South Africa’s Implementation of the APRM: Making a Difference or Going Through the Motions?

This policy briefing by the South African Institute of International Affairs (SAIIA) evaluates South Africa's third African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) National Programme of Action (NPoA) implementation report (SAIR3), launched in January 2014. While the author notes significant improvements in the quality, honesty, and consultative nature of the reporting compared to previous efforts, the briefing concludes that the APRM remains largely a foreign policy tool with minimal domestic impact due to a lack of integration into national planning and persistent governance challenges.

• The third APRM NPoA implementation report (SAIR3), launched on 29 January 2014, shows a marked improvement in reporting quality and honesty over the 2009 and 2011 reports. SAIR3 is described as better researched and more technical, utilizing "statistics and tables to show improvement and demonstrate progress" rather than making unsupported sweeping statements.
• SAIR3 adopted a more consultative approach than previous reports by organizing provincial consultations in Limpopo, Mpumalanga, and North West. These sessions aimed to include diverse stakeholders such as "non-governmental organisations, faith-based organisations, youth, disabled and the business sector".
• Despite improved reporting, the APRM process is criticized for being disconnected from domestic policy. There is no "discernible link" between the NPoA and the National Development Plan (NDP), suggesting the government uses the APRM primarily as a "foreign policy tool" rather than a domestic governance mechanism.
• The briefing identifies a failure to incorporate the actual voices of the public and civil society in the final SAIR3 document. The author notes a lack of case studies, attendance details, or quotes from the provincial meetings, making it difficult to see how these inputs influenced the final report.
• Governance challenges identified in the original 2007 Country Review Report (CRR) persist seven years later. The document highlights that issues such as "crime, HIV/AIDS and violence against women and children" remain unresolved despite the existence of the NPoA framework.
• The APRM has suffered from a lack of public visibility and institutional instability. The Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA), which drives the mechanism, experienced a "loss of institutional memory and staff shortages" after having four different ministers in three years.

APA

Turianskyi, Y. (2014). South Africa’s Implementation of the APRM: Making a Difference or Going Through the Motions? South African Institute of International Affairs. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Policy-Briefing-99.pdf

Chicago

Turianskyi, Yarik. South Africa’s Implementation of the APRM: Making a Difference or Going Through the Motions? South African Institute of International Affairs, 2014. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Policy-Briefing-99.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Turianskyi |first1=Yarik |title=South Africa’s Implementation of the APRM: Making a Difference or Going Through the Motions? |publisher=South African Institute of International Affairs |date=July 2014 |url=https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Policy-Briefing-99.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{turianskyi2014south, author = {Turianskyi, Yarik}, title = {{South Africa’s Implementation of the APRM: Making a Difference or Going Through the Motions?}}, institution = {South African Institute of International Affairs}, year = {2014}, month = jul, url = {https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Policy-Briefing-99.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }