Social Accountability and Social Audits

1. Social Accountability and Social Audits Shekhar Singh

2. Objectives of Social Accountability • Empowering people • Minimising leakages and waste of public resources • Making programmes more appropriate and efficient • Promoting public ownership • Promoting public participation

3. Methods • Involving affected people in planning, monitoring and evaluation • Timely dissemination of information in an understandable form • Extensive public consultation and consensus • Timely public response by authorities to issues raised

4. Preconditions to Effective Public Accountability • Effective transparency (role of RTI act) • Community mobilisation • Capacity development • Secure (preferable mandated) platform • Appropriate frequency and periodicity • Timely, transparent and effective follow-up by the authorities • Effective feedback to the community

5. Major Vulnerabilities • Collusion among functionaries • “Ghost” accountability and audit exercises • Inadequate or inappropriate transparency • Inadequate time • Lack of preparation • Public’s unwillingness to participate due to fear, cynicism or conspiracy • Disruption by vested interests • Inappropriate govt. role – indifferent or over controlling

6. Major Stakeholders • The affected community • The implementing agency • The supervisory agency • NGOs/people’s groups and movements • The adversely affected vested interests • The donor agency

7. Roles and Functions • Affected community (ordinarily supportive, can be afraid, cynical or complicit) • Need to demand social accountability, participate in the process and insist on follow up • The implementing agency (usually in the firing line, ordinarily wary of SA) • Need to facilitate SA process, disseminate information and participate in the process

8. Roles and Functions contd…. • The supervisory agency (welcomes the vigilance but has to deal with complaints and unrest among staff) • Needs to create a safe and secure platform with a requirement for SA – also help build capacity • NGOs, people’s groups and movements (Facilitators and watchdogs, but can become centres of power) • Need to motivate and mobilise the community and pressurise the authorities

9. Roles and Functions contd…. • Adversely affected vested interests (these include local bureaucrats and politicians, contractors, land lords etc. who stand to lose profits and face rising labour costs) • They will often try and disrupt SA processes and even resort to violence. They have to be controlled by the government and by public pressure. Social strategies have to be developed to neutralise their disruptive potential.

10. Roles and Functions contd…. • Donor agencies (Would often welcome the accountability but shy away from the sensitivities) • Need to incorporate mandatory requirement for SA in all their grants and loans – and in their technical cooperation inputs. Need also to themselves be socially accountable in letter and spirit.

11. Major Questions • Should donor agencies promote social accountability ? [Government sensitivities, transaction costs, need for self transparency vs public monitoring of conditionalities (Water project case), demand driven projects, local appropriateness and ownership, efficient use of resources]

12. Major Questions contd… • If so, how? [Making them mandatory in every new project, retrofitting in ongoing projects, making them a conditionality in SWAps] • In what form? [Techno-managerial ---- political: balance?; what role does the donor agency play?; what are the risks and vulnerabilities?]