POTENTIALS PAPER- Deepening Democracy as a priority for future international AADK programming

Transcription

1 POTENTIALS PAPER- Deepening Democracy as a priority for future international AADK programming

2 One-page version for Strategy Day There is strong potential for AADK to define a niche in promoting institutional/policy change to Deepen Democracy in the coming strategy, to complement programming to promote redistribution through progressive taxation to finance gender responsive public services. We compared the potential of five sub-themes that could provide further thematic focus to programming and campaigning on deepening democracy, using these criteria: Alignment with AA International strategy AADK experience in supporting international policy dialogue AADK experience in support to local and national programming/ campaigning/advocacy Potential for policy/institutional change in partnership countries Potential for international policy advocacy Alignment with Danida priorities (tentative based on draft policy) Potential for other donor support Potential to organize with social movements in global South around these issues from local to international level This analysis suggests that one area stands out for its potential across the criteria: Defending political rights and their expression by civil society (assembly, association, expression, right to information) It suggests that three other areas also have strong potential, but perhaps with some questions on certain criteria: Promoting stronger, more inclusive participation in elections Promoting decentralization processes to increase authority and participation at local government levels Civic education in public education To simplify further, it may be possible to incorporate work to promote decentralization with the theme around more participatory, inclusive electoral processes, by including a focus on the representativeness and accountability of political leaders at local level as part of that work. We could address other aspects of this issue through advocacy for better public services. In that case the scope within this area could include: - Stronger more inclusive participation in electoral processes at national and local level - Improved protection of civil and political rights for civil society organizations especially human rights defenders - Improved civic education in the public education system To realise this potential, there are several key steps that are urgent: Reach decisions on partnering with selected AA country offices in the global south based on their level of interest and their capacity/track record in this area Co-develop the programme idea further with AA offices and other potential external allies and partners Develop a persuasive and technically excellent proposal for future Danida funding incorporating a significant thematic component on this topic, complete with sharply articulated results and indicators Ensure that the programme design for deepening democracy effectively brings together different modalities around a purpose particularly Global Platforms, P4C resources, programme funding, TCDC training programmes, and programme management and policy expertise from AADK staff. Seek a delegation to exercise formal leadership in developing this thematic programming area within the AA Federation through the transition process in

3 Executive Summary - One potential for AADK s new strategy is to focus thematically on Deepening Democracy. - We have been discussing Democracy in two ways as a potential - first as a very broad framing device potentially for the whole AADK strategy. This would rest on a very rich, fulsome definition of democracy in which people enjoy substantive (economic and social) equality and ability to participate, there is strong defence against discrimination, effective formal institutions for negotiating the direction of governments and societies, and rich and diverse types of civil society organizations. Whatever issues we take up here are informed by this broad understanding of democracy. - It is also understood that our approach to achieving larger structural change is through organizing. We are taking that broad frame and understanding of Democracy and our way of working somewhat for granted here and moving onto a narrower question that we don t have an AAI or an AADK answer to yet. - The core question here is: if we treat Deepening Democracy in this paper as a narrower and distinctive programming area (separate from redistribution through progressive taxation to finance gender responsive public services), in which we are organizing people to achieve institutional and policy changes to create a better enabling institutional framework for democracy, what specific sub-themes could we focus on? Which have the most potential? - To give some structure to the discussion, we started the analysis with setting up some loosely defined sub-themes that look at different institutional aspects of democracy to test against one another for their potential. Where we find differences in the potential between them, we aim to highlight it - because we have more experience, there is more openning to change, there is more support from other stakeholders, etc. In some cases it isn t clear that one area stands out versus another as having more potential. - This paper prepared by Secretariat staff is one tool to bring together the staff s thinking on how programming on deepening democracy could be defined - there has been inputs from many staff but very limited chance for Garett/author for engagement on the analysis and findings as of today. This conversation will continue as a key part of defining the funding application to Danida, and a broader AA Federation discussion will likely continue in 2017 based on the new international strategy and definition of thematic focus included there. - The focus in this paper is on the AADK international programme; a separate and complementary paper on the potential democracy work in Denmark is under preparation. - At this stage, the assumption is that the different modalities established by AADK for international work (programme funds, capacity development modalities, supporting international coordination/advocacy/campaigns) would all potentially be brought to bear on this theme. Stocktaking - The thinking on Deepening Democracy as a stand-alone theme for programming has evolved over the last AA International and AADK strategic period. - In the AA International and AADK strategic period that is closing, Democratic Governance was primarily seen as working to improve the governance and delivery of public services, and to improve taxation systems, and secondarily as a way or working or cross-cutting approach to other themes (such as women s rights, education, agriculture/land rights). Concern grew through the period with Shrinking Political Space as an contextual risk and challenge for all of ActionAid s work given our Human Rights Based Approach theory of change, and AADK actively supported AA Federation efforts to analyse the problem and possible responses. - Through dialogue on the international strategy, where AADK was a strong facilitator and leader, the new AA International Strategy has maintained an thematic objective on democratic 3

4 governance, but has expanded the definition beyond tax and gender responsive public services to look more broadly at the accountability of state institutions, expanding political space, and supporting human rights defenders as thematic sub-areas as well. This still leaves many questions as to the shared international focus of the AA Federation - how more precisely will we promote these changes? - The International Strategy, with significant influence and support from AADK, has also put an increased emphasis on partnering with social movements, building on AA experience with an HRBA (which many see much like governance as a cross-cutting approach) and a feminist perspective. - AADK and existing partner countries have started scoping out a theme apart from public services and taxation which we commonly call Deepening Democracy - and have started considering different sub-themes we could pursue. This paper develops that thinking further. - Although AADK and the federation mainly focussed on Democratic Governance as public services and tax in this strategic period, on the margins there has been some work to promote democracy that falls outside these boxes. It is not well documented as the incentive in recent years has been to document tax and public services results. - At national and local level in AADK partners countries, AADK has diverse experience supporting organizing around stronger participation in electoral processes and promoting decentralization. AADK has more ad hoc experience supporting the protection of political and civil rights at national and local level during recent years, but there was more work on this before the merger, and it is recognized increasingly within the ActionAid federation as a need given the challenges of shrinking political space. We have limited experience supporting the development of independent media as in institution- we mainly engage with media as partners in generating public debate on other policy issues, and defend media s freedom of expression with allies on an ad hoc basis. AAI has a body of work under the Education theme on civic education at the school level - it is integrated in the Promoting Rights in Schools approach through a focus on child participation in school governance, and human rights education in school curricula. There was previously work by MS before the merger on this issue in Uganda, but it was some time ago. - International policy engagement on democracy has been limited to date as it hasn t been a strategic priority. We don t know the terrain well. The main efforts recently have been through the Shrinking Political Space working group supported by AA Denmark, which has had some engagement with international bodies and profiled the issue in civil society forums (like WSF), which is mainly focussed on defending political rights for civil society. AADK has won a grant from EC to engage in policy dialogue at AU, ECOWAS, SADC and EAC levels on implementation of the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance which will start in 2017 which means AADK and partners are already to engage in those spaces. Overview of the External Environment - In AADK partner countries: Global democratic trends are discouraging with limited global progress on democracy and comparative indicators showing regression in many countries. Specifically in AADK partner countries, we observe that most are in the middle-of-the-pack in democratic development, with exceptions being Myanmar and Zimbabwe that score notably lower on global indices than the others. Overall, AADK has more international experience working internationally in what could be characterized as partly-free, problematic electoral democracies. The rate of change in these countries was generally incremental over a five year period - with somewhat more rapid change in Myanmar and Zimbabwe- but we don t see dramatic jumps in a five year period, incremental change is the norm. - Danida focus: The area of Deepening Democracy is prioritized in Danida s draft strategy. When it comes to the sub-themes under consideration here, the defence of political rights and space for civil society stands out as one that is very explicitly prioritized by Danida. The other 4

5 sub-theme can be argued to align easily given Denmark s commitment to the overall international human rights framework, and to a strong support for a participatory version of democracy in which people are actively involved in both formal and informal political processes. They strongly highlight women s rights. - Other donors: The institutional funding landscape - EC and other donors - is quite favourable towards governance programming, although the details of focus and alignment within the Governance area matter, and we can t do a more detailed analysis here. - Danish CSO sector: Looking at the Danish CSO sector engaged in international work, we find that because HRBA has become the norm, there are elements of deepening democracy work in the international strategy of many Danish organizations. There are a shorter list of organizations where we see stronger alignment between their strategic priorities and competencies and the sub-themes here, including 3F, LO-FTF, Africa Contact, Amnesty International, Disabled People s Organisation Denmark, Ghana Friendship Groups, International Media Support, Oxfam Ibis and Sustainable Energy. This gives some potential for consortia. It also indicates that there is an open niche, for example when it comes to expertise on promoting participation around electoral processes and promoting decentralization, where the Danish space is not crowded. - International policy spaces: There are potential global and regional policy spaces to take up these democracy issues. It is a give that through a new EC-funded project, AADK will work to engage with the African Union on the Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance, including subregional engagement with ECOWAS, EAC and SADC. There is potential to engage systematically with the Human Rights Council - especially given Denmarks candidacy for and to link national campaigns to the Universal Periodic Review process. AADK could also explore engagement in the Open Government Forum, a multi-stakeholder space which centres around generating governance reform action plans and monitoring their implementation. It depends somewhat on the choices of focus countries as not all countries are signed on to this process. - Overall, there is already a strong international normative framework in place through human rights conventions to work on electoral processes and political rights. An internationally agreed normative framework for decentralization (putting more decision making authority at local government level) is not so clear, nor is any international normative framework for building media independent of government and corporate interests (although freedom of expression is defined). There are elements of civic education through public schools built into the human rights and right to education normative framework, but it is not a high policy dialogue focus at international level compared with issues like access, financing and antiprivatisation. - For international civil society spaces, the Inequality Alliance is a new convening space. With partners there including Amnesty and Civicus it is feasible that some of these sub-themes could be taken up as joint priorities as part of a broader struggle for equality but it is undecided. ActionAid has already used World Social Forum as a space for dialogue on political rights and expanding/defending space for civil society action. ActionAid has also been active in the Citizens Charter process, a process of civil society alliance building creating its own dialogue on political and civil rights. Scenario We make certain assumptions: - We know AADK will lead implementation of an EC proposal in this thematic area, and assume AADK will be able to raise significant Danida funding to continue work in this area. - We assume that the existing international programming modalities developed by AADK (programme funds, P4C, GPs) will continue to evolve to support this area of work. 5

6 - We also assume that the foundation of any work will be partnering with people s organizations, social movements, and other CSOs in alliances to organize around achieving structural change (in power, institutions, legislation, policies, resource allocation). - This table summarizes the potentials of different sub-themes under Deepening Democracy under consideration thus-far. Criteria for assessing potential as subthemes in the next strategic period More participatory and transparent electoral processes Decentralizatio n- devolution of authority including financial authority, to more participatory local governments Improving the implementatio n of political rights key for civil society activism (freedom of assembly, association, expression, right to information) Supporting the development of independent media where people can be critically informed on democratic governance processes and issues Integrating improved civic education in the public education system (reflecting human rights and democratic values) Alignment with AA International strategy Not explicit, implicit in approach to more accountable government institutions and expanding political space Not explicit, implicit in more accountable institutions, expanding political space, and commitment to geographic rootedness Explicitly supports this area, mentions human rights defenders specifically, an HRD framework is under development in AAI Not explicit, limited development of this idea within the Federation Not explicit - but implicit in rights based understanding of quality public education, a sub-issue there not highlighted in the International Strategy AADK experience in supporting international policy dialogue No - although new EC project will generate this experience at regional and AU level in Africa No- although existing partner countries see potential in SADC region, and it may come into the EC funded project Yes- support to Shrinking Political Space advocacy / engagement in 2015/2016, mainly in Africa region. More to be gained in EC/pan african project No- but will gain experience through new EC funded programme in Africa No- but AA/Education community very active and effective in CSO alliances and at Education tables on other issues AADK experience in support to local and national programming/ campaigning/a dvocacy Yes- diverse experience across countries Yes- diverse experience across countries Yes- but more ad hoc than other areas Limited - specific moments defending freedom of expression, not well developed Pre-merger - for AAI strands of this agenda are integrated in the Promoting Rights in Schools approach applied at institutional level in many countries Potential for policy/instituti onal change in partnership countries Yes- but incremental and risky, and depends on country specifics Yes- but incremental and risky and depends on country specifics Yes- but incremental and risky an depends on country specifics Highly variable depending on partner country Yes - but not well scoped out, also AA does not do handson curriculum development as a rule but supports 6

7 Governments to do so Potential for international policy advocacy Yes- leveraging strong existing normative framework Yes- by invoking some human rights commitments, but no clear and direct normative framework as to level of decentralization Yes- leveraging strong existing normative framework No- there is not an explicit normative frame around the best structure of media sector and it is unlikely to emerge Yes- but would mean escalating this issue in dialogue on quality education where it is one sub-point amongst many others Alignment with Danida priorities (tentative based on draft policy) Yes Yes Yes - strong specific support for defending civil society space Yes - but implicit Yes- but implicit Potential for other donor support Yes - although need to find niche vs. more technical electoral democracy organizations Yes - although need to find niche vs. technical organizations focussed on public administration Yes - although need to find niche vs. classic human rights (legalistic, monitoring) organizations Limitedinstitutional donors put very little into this area compared with other governance sectors Yes - bridges Education and Governance sector so fit with donor strategies would need exploring, needs more work to sort out Potential to organize with social movements in global South around these issues from local to international level Yes Yes, potentially Yes No AA has strong alliances with NGOs and social movements in the education sector from local to international level which likely would embrace this issue Best and worst lessons: Best: AADK had a significant success in 2016 by leading 8 ActionAid offices in Africa plus five external partners to win a grant from the EC for a project on mobilizing civil society support for implementation of the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance. The approach is to engage youth and civil society organizations in more dialogue on their own government s adherence to agreed democratic principles, and to engage in campaigning at local, national and international level. This proves AADK s ability to co-develop programmes in this area and to bring together methodological experience and modalities (P4C, Global Platforms, programme management) into a strong programme that links from local to international level. Worst: AADK had separated its conceptualization and implementation of Capacity Development and the start-up of the Global Platforms to a high degree from developing a shared political understanding and more programmatic definition of change we were pursuing in the previous strategic period. This 7

8 also meant there were distinct communities in AADK and externally in the federation working in parallel, in ways that would become very visible to other AA offices and their partners even at local level. This created many other problems including ongoing challenges ensuring that capacity development activities stay relevant to the overall political project of the AA Federation, and that they don t take on a different and disconnected logic. This is an old problem and AADK has gone a long way to reduce the gap in the last two years, and the discussion on carving this new area is much more jointly taken across teams and modalities. Conclusions: There is strong potential for AADK to define a niche in promoting institutional/policy change to deepen democracy in the coming strategy, to complement programming to promote redistribution through progressive taxation to finance gender responsive public services. This analysis suggests that one area stands out for its potential across the criteria: Defending political rights and their expression by civil society (assembly, association, expression, right to information) It suggests that three other areas also have strong potential, but perhaps with some questions on certain criteria: - Promoting stronger, more inclusive participation in elections Promoting decentralization processes to increase authority and participation at local government levels Civic education in public education This picture suggests that - Promoting independent media as a stand-alone policy and systemic issue has less potential and we don t recommend AADK putting more effort in that direction. At international policy level, the clearest route forward would be to utilize the existing international normative framework where it is strong and clear, and to focus more effort on bringing states to account on these standards. This approach would work for: Stronger, more inclusive participation in electoral processes Political rights and their expression by civil society Civic education in schools, although the prioritization of this commitment within education versus other issues in the education sector (financing, anti-privatisation) would be a major strategic choice for AA. Therefore if we want to simplify further, it may be to incorporate work to promote decentralization with the theme around more participatory, inclusive electoral processes, by including a focus on the representativeness and accountability of political leaders at local level as part of that work. In that case the scope within this area would include: - Stronger more inclusive participation in electoral processes at national and local level - Improved protection of civil and political rights for civil society organizations especially human rights defenders - Improved civic education in the public education system 8

9 Introduction: - One potential for AADK s new strategy is to focus thematically on Deepening Democracy. - We have been discussing Democracy as a very broad framing device potentially for the whole AADK strategy. This would rest on a very rich, fulsome definition of democracy in which people enjoye substantive (economic and social) equality, there is strong defence against discrimination, and formal institutions for negotiating the direction of governments and societies. We are taking that broad frame and understanding of Democracy somewhat for granted here and moving onto a narrower question that we don t have an AA or AADK answer to yet. - The core question here is: if we treat Deepening Democracy in this paper as a narrower and distinctive programming area (separate from redistribution through progressive taxation to finance gender responsive public services), in which we are organizing people to achieve institutional and policy changes to create a better enabling institutional framework for democracy, what specific sub-themes could we focus on? Which have the most potential? - To give some structure to the discussion, we started the analysis with setting up some loosely defined sub-themes that look at different institutional aspects of democracy to test against one another for their potential. Where we find differences in the potential between them, we aim to highlight it - because we have more experience, there is more openning to change, there is more support from other stakeholders, etc. In some cases it isn t clear that one area stands out versus another as having more potential. - This paper prepared by Secretariat staff is one tool to bring together the staff s thinking on how programming on deepening democracy could be refined towards sub-themes that connect an organizing approach to real challenges we can address at local level, national level and international level. This conversation will also be a key part of defining the funding application to Danida, and a broader AA Federation discussion will likely continue in 2017 based on the new international strategy and definition of thematic focus included there. - The focus in this paper is on the AADK international programme; a separate and complementary paper on the potential democracy work in Denmark is under preparation. - At this stage, the assumption is that the different modalities established by AADK for international work (programme funds, capacity development modalities, supporting international coordination/advocacy/campaigns) would all potentially be brought to bear on this theme. 9

10 Stocktaking: What has AADK done in this area together with the AA Federation and partners? AA International and AADK s changing policy and strategy approach to Deepening Democracy: AAI and AADK thinking on Deepening Democracy as a stand-alone area of intervention has evolved over the last strategic period, and AADK has been a major stakeholder in the broader Federation discussion. This section aims to summarize how AA s strategic thinking about deepening democracy has shifted over the period of the last international and AADK strategic period. Deepening Democracy as a stand-alone issue was not clearly prioritized in the international or Danish strategy, although as we will see below, there were activities in these broad areas. This section aims to capture the flow of discussion in brief that has led AADK to consider it as a prominent thematic focus for the new AADK strategy. AA International strategic approach to deepening democracy The previous AA international strategy - People s Action to End Poverty, is coming to a close. It included five strategic objectives, one of which is democratic governance. AADK was a major influence on including this thematic area as a stand-alone programming area. The two key change promises in the strategy defined much of the common programming and understanding across AA offices over this period: PROMISE 3: By 2017, through holding governments and corporates to account, we will have secured improvements in the quality, equity and gender responsiveness of public services for five million people living in poverty. PROMISE 4: By 2017 people and their movements supported by ActionAid will have won significant victories in achieving fair redistribution of resources to finance public policies that reduce poverty. Promise four meant to encompass work on tax policies and social protection. Underneath those headlines, there was also a common AA federation interest in right to information and anticorruption as key thematic areas. Right to information and anticorruption are potentially stand-alone themes, separate from public services and tax, as they involve discussions on crosscutting legislation and governance institutions and processes that are cut across specific public services or sectors. The strategy was based on a Human Rights Based Approach including processes of empowerment, solidarity, campaigning, and developing alternatives. The line between adopting an HRBA and adopting Democratic Governance as a way of working is nuanced - so there has been an ongoing discussion during this strategy period on whether Governance is in fact an objective in itself, or an approach to achieving results on other issues (land, agriculture, women s rights). 10

11 The AADK narrative on deepening democracy in the current strategy AADK s approach to Deepening Democracy was built on the foundation of the Building Local Democracy programme. The results of that programme were framed around people organizing to participate more actively in invited spaces and to connect better with local governance institutions. There was a sense that tracking the level of participation in governance institutions became frustrating at some point, because the benefits to those participating - from improved governance responsiveness- was not captured. The current strategy was prepared against that backdrop. The AADK strategy is closely aligned with the second objective in the international AA strategy and has focussed on gender responsive public services; tax justice; capacity development; and on contributing to integrating HRBA more deeply into programme approaches across ActionAid. Thus AADK has approached governance both as a substantive area and as a cross-cutting approach during the strategy period. The English version of the strategy from 2015 includes a concept of democracy as follows: We focus on democracy both as a basic human right and as a means to eradicate poverty. For AADK, democracy is about ensuring that all people women and men alike have maximum influence on their own lives. It is also a question of having legislation and institutions that ensure that all interests can be heard and handled fairly when finding solutions to personal and societal problems. Democracy is not only about governance and formal structures; it is a basic principle underlying all inter-personal relations from family to national level and is based on fundamental values such as freedom, equality, and respect for human rights. The AADK strategy includes key change promises linked to the key change promises in the international strategy. Under the key change promise on improving public services, one of three subobjectives is expanding political space: That Action Aid develops methodologies to support organising and mobilising under restrictive political conditions and that ActionAid programmes and partners are increasingly politically active in opposing reforms that reduce the potential for people living in poverty and their organisations to be politically involved. The objective on youth in the current AADK strategy is also very much a part of AADK thinking on democracy, as it is focussed strongly on youth as change agents: Strategic objective 4: AADK will contribute to ActionAid s efforts to mobilise five million young change agents in the struggle against poverty and to build the capacity of youth organisations and young change agents to work for democratic and sustainable ways of development. Facing the Shrinking Political Space challenge Thinking on democratic governance issues has evolved in reaction to the changing international environment over the course of the Strategy period. Alarmed by the increasing risks and backlash in many AA countries, the ILT established a Task Force on Shrinking Political Space in The trend was seen as a major operational risk to AA. The Task Force has received direct AADK staff, P4C and budgetary support from AADK since The Task Force worked to develop research on the trends with regard to SPS in many AA countries. 11

12 The team also developed analysis on the underlying drivers for these trends, and a policy paper. The thematic focus coming out of that dialogue includes: - Improving our support for human rights defenders when they are in trouble with authorities, especially those linked to processes and organization AA is supporting. - Engaging more actively in alliances with other progressive civil society organisations to take this as a policy issue, framing the issue in relation to defending political rights such as the right to assembly, right to association, freedom of expression, freedom of thought. Strengthened Federation-wide interest in linking better to Social Movements AA has a history of working with people s organizations and social movements. Depending on the office, AA has a mix of partnerships with membership-based organizations of these types, NGOs, think-tanks, and varying insider/outsider relationships with governments. There has been momentum to increase AA s federation-wide focus on working with social movements that is now reflected in the new international strategy. AADK has been a strong supported of this strategy throughout the international strategy development process. AADK has also consistently linked social movements to working with youth as change agents. At times, thinking on supporting youth and social movements has merged into thinking on supporting youth movements. At others, AADK has put forward a view that separates the two issues somewhat, thinking more about youth participation in youth movements, intergenerational learning between elder and youth activists, or alliances between youth movements and other movements. Building alternatives - work in progress The international strategy identified building alternatives as an integral part of the overall HRBA to be applied across all thematic work. In practice, there has been disagreement over what constitutes an alternative. The International Secretariat gradually developed a definition of Alternatives based on a list of criteria, and surveyed staff broadly across the federation for ideas of alternatives that would meet those criteria in There has then been a gradual effort to write those up in a similar format. In the Democratic Governance area, there has been some work on writing these alternatives up on three areas: an alternative approach to Tax policy, Generating more and better jobs through use of industrial policies and Gender Responsive Public Services as an alternative to neoliberal and private-sector oriented discourse on how to provide services to people living in poverty. The exercise has never been highly resourced and the interest of the International Platform on Democratic Governance members has been weak. Despite good efforts to clear up the different interpretations of what an Alternative is, there is still not a ready and easy consensus within AA. There are members of the federation who describe propositional policy influencing (through advocacy or campaigning) as promoting alternatives. In this case, they are produced through various types of research, participatory dialogue, and analysis of existing policies. There is also a notion that alternatives are a type of knowledge produced through participatory processes together with progressive social movements. The ambition in this case is higher - to produce blueprints for economic systems, political systems or institutions, that are a distinct departure from existing systems. 12

13 In practice, AA has not collectively or systematically produced these alternatives on electoral processes, decentralized governance, defense of political and civic rights, or independent media at a federation level. There are many elements of an approach to civic education in public schools included in the Promoting Rights in Schools toolkit but it has not been prioritized as an alternative to promote. Co-developing the narrative on Deepening Democracy through dialogue on the 2017 Danida frame application AADK worked collaboratively with the partner AA countries receiving Danida frame funding and key stakeholders in the International Secretariat to develop the frame application for This dialogue took place in Q3 of The dialogue aimed to anticipate changes in Danida s funding strategy, but also to anticipate shifts in the international AA strategy to include an explicit focus on political rights, democratic institutions and increased engagement with social movements. In addition to work on progressive taxation and gender responsive public services, the framework generated through this discussion includes a section on deepening democracy as an additional thematic area. Within that theme, distinct subthemes were developed that target somewhat more specific areas of democratic reform: - Engagement with electoral process - Promoting decentralization - Protecting and promoting political rights, with a special interest in freedom of expression or perhaps right to information, the discussion has shifted - Supporting social movements for their potential to expand democratic space and to generate alternatives This includes one possible framing for subthemes within the broader area of deepening democracy and is the basis for the new international project under preparation. We will build further on it below. The new International Strategy 2028 s embraces Deepening Democracy as a stand-alone programming area The AA International Strategy 2028, which which was approved by the Assembly in December 2016, frames democratic governance as a cross-cutting way of working that is relevant to all other thematic work. The strategy also includes four thematic focus areas for the first 3-4 years of the strategy. The second objective is drafted as below. The text that presents work that is somewhat distinctive or beyond a focus on redistribution through progressive taxation and public services as in the previous strategy is boldfaced for the purpose of this paper: Priority 2: Ensure increased civic participation and state accountability for the redistribution of resources and delivery of quality, gender-responsive public services ActionAid will work with people living in poverty, people s organisations and social movements and activist groups to increase civic participation in decision making that shapes delivery of public services. We will advocate for the participation of women, young people and excluded groups in decision making and governance processes affecting them. We will also work to ensure democratic and accountable States and governance institutions wherever we work and increased accountability from corporations. Our agenda will include promoting redistributive policies that facilitate more 13

14 equitable sharing of power and resources. We will advocate for public investment in and accountability for delivering quality, gender responsive public services, especially public education, and challenge the privatisation of these services. We will advocate for these services to be financed through progressive taxation systems, as well as implementation of fairer national and global tax rules. ActionAid will work to protect and expand political space for civil society organising and participation in democratic decision making, as well as support human rights defenders. The international strategy focusses on working more closely with social movements, and focussing our efforts on working with women and youth. The theory of change continues to be based on organizing people to shift power - invisible, hidden and visible power. The strategy embraces a feminist perspective. Reviewing AADK s international programmatic work on Deepening Democracy This section aims to give examples of the threads of work on Deepening Democracy that forms a base for expanding and focusing this work in the new strategy. International level work within the Federation and externally: Denmark has made a major contributed to developing the focus on this theme in the AA federation, - AADK took on a delegation for Strategic Objective 2 of the strategy starting in AADK pioneered thinking about how to structure an International Platform and Working Groups. AADK has also supported the functioning of that structure with a strong and diverse team of dedicated staff, and a budget drawn from flexible Danida frame funds. This has created the enabling conditions for 6 Working Groups to pursue projects on governancerelated themes. - The groups most relevant to Deepening Democracy as an emerging stand-alone thematic area are the Shrinking Political Space group and the methodology-related groups on best practices in participation and accountability at local level, linking LRP to national level policy change, and using ICT for knowledge sharing (the networked toolbox). - AADK facilitated dialogue of the International Platform on Democratic Governance on the new international strategy. AADK both provided the secretariat function to create an effective dialogue, and also participated actively in shaping the conclusions of those discussions. The platform generated a joint proposal on recognizing Deepening Democracy as a focus area in the new international strategy, and a very condensed version of the IP recommendation is now integrated in the international strategy alongside work on public services financed through progressive taxation as summarized above. People4Change has contributed to linking the international work to national and local efforts through highly specialised Advisors placed across the federation. The Advisors have been supporting a number of strategic priorities and in the later part of the strategy period they have played an increasingly important role for the working groups under the SO2 IP. Currently 14 Advisors are working on capacity building and connecting the federation. This has included dedicated support to the SPS working group, and a major contribution to cross- 1 Yearly heads; an alternative number could be 83 multi-year placements but that wouldn t reflect that some Advisors work for up to five years providing a substantial contribution. 14

15 cutting work on methodologies focussed on advocacy and campaigning for local government accountability. AADK has actively supported the increased focus on engaging with and supporting social movements as part of the federation. For example, the Beautiful Rising project has been a tangible process for linking to an international community of activists and social movements and generating a toolbox where the community can share strategy and tactics. AADK has built international relationships and profile that are significant for the overall Federation through this process. AAI and AADK presence in international policy spaces on Deepening Democracy Overall, because Deepening Democracy in the sense we are using it here was not a strategic priority, AAI and AADK engagement in international policy spaces on these issues has been limited. For example, AADK has invested many policy, campaigning and communications resources in UN processes, such as the post 2015 agenda, leading up to the SDGs and Agenda 2030 as well as Rio+20 and financing for development. In our work influencing Danish positions in these UN processes, we have largely focused on issues that linked up with AAI campaigning priorities (land, agriculture, tax, corporate accountability), and therefore not really following our own program focus on governance. In the post 2015-process it was a Danish government priority to work for a strong SDG16 (peace, institutions, accountability), but mostly focusing on peace and using accountability as a bargaining chip in negotiations with developing countries demanding aid, technology transfer and capacity building. There are, however, threads of ongoing AAI and AADK work that are relevant to considering potentials. Shrinking Political Space engagement : As there was an explicit choice to face and address this challenge to the federation, there was also a Task Force/working group with an explicit mandate and support and resources from AADK to engage in policy dialogue on the challenge. AA representativesprimarily Arthur Larok, CD Uganda - engaged in many forums to build alliances with Civil SOciety partners at to raise the issue with accountability holders. The SPS group has engaged in many civil society driven international spaces, notably: Recently generating a Civic Charter and on developing a network of supportive CSO allies for those principles. There was a launch event for the Charter in late 2016 in Germany where AA/Uganda played a prominent role. This issue was also prominent in ActionAid s efforts at the previous two World Social Forums (Tunisia and Montreal) to build alliances with other progressive social movements. CIVICUS- partner in the Inequality Alliance- is convening interested organizations around defending political space again in February 2017 and AA will follow up on this work. The SPS group has engaged in many international (governmental) spaces as well, such as: Africa Union, Political Affairs Department SADC 15

16 UN-UNDEF East African Community Social movement meeting in Johannesburg: In June 2016, 27 youth activists and movement representatives from 23 countries, meet at Rustlers Valley in South Africa to share stories, success and challenges and deepen their analysis on the current landscape of our common political narrative. The meeting was co-hosted by ActionAid International, ActionAid Denmark and Beautiful Rising. The event was focussed on developing an intersectional analysis through spending time to share each other's stories and struggles. The participants have a shared political narrative and critique of the Neoliberal, patriarchal and Capitalist system(s). This was felt also as a particular connectedness to a larger struggle. The dialogue at the meeting wasn t focussed on alliances around specific institutional reforms to democratic institutions, so it wasn t a space to make the kind of prioritization we are discussing here. It was notable that there was an organic concern with defending political and civil rights and the ability of activists to take action. A facilitated space for cross movement learning is a specific role that needs attention. INGOs and NGOs have a position in social struggles and the task is to be clear in defining this specific role and ensure we are not taking the space or resources of movements we want to work with. This event demonstrated that ActionAid can have a supporting role in building networks and supporting an infrastructure of coaching and learning between movements. National and local level programming: Although the sub-themes under Deepening Democracy were not explicit priorities, AADK has supported programme work on these issues over the last strategic period. They are often not well documented because they were not tied directly to tax or public services results. We are providing some illustrative examples of work supported by AADK in the Danida partnership AA countries to give an idea of practical programming experience that we can build on. Electoral processes: Zambia: Uganda: Elections 2016: In Uganda, civil society including ActionAid Uganda with support from AADK has been very active in the build up to the election (February 2016) over 2015 and 2016 and a number of facilities were put in place to observe the elections including a Citizens Election Observation Network (CEON). ActionAid Uganda were part of a broader civil society campaign for peace to prevail and supported a group of religious leaders from all denominations to spread the message of peace. They also supported youth groups to monitor what was going on across the country from a safe location, a Women s Situation Room (WSR) was set up at the Sheraton Hotel in the capital doing the same. Further ActionAid Uganda where very active in the electoral process, contributing to debate on TV and other media about priorities in the elections, ranging from transparency in managing natural resources, preparing a citizens manifesto with other CSOs to calls for peaceful dialogue. After the election AAUganda is continuing to work with the following Post-Election Actions: Work with youth, women and men to engage their political leaders in the execution of their commitments for accountable leadership including Citizens surgeries. 16

17 Work with citizens to engage their leaders on the proposed constitution reforms including abandonment of the proposed change in age limits for different public servants; electoral commission term limits; among other areas Use Reflection Action tools to engage youth, women and men on barriers that prevent their genuine participation in local government planning, budgeting accountability and decision making (using ELBAG, budget/resource tracking) Engage political parties with representation at national and local level to influence their policies and positions on issues affecting youths, women and the citizens at large Actively participate in shaping and supporting the national Dialogue process in Uganda Tanzania: Youth participation in decision making and elections. During the period ActionAid Tanzania has chosen to focus more intensely on youth participation and engaging youth in national and local decision making processes. As a result youth have increasingly been participating effectively in local decision making forums such as village assemblies. In 2012 approximately 3,500 youth for instance participated in village assemblies raising youth specific recommendations, such as youth inclusion in the election and the on-going constitution-making process. In 2013 approximately a total of 1400 mainly young people (600 women and 800 men) participated in a local campaign focusing on lack of responsibility and accountability of local elected leaders conducted by the Youth CSO partners YPC and youth activists in Kibaha District. The campaign included several events such as Citizen Information Sharing Meetings, a Music and Drama festival, media talk shows, District accountability forums and round-table discussions with MPS, councilors, and district officers as well as interface meetings with relevant authorities. Decentralization Zimbabwe: In Zimbabwe, a new Constitution was passed in 2013 with decentralisation as a key component. Section 264 of the Constitution lays a firm basis for a devolved system of local governance. Civil society organisations including ActionAid Zimbabwe have been proponents of people-centred decentralisation before and during the Constitution-making process. For instance, in 2012 a position paper on the Urban Councils Act reform was developed by the AAZimbabwe partner Combined Harare Residents Association (CHRA), which was presented to the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Local Government to push for reform to increase the participation of citizens. AAZimbabwe continues to advocate for the implementation of decentralisation as stipulated in the Constitution. However, the present Zanu-PF government is highly centralistic and has done little to implement decentralisation as laid out in Constitution. Nepal: Nepal has a quite elaborate legislative framework for decentralisation in the Local Self- Governance Act (LGSA). The government also has a programme in place for implementing the LGSA namely the Local Governance and Community Development Programme (LGCDP) which is partly funded by Government of Nepal (GoN) partly by international donors. AANepal has developed a training toolkit on civic education around the Local Self-Governance Act (LSGA) containing methodologies and tools on how communities can interact with local governments. The toolkit was initially tested and used in four AANepal operating districts and has over the years become widely used not only by ActionAid, but in Nepal in general, among others via the LGCDP, to educate partners, communities and local government officials on participatory democracy. In 2012 the Ministry of Federal Affairs and Local Development invited AANepal to prepare the Strategic Implementation Plan of outcome 1 of the Local Governance and Community Development Programme (LGCDP II) for the period of July July Outcome 1 of the LGDCPII is: Citizens and communities actively engaged with local governance actors and holding them to account. This government programme has since been implemented extensively in all districts of 17

18 Nepal. The invitation gave AANepal the opportunity to constructively engage with the Ministry of Federal Affairs and Local Development, ultimately to the benefit of local communities. Zambia working with participatory structures at local level: During the last years AA Zambia has focused on strengthening people participation as well working actively for improvement of participatory structures at local level. The structure for local governance in Zambia comprise District Councils that are made up of about 20 Ward Councillors who are elected during the national general elections to provide leadership for Ward Development Committees (WDCs). These are community structures through which development initiatives are supposed to be channelled and are made up of people coming from the different villages and/or zones. Members of the WDCs are elected by their respective communities or zones and also act as a platform for communities to influence decision making and monitor service delivery. To date, the WDCs are not functional in most areas due to a lack of legal standing as they are not constituted by any piece of legislation but through ministerial circulars or notices. The local authorities (district councils) too currently lack capacity to support the development of these structures. These WDCs have always been viewed as centres of potential opposition mobilisation hence successive governments have not been keen to activate them. This has effectively left citizens without the invited space that ought to be a conduit for their concerns and connections with the duty bearers. By reviving and working through these participatory structures, AA Zambia have tried to positively support people living in poverty to hold public officials accountable. Also, work has been initiated at district level the last years to organize and mobilize citizens in district Civil Society Platforms to provide space for preparation and dialogue on priorities and needs in the communities, which later can be presented in the invited spaces at district level e.g the District Development Coordination Committee meetings. Political rights Zambia: link to Freedom of Expression Tanzania: Zimbabwe: AADK supported AAZimbabwe with human rights defense earlier in the strategic period. Through their network of 430 human rights defenders (151 women and 279 men), ZPP (Zimbabwe Peace Project) reported and documented cases of politically motivated violence in The national newspaper The Daily News has been publishing this information and it has also been distributed to national and international stakeholders. ZPP monitor and report on human rights in its monthly human rights monitoring report which is shared broadly. Training human rights monitors on international conventions on human rights has impacted positively on the ability of human rights monitors to appropriately refer victims to service providers such as the Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights. At that time, AADK also worked with the Human Right Defender NGO ZimRights on the impact of torture in communities. Independent media, and freedom of expression (particularly in the media) Mozambique: partnerships on corruption, tax, journalists. Zambia: Nalucha in open on independent media, protecting their independence. Other: Constitutional separation of powers: 18

