about legal rights and available services) or efforts to improve the effectiveness of "internal" accountability mechanisms - for example, through citizen involvement in public commissions and hearings, citizen advisory boards, and oversight committees.

When did the concept of social accountability start?

It evolved from the concept of citizens participating in governance. When government mechanisms and market forces failed to promote the public good, especially in eliminating corruption and reducing poverty, a movement began toward making direct citizen involvement a prominent aspect of governance. International donors who want to secure the proper use of loans and grants to developing governments also contributed significantly in support of the social accountability approach.

Who are the most important players here?

Both citizen groups and the government are important players of social accountability. Government has the duty to facilitate access to all information while citizens must assert their right to participate in governance. Citizens must organize themselves to be able to engage in this kind of participation.

When should citizen groups practice social accountability?

There should be social accountability at every stage of the entire cycle of democratic governance. Citizenship should not only be exercised during elections when citizens cast their votes. The social accountability approach calls for citizens to remain watchful, vigilant, and proactive in making elected leaders, bureaucrats, and service providers accountable for their performance even and especially after the election period.

How does the government-citizen engagement work?

The social accountability approach presumes, first, that government keeps the door open for people's participation and, second, that citizens are willing to engage the government. The dynamics of the relationship is constructive government-citizen engagement.

How is constructive engagement possible?

It is possible if there is mutual trust and openness. The crucial factor would be if there were trusted and credible "champions" in government who appreciate the value of citizen participation. These champions should be complemented with equally credible citizen groups that can dialogue in an organized and competent manner.

Does this mean citizen groups should no longer disagree with government?

Of course not. Non-violent but assertive methods, such as protest, remain legitimate actions and should be used, depending on the needs of the situation.

But isn't there a risk of citizen groups becoming co-opted by government?

Not if you set concrete measures of either success or failure of engagement. Significant failure to live up to these measures should be a basis for withdrawing support while success should encourage continuation of support. The public should know about the success and failure of the engagement.

How can ordinary citizens battle big problems in government through social accountability?

Ordinary citizens are actually the primary contributors to the advancement of social accountability, but it is necessary to pull together and consolidate their actions to match big, complicated issues. By connecting citizens, the power of collective and organized advocacy work can make them a potent force for social transformation.

Should the social accountability approach be made more culturally appropriate?

Yes, definitely. Social accountability requires cultural relevance. It must be understood and framed according to the unique values, language, and practice of the people of the East Asia-Pacific region. Only in this way can the social accountability approach be popularized, mainstreamed, and accepted.

What is the role of ANSA-EAP in social accountability?

ANSA-EAP is a regional network established in 2008 to help cultivate the East Asia-Pacific way of doing social accountability by upholding the region's culture and norms. ANSA-EAP reaches out to various groups: citizen groups, nongovernment organizations, civic associations, the business sector, and government institutions. It harnesses and enhances the region's knowledge, expertise, and experience. Through ANSA-EAP, homegrown efforts can make people realize the direction and value of their participation in governance, further enriching the existing community of learning and practice.