Existing evidence on the impact of “transparency and accountability initiatives” (TAIs), including freedom of information, is “weak,” according to a major new review of the research.
This finding on the empirical front “does not mean that the impacts of TAIs are not significant, nor that they do not hold strong potential for change. It is just to stay that we cannot necessarily prove these impacts clearly one way or another, and that we cannot make a strong, generalisable case for the potential of TAIs from the existing evidence. “
The study, or rather studies, were supported by the British government’s Department of International Development and conducted by researchers at the Institute of Development Studies (IDS) and other experts.
Looking ahead, the study states: “A core challenge, therefore, is to deepen the evidence and knowledge base of the impact of TAIs, building on the methods and insights which are emerging in a dynamic, relatively young but rapidly expanding field.”
Freedom of information is one of five TAIs examined, principally based on a paper by Richard Calland, Associate Professor: Public Law at the University of Cape Town and Director of its Democratic Governance & Rights Unit (DGRU). The other four sectors examined were: public service delivery; budget processes; natural resource governance; and aid transparency. Two regional papers surveyed the literature and experience in south Asia and Latin America. In addition, the project has compiled and annotated bibliography of the top 75 studies in the field.
Emerging Evidence of Impacts
The synthesizers of the papers, Rosemary McGee and John Gaventa of IDS, suggest that positive outcomes are possible, even visible, despite slim evidence.
They write: “While we have above expressed caution about drawing generalised conclusions of impact, at the same time a number of studies do suggest some evidence of the types of impacts that can be attained in some settings.”
There is evidence, they say, that TAIs have contributed, under some conditions, to increased state or institutional responsiveness, lowering of corruption, building new democratic spaces for citizen engagement, empowering local voices, and better budget utilization and better delivery of services.
“Moreover,” they report, “there are a number of insights throughout the study which do begin to offer building blocks for what successful strategies for increasing transparency and accountability might look like. While given the state of the evidence we hesitate to call these best practices or universal principles, we can draw from the review some ‘probes’ that might be used in evaluating current initiatives on in appraising or designing new ones.”
Evidentiary Gaps
Cautioning against “drawing generalized conclusions from the existing evidence base,” the researchers warn that in some cases it is too early to evaluate the initiatives, some are too local to permit general conclusions, and that much of the literature focuses on the effectiveness of implementation rather than broader developmental or democratic outcomes. Positive evidence in one setting, “is often not corroborated – and sometimes even contradicted” by findings in another setting where different, or even similar, methods have been used, the report states.
“In addition to these reasons for caution, the study elaborates on three significant limits of the existing evidence base: a) untested assumptions and theories of change; b) the methodological challenges of assessing what are often highly complex initiatives; and c) the complexity of factors which contribute to their success,” according to the executive summary. It further states:
While the evidence base on accountability and transparency may be underdeveloped, this does not mean that the lessons to be learned from existing evidence, or that the TAIs themselves, are not significant. As we have seen, some insights may already be gained as to impact, factors of change, and design principles for new initiatives. However, a core challenge is to deepen the evidence and knowledge base of the impact of TAIs, building on the methods and insights which are emerging in a dynamic, relatively young but rapidly expanding field.
The report provides many suggestions for further research, including methodological strategies.
Commissioned by the Policy Research Fund of the UK Department of International Development (DFID), this project is intended to provide guidance to the Transparency and Accountability Initiative, a new donor collaborative that includes the Ford Foundation, Hivos, the International Budget Partnership, the Omidyar Network, the Open Society Institute, the Revenue Watch Institute, and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.
Filed under: What's New