A new generation of strategies for government accountability is needed, one that fully considers entrenched, institutional obstacles to change. Vertical integration of coordinated civil society policy monitoring and advocacy is one such strategy. Engaging each stage and level of public sector actions in an integrated way can locate the causes of accountability failures, show their interconnected nature, and leverage the local, national and transnational power shifts necessary to produce sustainable institutional change.
Indigenous peoples have a rich and long history of struggle, and the case study of campaigning for indigenous peoples’ rights examines the work of the Teduray Lambangian Women’s Organisation Inc. (TLWOI), a federation of community-based organizations which is fighting for the rights of indigenous women in Mindanao.
The case study examines the work of the Reproductive Health Advocacy Network (RHAN) to push for the passage of the Reproductive Health Bill, despite stiff opposition from the highly influential Catholic Church.
This case study summary looks into the advocacy campaign of the Disaster Risk Reduction Network Philippines (DRRNetPhils), which was directed at the passage, implementation and review of the 2010 Disaster Risk Reduction Management (DRRM) Act.
This case study summary reflects on some of processes, mechanisms, actors and activities at play at various stages and levels of the programme, which made it possible for civil society monitoring to cover all the Textbook Delivery Programme’s possible vulnerabilities to corruption and inefficiency. It attempts to unbundle processes at every level, and measure the intensity of the actions/tactics per level using vertical integration as a framework for analysis.
The case study focuses on the organizing efforts of two national agrarian reform networks, the Rural Poor Institute for Land and Human Rights Services (known as RIGHTS Network) and the Movement for Agrarian Reform and Social Justice (Katarungan), and their campaign with local farmers’ organizations on the Bondoc Peninsula.
The case study looks at the work of Damayan ng Maralitang Pilipinong Api (DAMPA, Solidarity of Oppressed Poor Filipinos), a network of more than 90,000 poor urban households, which works to provide “viable solutions to basic poverty problems endemic to the urban poor” (DAMPA 2004).
This piece puts forward propositions on "doing accountability differently" through strategies that tackle power and systemic issues in order to address root causes (instead of just the symptoms) of corruption and bad governance through balanced and synergistic, multi-level and multi-actor actions on transparency, participation and accountability.
This provides background paper for a learning event on transforming governance, which presents vertical integration as “an effective way of doing accountability work because it can reveal more clearly where the main problems are, permitting more precisely targeted civil society advocacy strategies.”
This paper focuses on the central question: How do governance reforms happen (or not happen) in “fragile” or post-conflict societies?
In the 1990s, the Philippines government was corrupt, and the Department of Education among the worst offenders. In high schools, the shortage of textbooks was so great that eight children had to share a single copy. After Congress passed the Government Procurement Reform Act, the education department set to work to provide the right number of high-quality textbooks to the nation’s schools. A crucial aspect was mobilising civil society NGOs to check that suppliers were delivering what they promised, a key monitoring initiative being Textbook 1-2-3.
In June 2015, a North-South convergence of four organizations hosted a workshop entitled “scaling accountability.” In contrast to the conventional idea of “scaling” as involving the replication of local pilots, our use of the term was intended to convey the idea of going beyond bounded projects to address systemic accountability problems.
This study explores whether and how Philippine open government reformers have been able to leverage the Open Government Partnership (OGP) mechanisms, processes, spaces, and assistance to improve government responsiveness and accountability.
The attempt of civil society to venture into expenditure monitoring is a huge challenge. It is a new terrain that involves technicalities and requires access to critical processes and documents of the government.
In 2001 there were a plethora of reports, disclosing that billions of pesos were lost in textbook scams, corruption in procurement, ghost projects in textbook delivery and school-building construction. In that year, G-Watch reviewed public sector performance in two key areas: textbook delivery and school-building construction.
After round of monitoring of school building projects (SBPs) under the Bayanihang Eskwela, G-Watch has persistently encountered issues on allocation. This led G-Watch to inquire about the standard involving allocation.
The Government Watch (G-Watch) of Ateneo School of Government has implemented Bayanihang Eskwela since 2005. The program is a community-based monitoring of the government’s school-building projects that aims to ensure that the right quality of school building projects are implemented at the right time where it is needed most.
A follow up to the COMELEC Budget Watch in 2009, this study aimed to baseline and benchmark electoral administration spending of COMELEC, in the hope of helping inform COMELEC of relevant performance standards and indicators they should achieve in effectively linking their budget preparation and performance target setting.
This policy study aims to identify key issues in the implementation of the government’s school building program, focusing on the DepEd-led School Building Program for schools experiencing acute classroom shortage and the DPWH enforced Regular School Building Program which is in the ambit of Republic Act No. 7880 or more commonly known as the Roxas Law.
The news that the FOI Bill failed was frustrating, but it should serve as a wake up call. Not only that we must make power accountable, we must reconstitute power; for as it is now, the power configuration in our society only allows limited reforms and hardly any radical changes. Important legislations that deepen democracy by giving more power to the people and making the exercise of power more accountable like the FOI Bill will hardly have a chance and our toil to make a difference will be more of the same without making any difference in the existing power structure. This is why it is most critical that while we continue our governance work now, we do not lose sight of the important task of developing our political party system, continuing the political engagement with the new administration and creating a reform-oriented context for the next elections through electoral reform and political education.