African peer review: In the footsteps of the Harare Declaration

The document examines the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), a voluntary governance assessment tool launched by the African Union in 2002 under the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD). It details the five-stage review process—ranging from national self-assessment to peer pressure from heads of state—and analyzes the varying degrees of civil society involvement in early adopters like Ghana, Rwanda, Mauritius, and Kenya. The authors argue that the efficacy of the APRM depends on the transparency of final reports and the willingness of African leadership to implement national action plans.

• The APRM is a voluntary African Union initiative launched at the 2002 Durban Summit to measure governance across four specific areas: democracy and political governance, economic governance and management, corporate governance, and socio-economic governance.
• The peer review process consists of five stages: establishing national focal points and coordinating commissions, completing a self-assessment and draft action plan, conducting a country review visit by a team of experts, reviewing the draft report via the APR Panel and Forum to apply peer pressure, and finally making the report public through AU structures.
• As of the writing, 24 out of 53 African countries have signed up for the peer review process, including 12 Commonwealth members such as South Africa, Nigeria, and Kenya.
• Early implementation shows a stark contrast in civil society engagement: Ghana utilized an independent body of academics and civil society to ensure a transparent process, whereas Mauritius and Rwanda employed government-dominated processes that limited public input and candor.
• A significant challenge to the APRM's credibility is the lack of a fixed timeframe for publishing reports and the fact that heads of state overruled the Panel of Eminent Persons' recommendation to make reports public immediately upon completion.
• The mechanism lacks explicit punitive measures or sanctions for countries that fail to implement the recommendations found in their review reports.

APA

Sidiropoulos, E., & Herbert, R. (n.d.). African peer review: In the footsteps of the Harare Declaration. South African Institute of International Affairs. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/Commonwealth_Elsid-amp-Ross.pdf

Chicago

Sidiropoulos, Elizabeth, and Ross Herbert. African peer review: In the footsteps of the Harare Declaration. South African Institute of International Affairs, n.d. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/Commonwealth_Elsid-amp-Ross.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Sidiropoulos |first1=Elizabeth |last2=Herbert |first2=Ross |title=African peer review: In the footsteps of the Harare Declaration |publisher=South African Institute of International Affairs |url=https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/Commonwealth_Elsid-amp-Ross.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{sidiropoulosndafrican, author = {Sidiropoulos, Elizabeth and Herbert, Ross}, title = {{African peer review: In the footsteps of the Harare Declaration}}, institution = {South African Institute of International Affairs}, url = {https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/Commonwealth_Elsid-amp-Ross.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }