The African Peer Review Mechanism

This report by the South African Institute of International Affairs provides a practical guide and critical analysis of the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), drawing on the experiences of 'pioneer' countries. It details the official guidance documents, the structural requirements for national implementation, and a comprehensive set of 80 lessons for success aimed at improving the process's transparency, inclusivity, and effectiveness.

• Pioneer countries found the official APRM timeline—which suggests reviews begin within 18 months of accession and take no more than six months to complete—to be highly unrealistic, with some countries taking over a year just for self-assessment.
• The APRM process is structured into five stages: preparatory process and self-assessment, a visit by the APR Team for consultations, drafting of the report, submission to the APR Secretariat and Panel for consideration by the APR Forum, and finally, the public release of the report.
• Effective national governance of the APRM requires a National Governing Council (NGC) that is autonomous from the government, led by a majority of non-partisan civil society and business professionals, and capable of making key decisions on research and editing.
• The report identifies a critical need for a 'COPPER' approach to ensure the integrity of the review: the process must be Candid, Open, Planned, Participatory, Exemplary, and Rigorous.
• The APRM Self-Assessment Questionnaire is a complex tool comprising 25 objectives, 58 questions, and 183 indicators across four thematic areas: democracy and good political governance, economic governance and management, corporate governance, and socio-economic development.
• There is a documented gap in support from the continental Secretariat, with countries reporting a lack of clear guidance on how to conduct public consultations, research, and budgeting, which has contributed to significant delays.
• To avoid hasty and ill-considered policy making, the National Programme of Action (POA) should be developed early in the process rather than at the end, integrating solutions identified during the self-assessment phase.
• The report emphasizes that trust and credibility in the APRM are earned through transparent actions, such as allowing civil society to nominate its own representatives and maintaining open communication with the media.
• The continental APRM system faces a capacity crisis; by July 2007, only five reviews had been completed, suggesting that at the current pace, it would take until 2021 for all then-signatory countries to finish their first review.

APA

Herbert, R., & Gruzd, S. (2008). The African Peer Review Mechanism. South African Institute of International Affairs. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/aprm_pioneers_part5_20090219.pdf

Chicago

Herbert, Ross, and Steven Gruzd. The African Peer Review Mechanism. South African Institute of International Affairs, 2008. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/aprm_pioneers_part5_20090219.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Herbert |first1=Ross |last2=Gruzd |first2=Steven |title=The African Peer Review Mechanism |publisher=South African Institute of International Affairs |date=February 2008 |url=https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/aprm_pioneers_part5_20090219.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{herbert2008african, author = {Herbert, Ross and Gruzd, Steven}, title = {{The African Peer Review Mechanism}}, institution = {South African Institute of International Affairs}, year = {2008}, month = feb, url = {https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/aprm_pioneers_part5_20090219.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }