CAN THE APRM BE AN EFFECTIVE TOOL TO MONITOR AGENDA 2063 AND THE SDGs?

This research paper by the South African Institute of International Affairs (SAIIA) evaluates whether the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) can effectively monitor the African Union's Agenda 2063 and the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). While the authors identify strong normative and thematic alignment between the three initiatives, they argue that the APRM currently lacks the administrative capacity, funding, and technical rigor to handle the extensive monitoring responsibilities required.

• The AU Assembly decided on 30–31 January 2017 to expand the APRM's mandate to include the monitoring and evaluation of the African Union Agenda 2063 and the UN Sustainable Development Goals (Agenda 2030).
• The APRM, Agenda 2063, and the SDGs share a compatible normative framework, specifically a commitment to democratic, participatory governance and the rejection of authoritarian 'development from above' philosophies.
• There is significant thematic overlap between the APRM's diagnostic tools and the goals of the SDGs and Agenda 2063, particularly regarding poverty, food security, health, education, gender equality, and democracy.
• The APRM is currently incapable of the ongoing monitoring required by the SDGs and Agenda 2063 because it has failed to produce regular, timeous reports for participating countries.
• The APRM suffers from severe financial instability, with many member states failing to pay annual subscriptions and a significant decline in foreign donor support.
• Administrative and leadership failures have hindered the APRM, including a seven-year period without a permanent CEO and allegations of maladministration within the Panel of Eminent Persons.
• The APRM's review process is criticized for being too cumbersome, expensive, and slow, producing reports that lack clear narratives and are not user-friendly.
• The APRM lacks the robust, quantifiable indicators necessary for the precise measurement of progress required by the SDGs and Agenda 2063.
• While the APRM is designed to be participatory, the actual quality of civil society engagement has been uneven, with some governments, such as Rwanda, tightly controlling the process.
• To become an effective monitoring tool, the APRM must transition from large-scale base reviews to more limited, thematic 'Development Reviews' and utilize ICT for data collation.

APA

CORRIGAN, T., & GRUZD, S. (2017). CAN THE APRM BE AN EFFECTIVE TOOL TO MONITOR AGENDA 2063 AND THE SDGs? South African Institute of International Affairs. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Occasional-Paper-251.pdf

Chicago

CORRIGAN, TERENCE, and STEVEN GRUZD. CAN THE APRM BE AN EFFECTIVE TOOL TO MONITOR AGENDA 2063 AND THE SDGs? South African Institute of International Affairs, 2017. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Occasional-Paper-251.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=CORRIGAN |first1=TERENCE |last2=GRUZD |first2=STEVEN |title=CAN THE APRM BE AN EFFECTIVE TOOL TO MONITOR AGENDA 2063 AND THE SDGs? |publisher=South African Institute of International Affairs |date=February 2017 |url=https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Occasional-Paper-251.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{corrigan2017can, author = {CORRIGAN, TERENCE and GRUZD, STEVEN}, title = {{CAN THE APRM BE AN EFFECTIVE TOOL TO MONITOR AGENDA 2063 AND THE SDGs?}}, institution = {South African Institute of International Affairs}, year = {2017}, month = feb, url = {https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Occasional-Paper-251.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }