Abstract
Abstract
Background
The majority of documented social accountability initiatives to date have been ‘tactical’ in nature, employing single-tool, mostly community-based approaches. This article provides lessons from a ‘strategic’, multi-tool, multi-level social accountability project: UNICEF’s ‘Social Accountability for Every Woman Every Child’ intervention in Malawi.
Methods
The project targeted the national, district and community levels. Three Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) were engaged to carry out interventions using various tools to generate evidence and political advocacy at one or more levels. This article focuses on one of the social accountability methods – the bwalo forum (a meeting based on a traditional Malawian method of dialogue). A detailed political economy analysis was conducted by one of the co-authors using qualitative methods including interviews and group discussions. The authors conducted in-country consultations and analysed secondary data provided by the CSOs.
Results
The political economy analysis highlighted several ways in which CSO partners should modify their work plans to be more compatible with the project context. This included shifting the advocacy and support focus, as well as significantly expanding the bwalo forums. Bwalos were found to be an important platform for allowing citizens to engage with duty bearers at the community and district levels, and enabled a number of reproductive, maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health issues to be resolved at those levels. The project also enabled learning around participant responses as intermediate project outcomes.
Conclusions
The project utilised various tools to gather data, elevate community voices, and facilitate engagement between citizen and state actors at the community, district and national levels. This provided the scaffolding for numerous issues to be resolved at the community or district levels, or referred to the national level. Bwalo forums were found to be highly effective as a space for inter-level engagement between citizens and state; however, as they were not embedded in existing local structures, their potential for sustainability and scalability was tenuous. A key strength of the project was the political economy analysis, which provided direction for partners to shape their interventions according to local and national realities and be sensitive to the barriers and drivers to positive action.
Funder
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference54 articles.
1. The World Bank. Maternal mortality ratio (modeled estimate, per 100,000 live births). 2017. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.STA.MMRT. Accessed 20 Feb 2020.
2. Lodenstein E, Ingemann C, Molenaar JM, Dieleman M, Broerse JEW. Informal social accountability in maternal health service delivery: a study in northern Malawi. PLoS One. 2018;13(4):e0195671.
3. Fox J. Social Accountability: What Does the Evidence Really Say? GPSA Working Paper No. 1. Global Partnership for Social Accountability. 2014. http://gpsaknowledge.org/wp- content/uploads/2014/09/Social-Accountability-What-Does-Evidence-Really-Say-GPSA-Working-Paper- 1.pdf. Accessed 17 Aug 2017.
4. O’Meally SC. Mapping Context for Social Accountability: A Resource Paper. Social Development Department. Washington, DC: The World Bank; 2013. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTSOCIALDEVELOPMENT/Resources/244362- 1193949504055/Context_and_SAcc_RESOURCE_PAPER.pdf. Accessed 17 Aug 2017.
5. Holland J. What works for social accountability? Findings from DFID’s Macro Evaluation. Policy Briefing. Itad and DFID. 2017. https://itad.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/SummaryFindings_Briefing_2-v7.2-high-res.pdf. Accessed 7 Mar 2019.
Cited by
12 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献