The World Governance Assessment (WGA) Survey: Namibia (2006)

1
The World Governance Assessment (WGA) Survey
Namibia (2006)

• A research report compiled by Justine Hunter and
  published by the Namibia Institute for Democracy
  (NID)
• Country-led governance assessments
• Sharing experiences and increasing political
• accountability
• Windhoek, November 2nd 5th 2009

2
Introduction methodology I

• WGA consultative and inclusive governance
  assessment by LOCAL stakeholders
• Understanding of governance provided by local
  respondents, not by foreign observers
• Generating quantitative data capturing
  qualitative comments
• Country-based but allows for cross-country
  comparisons
• Interesting and relevant insights for local
  activists foreign observers
• Separates the governance process into six ARENAS
  civil society, political society, government,
  bureaucracy, economic society, judiciary
• Relies on six theoretical PRINCIPLES
  participation, fairness, decency, accountability,
  transparency, efficiency
• Not country-specific, reflect universal human
  values

3
Introduction methodology II

• Second round 2006 participating countries
  Argentina, Bulgaria, Indonesia, Kyrgyzstan,
  Mongolia, Peru, Palestine, Trinidad, Uganda, and
  Namibia
• Namibia NID was local country coordinator after
  NID had attended governance-assessment training
  course offered by InWEnt in 2005
• Local country coordinators offer commentaries for
  contextualization
• Throw light on the political context, as well as
  on possible reasons why respondents have answered
  the questions the way they have
• Data collected from a cross-section of
  well-informed persons (WIPs) from 10 key
  stakeholder groups religious, parliament, NGOs,
  media, judicial, international organization,
  government ministers or deputy ministers, civil
  service, business, academia
• Distinction was drawn between non-government
  WIPs (73 of all respondents) and government
  WIPs (27)
• Women constituted 21 of all respondents

4
Introduction methodology III

• Focus on PERCEPTIONS of respondents
• Questionnaire included indicators for the ARENAS
  and PRINCIPLES listed above
• Questionnaire comprised thirty-six items, with a
  five point response scale (very high, high,
  moderate, low or very low) for each
  question
• The scores from 1 to 5 for the arenas and
  principles, corresponded with the five-point
  response scale
• To detect changes over time, respondents were
  asked to assess the quality of governance five
  years ago (2001) and now (2006)
• 105 WIPs were contacted 70 completed the
  questionnaires (response rate of 66)
• 77 used the paper version of the questionnaire,
  23 completed the questionnaire online

5
Findings (I)

• Of the 10 countries that participated in the
  second round of the WGA, Namibia scored the
  highest
• One has to bear in mind, that the participating
  countries were not chosen on a structured sample
  basis (as the WGA was still in its pilot phase)
• The range of the WGA scale is from a low of 36 to
  a high of 180, Namibias overall scores of 111.9
  (2001) and 114.4 (2006) are in the upper-middle
  of the scale
• Namibias WGA scores correspond with other
  cross-country surveys
• 2009 Freedom of the World accorded Namibia the
  status free
• 2008 TIs Corruption Perception Index was 4.5
• However, the Afrobarometer National Citizens
  Survey came to the conclusion that the supply of
  democracy in Namibia exceeds the demand
• It is therefore necessary to understand Namibias
  political culture rather than to focus solely on
  cross-country comparisons

6
Overall mean scores per country
7
Findings (II)

• Assessment in Namibia might have been affected by
  political developments, Namibias history as a
  postcolonial/post-apartheid state and
  socio-economic factors
• National elections in 2004, presidential
  succession in 2005, land reform process
  farmland expropriation since 2003
• Although qualified as a lower-middle income
  country, Namibia is one of the most unequal
  societies in the world (gini coefficient of 0.7
  (2009)
• Poverty and marginalization are aggravated by
  high HIV/AIDS prevalence rates (2008 19.6)
• The overall assessment was that governance in
  Namibia improved slightly between 2001 (five
  years ago) and 2006 (now)
• As expected, government performance in some
  principles and arenas was assessed to be better
  than in others

