The African Peer Review Mechanism

The document provides a comprehensive analysis of the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), focusing on the experiences of pioneer countries. It details the official guidance documents, the five stages of the review process, and the critical roles of national institutions like the Focal Point and National Governing Council. A significant portion of the text is dedicated to '80 Lessons for Success,' offering strategic advice on planning, governance, media engagement, and the use of the Self-Assessment Questionnaire. It emphasizes the necessity of civil society leadership, transparency, and rigorous research to ensure the mechanism's credibility and effectiveness in fostering good governance across Africa.

• The APRM's official guidance framework is characterized by significant inconsistencies and ambiguities, particularly regarding public participation and the powers of national institutions. The 'Supplementary Guidelines' are considered the most current and detailed rules, as they provide more extensive discussion on the independence of national institutions from government.
• The timeline established in the APRM Protocol is viewed as unrealistic by pioneer countries. While the Protocol suggests reviews should begin within 18 months of accession and take no more than six months from inception to the presentation of the report, most countries require over a year just for the self-assessment phase.
• Effective national governance of the APRM requires a National Governing Council (NGC) that is led by civil society and business professionals rather than government officials. To maintain credibility and prevent political manipulation, the NGC should have a civil society majority and be allowed to make key decisions on research and report editing.
• The APRM Self-Assessment Questionnaire is a complex tool that requires diverse specialized expertise in areas such as trade, central banking, and the environment. The document suggests that the Questionnaire's thematic structure can lead to duplication of effort and recommends grouping cross-cutting issues like gender and corruption into specialized clusters.
• The development of the National Programme of Action (POA) is often rushed because it is left until the end of the process. Best practice suggests that the POA should be developed concurrently with the self-assessment, incorporating solutions from existing national planning documents to avoid duplication and ensure realistic costing.
• The continental APRM Secretariat and the Panel of Eminent Persons lack sufficient capacity to meet the mechanism's goals. With only five reviews completed by July 2007, the current pace suggests it would take until 2021 for all signatory countries to complete their first review.
• Trust and credibility in the APRM process are built through transparency and the active inclusion of diverse stakeholders. This includes using a 'COPPER' approach: Candid, Open, Planned, Participatory, Exemplary, and Robust.

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} }