African peer review: In the footsteps of the Harare Declaration

This research paper by Elizabeth Sidiropoulos and Ross Herbert 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). The authors analyze the APRM's structure, its five-stage review process, and the varying degrees of civil society involvement in early participating countries, while highlighting the critical importance of publishing final reports to ensure government accountability.

• The African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) was launched by the African Union (AU) at the 2002 Durban Summit as a voluntary process to measure four specific areas of governance: corporate governance, economic governance and management, socio-economic governance, and democracy and political governance.
• The APRM review process consists of five stages: the establishment of a national Focal Point and coordinating commission; the completion of a self-assessment questionnaire and draft action plan; a country review visit by a team led by the APR Panel; a review of the draft report by the APR Panel and subsequent discussion by the APR Forum (heads of state); and the final public tabling of the report in AU structures.
• As of the writing of the paper, 24 out of 53 African countries had signed up for the peer review process, including 12 Commonwealth members: Cameroon, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Tanzania, and Uganda.
• Early implementations of the APRM show a stark contrast in civil society engagement: Ghana utilized an independent seven-member body of academics and civil society and commissioned four independent think-tanks, whereas Mauritius and Rwanda employed government-dominated processes with limited public input.
• A significant challenge to the APRM's efficacy is the lack of transparency regarding final reports; while the APR Panel advocated for immediate publication, heads of state overruled this, leaving the reports for Ghana and Rwanda unpublished at the time of writing.
• Botswana has declined to join the APRM, arguing that the process duplicates the work of the IMF and World Bank, and citing its high rankings in the Global Competitiveness Report 2003-04 and its sovereign credit ratings as evidence that it has nothing to prove.

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} }