8
Findings (III)

• PRINCIPLES
• DECENCY (Rules are implemented without harming
  people), ACCOUNTABILITY (Political
  decision-makers are responsible for their
  actions), and PARTICIPATION (The degree of
  involvement and ownership by affected
  stakeholders) all received relatively high
  scores
• EFFICIENCY (Use of limited resources for
  greatest output) stands out as a more
  problematic aspect of governance in Namibia
• Namibias public sector has a reputation of
  inefficiency
• Several respondents complained about public
  servants laziness, incompetence and
  discrimination against certain ethnic groups and
  the poor
• Most respondents felt that the system of
  recruitment and promotion in the civil service
  was not merit-based
• Nepotism, favoritism and the tendency to make
  political motivated appointments have been
  criticized by the respondents as obstacles to
  efficiency in the public service

9
Findings (IV)

• With regard to the ARENAS of governance, CIVIL
  SOCIETY received the highest scores
• Most WIPs gave high ratings to freedom of
  association and expression
• However, respondents believe that, although
  constitutional rights are respected, civil
  society does not really give inputs into policy
  making
• Some respondents say that civil society is denied
  to give these inputs, others believe that civil
  society is just not well enough organized to do
  so
• The comments also show that, although the freedom
  of association has not been directly violated,
  citizens fear to be associated with certain NGOs
  that have a reputation for being critical of
  government
• BUREAUCRACY stands out as the most problematic
  governance arena. Given the overlap between the
  indicators for BUREAUCRACY Arena and those for
  EFFICIENCY Principle, the suggested
  explanations are already given above

10
Findings (V)

• The GENERAL QUESTIONS section explores the
  relationship between the perceptions of
  governance in general and views on specific
  governance issues
• The following variables seem to be drivers of
  governance perceptions
• Is there a meaningful separation of powers in the
  country? Dominant party state since 1994!
• Does the government care for the poorest 20 of
  the population? High gini-coefficient!
• Is the cultural and ethnic make-up of the country
  of importance? Post-apartheid state!
• These findings suggest that the assessment of
  governance has been affected by historical and
  political developments, as well as by
  socio-economic factors.
• It clearly demonstrates that governance
  performance relates to local conditions, and,
  above all, that the context matters

11
Conclusion dissemination and usage of results
(I)

• WGA survey Namibia 2006 reaches six main
  conclusions
• Namibias overall scores correspond with other
  international cross-country surveys
• Namibias governance climate continued to be
  influenced by the legacies of apartheid rule and
  the liberation struggle
• Views are shaped by intense partisanship and
  inequality of income distribution
• Government WIPs generally rated governance in
  Namibia more favorably than non-government
  experts
• Favoritism and the tendency to make politically
  motivated appointments were obstacles to
  efficiency in the public service
• In conclusion, factors that played a major role
  in the outcome of the assessment are historical
  and political developments, as well as
  socio-economic factors

12
Conclusion dissemination and usage of results
(II)

• The real strength of this survey appears to be on
  the country level, as this assessment is most
  relevant for national stakeholders
• The WGA does not only guarantee local ownership,
  it also guarantees the participation of
  government WIPs buy-in
• Dissemination strategies
• Media stakeholder workshop
• Postal and personal distribution to community
  libraries, archives, government representatives,
  civil society activities, academia and interested
  citizens
• Media coverage
• Free download on website www.nid.org.na

13
Conclusion dissemination and usage of results
(III)

• WGA results in Namibia used as a tool for civic
  action by the NID (no complementing data
  available)
• Usage of results on the arena CIVIL SOCIETY
• To lobby donor community to support programmes
  aiming at strengthening the interaction between
  civil society and selected government
  institutions
• Incorporation of results in academic papers on
  the role of civil society in Namibia e.g.
  presentation at Vision 2020 conference
  (Windhoek, August 2009)
• Usage of results on the arena BUREAUCRACY and the
  principle EFFICIENCY
• To lobby donor community to support the NIDs
  Zero Tolerance for Corruption Campaign ZTfCC in
  general
• Tailor-made integrity-related training workshops
  for civil servants and local authorities
  specifically

14
Thank you very much for your attention

• Contact
• Justine Hunter hunter_at_nid.org.na
• Namibia Institute for Democracy www.nid.org.na
• The WGA research report was funded by