19 Zambia- Constitution making processes : AA Zambia has since 2011 actively advocated for and participated in constitution revision processes. AA Zambia believes that most of the challenges that the country faces in an attempt to create strong institutions of governance that will guarantee service delivery and accountability are rooted in the country s inability to develop a good constitution. The citizen s enjoyment of their civil and political rights can only be facilitated through an enabling legal and political milieu. The country s constitution has been reformed in a piecemeal fashion through amendments at different periods, starting from 1968 (referendum to remove a clause that required a referendum to make constitutional amendments). By the end of 2011, the government, elected in September 2011, had initiated another process to revise the constitution through the establishment of a committee of experts who have been working on the basis of previous draft constitutions. This process currently lacks legal backing, and many citizens doubt whether this process will lead to any meaningful changes in the constitution. Under the current government, constitutional breaches abound and there is seemingly a judicial crisis as a cross section of Zambian s call to question the legality of the current acting chief justice and the government initiated tribunal of key judges has failed to take off. The legislature is also in turmoil with constant by-elections of Members of Parliament as the courts continue to nullify election results due to allegations of malpractices and government continues to poach Members of Parliament by offering them ministerial jobs. Such members either resign or are expelled from their parties leading to costly by-elections. Overall, there is a lack of separation of powers among the 3 wings of government, with the executive constantly usurping or disregarding authority of the other 2 wings. People4Change Support over the Period People4Change has supported a number of countries through both Advisor and Inspirator placements, contributing to strengthening a large number of partner organisations and improving our work at national and local level. During the strategy period Inspirators have been placed to support different areas 3. Annual quantitative surveys with among the partners and AA offices hosting Advisors and Inspirators show an overwhelming appreciation of the programme. Combined with the results from an annual qualitative impact assessment in a selected country P4C can confidently say that there is both deep and broad impact, that the programme runs efficiently and effectively resulting in concrete programmatic change. The most recent quantitative surveys show that 84-98% placements have resulted in improved outputs and long term objectives, increase efficiency of the host organization and strengthened their programme implementation. Further, it s clear that the international aspect of the programme means that Inspirators and Advisors bring outside perspectives, introduce innovative ideas and promote solidarity. In 2015 the qualitative impact assessment focussed on Uganda and in 2016 on Myanmar. There are plenty of concrete examples of how both Inspirator and Advisor placements have led to change. P4C has supported the international and Ugandan Shrinking POlitical Space working group process effectively. Many advisors have supported the roll-out of HRBA through the federation- which is very similar to working on governance as a cross-cutting approach. Although the P4C programme has focussed on public service delivery and tax issues, the modality has proved to be flexible and adaptable to supporting work on different issues. The thematic mix of advisors and inspirators has successfully shifted with changing priorities over the last strategic period. Thus it is reasonable to think that we can attract and deploy 2 Also yearly heads used as a way to reflect the number of Inspirator placements. 3 Roughly 50% of the Inspirators have supported KCP3, 10% KCP4, 15% KCP6 and 20% HRBA 19

20 Advisors and Inspirators that can support AA and partners work on the sub-themes under consideration here. P4C see a good level of interest from people with the right background. Overview of the external environment (5 pages): Democratic trends in Potential partner countries: One major consideration for AADK moving forward must be the trends, challenges and opportunities in the specific countries where AADK chooses to focus its international programming support. These countries are not yet determined, but it is useful to consider what is happening in the countries where AADK is currently engaged - through Danida frame programming and the DAPP programme- and the opportunities for change there. There are various sources of data that paint a high-level picture of trends in potential partner countries. For example, at a top line: Civicus Monitor 2016: over 3.2 billion people now live in countries where civic space is repressed or closed, with serious violations of civic space recorded in 109 countries Freedom House: 2016 recorded the tenth year of decline in global freedom by their measure Economist Intelligence Unit, State of Democracy 2015: shows overall stagnation in democratic development, with equal numbers of countries in Africa showing some improvement and some decline We have looked at three sources of data and analysis here and what they demonstrate about existing AADK partner countries. AA Shrinking Political Space survey: ActionAid s own Shrinking Political Space working group (supported by AADK) conducted a study in 2015/16 based on surveying AA offices for their own analysis of political space in their own national contexts. Thirty four of the AA federation offices responded. When asked to summarize whether political space was expanding, holding steady, or declining, 34 AA countries responded, 65% reported deteriorating space, 29% holding 6% improving By this measure, we should expect challenging conditions in most countries where AADK could work. World Bank Worldwide Governance Indicators- Voice and Accountability dimension: The World Bank measures the quality of governance in 6 dimensions in their research dataset Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI). The WGI measures trends in both industrial and developing countries around the world, and the data is gathered from survey institutes, think tanks, non-governmental organizations, international organizations and private sector firms. The WGI does not reflect the official views of the World Bank, but is rather an analysis of data from many sources. The first dimension of the WGI is Voice and Accountability. The Voice and Accountability dimension captures perceptions of the extent to which a country's citizens are able to participate in selecting their government, as well as freedom of expression, freedom of association and a free media. The Voice and Accountability relates most closely to the set of issues we consider addressing under Deepening Democracy. According to the collected data, the countries are given a score on this aspect between -2,5 and +2,5 with +2,5 being the highest score and -2,5 the lowest. 20

21 The WGI highlights that most of the existing AADK partnership countries score similarly with scores around the middle of the scale. The following range between 0 and -0.5: Bangladesh, Kenya, Lebanon, Mozambique, Nepal, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia. These scores have changed relatively little over the last strategic period. Zimbabwe is an exception with a score between -1.5 and -1.0, significantly lower than the other countries, with a slight upwards trend over the last five years. Myanmar is a greater exception with a score ranging between -2 and -1.5 on the scale, even lower than Zimbabwe and a sharper upwards trend over the period. Freedom House: The organization Freedom House produces the democracy index Freedom in the World, a report published yearly consisting of numeric values for countries as well as a shorter description. The purpose of FW is to analyze the degree of political rights and civil liberties. Freedom in the World stamps countries as either Unfree, Partly free or Free. Countries, which are stamped as Free can be seen as liberal democracies, whereas some of the countries stamped as Partly free can be seen as electoral democracies where political rights and freedoms are limited. Countries stamped as Unfree fall short on both procedural (electoral) democracy and political rights and freedoms. The organisation puts a focus on real-world rights and freedoms enjoyed by individuals, covering the actual living conditions in countries rather than formal rights only. Freedom in the World consists of 25 indicators within the two areas: political rights and civil liberties. A country is assigned two ratings on a scale of 1 to 7, one rating for political rights and one for civil liberties, with 1 representing the greatest degree of freedom and 7 the smallest degree of freedom. The average of a country s political rights and civil liberties ratings determines the overall Freedom Rating, with a status of Free (1.0 to 2.5), Partly Free (3.0 to 5.0), or Not Free (5.5 to 7.0). The summary of ratings for AADK partnership countries over the strategic period is as follows: Partly Free: Bangladesh, Kenya, Mozambique, Nepal, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Jordan and Lebanon Not Free: Myanmar Progressing from Not Free to Partly Free: Zimbabwe Regressing from Partly Free to Not Free: Uganda. Analysis: In practice, these big-picture analyses of trends in the current AADK countries give us some takeaways for considering future programming options: This data reminds us that generally changes in democratic development at macro level in any country are quite incremental over a 5 year strategic period. These ratings scales show more significant changes over the last strategic period only in Myanmar, Uganda (by Freedom House assessment only) and Zimbabwe. Promising major structural changes is very risky from an accountability perspective. However, more nuanced changes are taking place in all these countries. So there is some art needed in defining the level of changes we can expect within a four to five year programme or strategic period. AADK has more experience working with countries in a similar level of democratic development, countries that are in the middle of the pack when it comes to political 21

22 participation and respect for related rights. Surprisingly, the democratic challenges in Jordan and Lebanon are seen as more similar to other partnership countries than one might expect. AADK has more limited experience in more difficult institutional environments (with weaker environment for democratic practices), but AADK has had some successful programming there. Myanmar and Zimbabwe stand as outliers in terms of how challenging the situation is. Institutional Donors trends and funding opportunities: Danida s approach to deepening democracy: Danida s draft international assistance policy includes four thematic areas. One of them is a standalone priority linked closely to our understanding of deepening democracy: We will promote values human rights, democracy, equality. Denmark will be a visible global defender of human rights, democracy and equality. Human rights, democracy, good governance, constitutional state principles and equality are independently prioritised in the Danish development cooperation. It is also notable that they see SDG16 as a goal which is a priority to pursue in all categories of priority countries. It is also seen as a relevant goal to all of the four sub-themes in the strategy, so there is a sense in which democratic governance as framed in SDG16 is mainstreamed throughout Danida s policy thinking. If we look more closely at the text in the section on the stand-alone Human rights, democracy and equality section, and mention of the sub-themes we are considering here, there is some work to do to make the links: Electoral processes: There is a subsection on Human Rights and Democracy that states that, Citizens should be able to choose their own future and contribute to developing their own societies. Denmark will contribute to ensuring safe national conditions with strong institutions that can deliver well-functioning systems of justice, effectively fight against corruption and protect private property rights. We can read in some focus around political/electoral proceses and creating other invited spaces here, but they are not named specifically as are justice insittutiona, corruption and protection of property. Decentralization/devolution of power: There is no real direct commentary on this issue in the draft strategy. So we would have to frame this for Danida as relating to peoples inclusion in shaping their future societies. Explaining how reforms we are promoting would combat corruption could be another route. Political rights: The strategy is very explicit on the pressures on civil society organizations and Denmarks commitment to defending that space. We could very easily and directly link work in this area to their priorities. Independent media: There doesn t appear to be any direct mention of this- so it would come as part of the overall human rights areas, or perhaps media could be presented as part of civil society under threat. It would take making some links. Civic education in public education: It is not explicitly highlighted here, so we would have to make the links. We could link this to overall human rights standards - the interpretation of the right to education includes commitments to the content of education being consistent with human rights, for example. 22

23 Women s rights. One other major issue to note is that Danida includes Women s Rights/equality as a highlighted and prominent priority in the same category as human rights and democracy.this includes protection for sexual and reproductive rights and many other human rights issues. Thus there are stand alone issues here that are additional to democratic institutions and civil society space. It is notable as well that there is not much gender equality language mainstreamed in those other sections on human rights, democracy, and civil society space. Partnerships. Danida sees Danish government, civil society, political parties and the private sector working in concert to promote human rights, democracy and equality, based on making a case that it is broadly beneficial to other countries. International policy spaces. The draft fore-fronts global rules as an important frame for human rights, democracy and equality that Denmark is committed to. The draft strategy makes it explicit that Denmark is targeting a seat on the Human Rights Council from 2018 to This is useful when considering where to engage in policy discussions at international level. European Commission: AADK in cooperation with the AA International Secretariat led a successful effort to land a three year, 5 million Euro grant from the EC starting in 2017 to mobilize civil society for implementation of the African Governance Architecture. The initiative will focus more specifically on campaigning and advocacy for implementing the African Charter on Elections, Democracy and Governance. Other donors: An AA International analysis of broad institutional donor trends in Africa conducted in 2016 concluded that the general trend across institutional donors is towards supporting work related to governance, migration and population movement, skills and entrepreneurship. At the same time, they note that thematic focus is never static. In the big picture, institutional donors are relatively favourable to supporting governance programming at this moment. There are many more nuances as to how different donors interpret Democracy and legitimate programming, and what subsectors they may be interested in supporting. We don t have the resources to cover that in this paper - and it is difficult without first refining better what areas of governance AADK would like to pursue. Overall there is potential to raise institutional funding from Danida, the EC and other donors for work in this area. Potential civil society allies in Denmark: We analysed other civil society actors in Denmark and their interest in international work in this area (a longer analysis is annexed). The first reason to look into this question is that the general AAI and AADK Theory of Change is based on alliances with social movements and other civil society actors. Second, the donor landscape is changing, towards fewer, larger grants which often require/favour consortia bringing different types of expertise. Because HRBA has become a common approach across the Danish NGO sector, all Danish organizations have some aspect of strengthening local organizations and movements and supporting their empowerment and stronger participation in governance processes. Thus governance as an approach is very common currency with partners. 23

24 There are a number of organisations that stand out in relation deepening democracy that could be a source of inspiration or potential partners to AADK; 3F, LO-FTF, Africa Contact, Amnesty International, Disabled People s Organisation Denmark, Ghana Friendship Groups, International Media Support, Oxfam Ibis and Sustainable Energy. Their specific strategic focus is described in more detail in the Annex. Oxfam Ibis stands out as committing to tackling the shrinking political space challenge and also explicitly supporting decentralization processes. There is little focus in these Danish organizations on taking positions on reforming electoral processes. Danish Institute for Parties and Democracy work directly with political parties around the world, which includes specific support around elections. One could read this as an opportunity to stand out from others. International Media Support would be a natural partner on freedom of expression and/or building independent media. Global discourse: Global trends/ thinking on challenges to democracy, and opportunities/ alternatives Global and regional policy spaces There are potential global and regional policy spaces to take up these democracy issues. It is a given that through a new EC-funded project, AADK will work to engage with the African Union on the Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance, including subregional engagement with ECOWAS, EAC and SADC. There is potential to engage systematically with the Human Rights Council - especially given Denmarks candidacy for and to link national campaigns to the Universal Periodic Review process. AADK could also explore engagement in the Open Government Forum, a multi-stakeholder space which centres around generating governance reform action plans and monitoring their implementation. It depends somewhat on the choices of focus countries as not all countries are signed on to this process. Overall, there is already a strong international normative framework in place through human rights conventions to work on electoral processes and political rights. An internationally agreed normative framework for decentralization (putting more decision making authority at local government level) is not so clear, nor is any international normative framework for building media independent of government and corporate interests (although freedom of expression is defined). There are elements of civic education through public schools built into the human rights and right to education normative framework, but it is not a high policy dialogue focus at international level compared with issues like access, financing and anti-privatisation. For international civil society spaces, the Inequality Alliance is a new convening space. With partners there including Amnesty and Civicus it is feasible that some of these sub-themes could be taken up as joint priorities as part of a broader struggle for equality but it is not clear. ActionAid has already used World Social Forum as a space for dialogue on political rights and expanding/defending space for civil society action. ActionAid has also been active in the Citizen's Charter process, a process of civil society alliance building creating its own dialogue on political and civil rights. 24

25 Scenarios: Working assumptions: - We know AADK will lead implementation of an EC proposal in this thematic area, and assume AADK will be able to raise significant Danida funding to continue work in this area. - We assume that the existing international programming modalities developed by AADK (programme funds, P4C, GPs) will continue to evolve to support this area of work. - We also assume that the foundation of any work will be partnering with people s organizations, social movements, and other CSOs in alliances to organize around achieving structural change (in power, institutions, legislation, policies, resource allocation). - This table summarizes the potentials of different sub-themes under Deepening Democracy under consideration thus-far. Comparing the potential of different sub-themes Criteria for assessing potential as subthemes in the next strategic period More participatory and transparent electoral processes Decentralizatio n- devolution of authority including financial authority, to more participatory local governments Improving the implementatio n of political rights key for civil society activism (freedom of assembly, association, expression, right to information) Supporting the development of independent media where people can be critically informed on democratic governance processes and issues Integrating improved civic education in the public education system (reflecting human rights and democratic values) Alignment with AA International strategy Not explicit, implicit in approach to more accountable government institutions and expanding political space Not explicit, implicit in more accountable institutions, expanding political space, and commitment to geographic rootedness Explicitly supports this area, mentions human rights defenders specifically, an HRD framework is under development in AAI Not explicit, limited development of this idea within the Federation Not explicit - but implicit in rights based understanding of quality public education, a sub-issue there not highlighted in the International Strategy AADK experience in supporting international policy dialogue No - although new EC project will generate this experience at regional and AU level in Africa No- although existing partner countries see potential in SADC region, and it may come into the EC funded project Yes- support to Shrinking Political Space advocacy / engagement in 2015/2016, mainly in Africa region. More to be gained in EC/pan african project No- but will gain experience through new EC funded programme in Africa No- but AA/Education community very active and effective in CSO alliances and at Education tables on other issues AADK experience in support to Yes- diverse experience across Yes- diverse experience across Yes- but more ad hoc than other areas Limited - specific moments Pre-merger - for AAI strands of this agenda are 25

26 local and national programming/ campaigning/a dvocacy countries countries defending freedom of expression, not well developed integrated in the Promoting Rights in Schools approach applied at institutional level in many countries Potential for policy/instituti onal change in partnership countries Yes- but incremental and risky, and depends on country specifics Yes- but incremental and risky and depends on country specifics Yes- but incremental and risky an depends on country specifics Highly variable depending on partner country Yes - but not well scoped out, also AA does not do handson curriculum development as a rule but supports Governments to do so Potential for international policy advocacy Yes- leveraging strong existing normative framework Yes- but not as clear, normative framework as to level of decentralization is not clear Yes- leveraging strong existing normative framework No- there is not an explicit normative frame around the structure of media sector and it is unlikely to emerge Yes- escalating this issue in dialogue on quality education Alignment with Danida priorities (tentative based on draft policy) Yes Yes Yes - strong specific support for defending civil society space Yes - but implicit Yes- but implicit Potential for other donor support Yes - although need to find niche vs. more technical electoral democracy organizations Yes - although need to find niche vs. technical organizations focussed on public administration Yes - although need to find niche vs. classic human rights (legalistic, monitoring) organizations Limitedinstitutional donors put very little into this area compared with other governance sectors Yes - bridges Education and Governance sector so fit with donor strategies would need exploring, needs more work to sort out Potential to organize with social movements in global South around these issues from local to international level Yes Yes, potentially Yes No AA has strong alliances with NGOs and social movements in the education sector from local to international level which likely would embrace this issue 26

27 Best-Worst Lessons Best: AADK had a significant success in 2016 by leading 8 ActionAid offices in Africa plus five external partners to win a grant from the EC for a project on mobilizing civil society support for implementation of the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance. The approach is to engage youth and civil society organizations in more dialogue on their own government s adherence to agreed democratic principles, and to engage in campaigning at local, national and international level. This proves AADK s ability to co-develop programmes in this area and to bring together methodological experience and modalities (P4C, Global Platforms, programme management) into a strong programme that links from local to international level. Worst: AADK had separated its conceptualization and implementation of Capacity Development and the start-up of the Global Platforms to a high degree from developing a shared political understanding and more programmatic definition of change we were pursuing in the previous strategic period. This also meant there were distinct communities in AADK and externally in the federation working in parallel, in ways that would become very visible to other AA offices and their partners even at local level. This created many other problems including ongoing challenges ensuring that capacity development activities stay relevant to the overall political project of the AA Federation, and that they don t take on a different and disconnected logic. This is an old problem and AADK has gone a long way to reduce the gap in the last two years, and the discussion on carving this new area is much more jointly taken across teams and modalities. Recommendations There is strong potential for AADK to define a niche in promoting institutional/policy change to deepen democracy in the coming strategy, to complement programming to promote redistribution through progressive taxation to finance gender responsive public services. This analysis suggests that one area stands out for its potential across the criteria: Defending political rights and their expression by civil society (assembly, association, expression, right to information) It suggests that three other areas also have strong potential, but perhaps with some questions on certain criteria: - Promoting stronger, more inclusive participation in elections Promoting decentralization processes to increase authority and participation at local government levels Civic education in public education This picture suggests that - Promoting independent media as a stand-alone policy and systemic issue has less potential and we don t recommend AADK putting more effort in that direction. At international policy level, the clearest route forward would be to utilize the existing international normative framework where it is strong and clear, and to focus more effort on bringing states to account on these standards. This approach would work for: Stronger, more inclusive participation in electoral processes Political rights and their expression by civil society Civic education in schools, although the prioritization of this commitment within education versus other issues in the education sector (financing, anti-privatisation) would be a major strategic choice for AA. Therefore if we want to simplify further, it may be to incorporate work to promote decentralization with the theme around more participatory, inclusive electoral processes, by 27

28 including a focus on the representativeness and accountability of political leaders at local level as part of that work. In that case the scope within this area would include: - Stronger more inclusive participation in electoral processes at national and local level - Improved protection of civil and political rights for civil society organizations especially human rights defenders - Improved civic education in the public education system 28

29 Annex 1: Democratic trends in AADK s DANIDA and DAPP Partnership countries The following section investigates and analyses the democratic trends on freedom, voice and accountability in the 10 ActionAid Denmark (AADK) partnership countries being Bangladesh, Kenya, Myanmar, Nepal, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe as the Danida countries and Jordan and Lebanon as the DAPP countries. Due to the status of Palestine as a territory, there was no data available and therefore Palestine is not be analysed in this section. The section begins with an brief introduction to the first of the two selected measuring methods: the Voice and Accountability dimension in the Worldwide Governance Indicators by the World Bank (1.1). This is followed by empirical data on respectively the 8 Danida countries and the two DAPP countries shown graphically (1.2). Following this section the second measuring method is introduced: Freedom in the World by Freedom House (2.1). The democratic trends when it comes to freedoms in the same 10 countries according to Freedom House is hereafter viewed graphically. Section 3 analyses the trends in each partnership country, and it is therefore possible to jump straight to this section. 1.1 Worldwide Governance Indicators: Voice and Accountability by The World Bank The World Bank measures the quality of governance in 6 dimensions in their research dataset Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI). The WGI measures trends in both industrial and developing countries around the world, and the data is gathered from survey institutes, think tanks, non-governmental organizations, international organizations and private sector firms. The WGI does not reflect the official views of the World Bank, but is rather an analysis of data from many sources. Governance is in this case defined as the set of traditions and institutions by which authority in a country is exercised. This includes first of all, the process by which governments are selected, monitored and replaced, secondly, the capacity of the government to effectively formulate and implement sound policies, and thirdly, the respect of citizens and the state for the institutions that govern economic and social interactions among them. The first dimension of the WGI is Voice and Accountability. The Voice and Accountability dimension captures perceptions of the extent to which a country's citizens are able to participate in selecting their government, as well as freedom of expression, freedom of association and a free media. The Voice and Accountability 29

30 relates most closely to the set of issues we consider addressing under Deepening Democracy. According to the collected data, the countries are given a score on this aspect between -2,5 and +2,5 with +2,5 being the highest score and -2,5 the lowest. 1.2 WGI, Voice and Accountability scoring of AADK Partnership countries The following section shows governance trends in Danida partnership countries and DAPP frame countries from 2011 to For a better overview the diagrams below views the score between +2 and -2, since none of the countries are ranked as a the top or lowest score. Most of the countries are ranked with a low score between 0 and -1. This score is low, but not significantly low for developing democracies. Two countries are exceptions to this and stands out from the rest: Zimbabwe and Myanmar are both ranked with a score between -1 and -2. The context and governance trends in each country is analysed in the end in section 3. DANIDA countries 30

31 31

32 32

33 DAPP countries 33

34 2.1 Freedom in the World by Freedom House The organization Freedom House produces different reports and indexes, and one of them is the democracy index Freedom in the World which is the flagship publication of Freedom House. Freedom in the World is a report published yearly consisting of numeric values as well as a shorter description of the respective countries. The purpose of FW is to analyze the degree of political rights and civil liberties. Freedom in the World stamps countries as either Unfree, Partly free or Free. Countries, which are stamped as Free can be seen as liberal democracies whereas some of the countries stamped as Partly free can be seen as electoral democracies. Countries stamped as Unfree is not democracies. Freedom House operates from the assumption that Freedom for all peoples is best achieved in liberal democratic societies and thereby but value to the liberal democracy as the aim. The organisation notes that it puts a focus on real-world rights and freedoms enjoyed by individuals, and thereby there is a focus on covering the actual living conditions rather than formal rights only. Freedom in the World consists of 25 indicators within the two areas: political rights and civil liberties. A country is assigned two ratings (7 to 1) - one for political rights and one for civil liberties based on its total scores for the political rights and civil liberties questions. Each rating of 1 through 7, with 1 representing the greatest degree of freedom and 7 the smallest degree of freedom, corresponds to a specific range of total scores. The average of a country s political rights and civil liberties ratings is determining the status of Free (1.0 to 2.5), Partly Free (3.0 to 5.0), or Not Free (5.5 to 7.0) and it is this particular rating which is shown in the data below. 2.2 Freedom House ranking of AADK partnership countries 34

35 The following section shows democratic trends in the 8 Danida partnership countries and the two DAPP frame countries ranked on the Freedom Rating with a mean score of political rights and civil liberties. None of the AADK partnership has a score of a being a Free country in any of the five recent years, according to terminology of Freedom House. Countries are either ranked as Partly Free (Bangladesh, Kenya, Nepal, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Jordan and Lebanon), Not Free (Myanmar) or progressing from being Not Free to Partly free as Zimbabwe or from Partly Free to Not Free which is the case for Uganda. Current DANIDA partnership countries 35

36 36