The State of Governance in Africa: What Indices Tell Us

The paper investigates the impact of the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) on governance in Africa by comparing Ibrahim Index of African Governance (IIAG) scores between 2003 and 2015 for reviewed members, non-reviewed members, and non-members. It finds that while APRM members generally performed better than non-members, there is no significant difference in progress between those who underwent a full review and those who merely joined. The author suggests this indicates a 'self-selection' bias where states already inclined toward reform join the APRM, rather than the mechanism itself causing the improvement. The paper also notes a trend where economic and corporate governance gains often occur alongside stagnant or declining political freedoms, specifically citing Rwanda and Mali as contrasting case studies.

• APRM member states showed a significantly more positive trend in governance scores compared to non-members between 2003 and 2015. Specifically, APRM members improved their average Ibrahim Index of African Governance (IIAG) scores by 4.1 points, while non-members improved by only 0.9 points.
• There is no significant evidence that undergoing a formal APRM review leads to better governance outcomes than simply joining the mechanism. The average improvement for non-reviewed APRM states (5.0) was slightly higher than for reviewed states (3.1), and the difference between reviewed states and all other countries was not statistically significant.
• The observed governance improvements in APRM states are likely due to 'self-selection' rather than the mechanism's causal influence. States that voluntarily join the APRM are typically those that already possess the political will to reform.
• Governance progress in some APRM states is unbalanced, with significant gains in economic and corporate governance occurring despite authoritarian political trends. Rwanda is highlighted as a case where human development and corporate governance improved significantly, while political participation and rights decreased.
• External shocks and political instability can lead to severe governance regression regardless of APRM status. Mali experienced the most significant regression among the studied group, with its IIAG score declining by 4.2 points following a 2012 coup.
• The APRM is criticized for being a 'paper tiger' because its recommendations are frequently ignored and its provisions for non-compliance are never invoked. The author argues that the voluntary nature of the mechanism must change to ensure the implementation of National Programmes of Action (NPoA).

APA

Turianskyi, Y. (2016). The State of Governance in Africa: What Indices Tell Us. South African Institute of International Affairs. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Occasional-Paper-232.pdf

Chicago

Turianskyi, Yarik. The State of Governance in Africa: What Indices Tell Us. South African Institute of International Affairs, 2016. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Occasional-Paper-232.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Turianskyi |first1=Yarik |title=The State of Governance in Africa: What Indices Tell Us |publisher=South African Institute of International Affairs |date=May 2016 |url=https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Occasional-Paper-232.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{turianskyi2016state, author = {Turianskyi, Yarik}, title = {{The State of Governance in Africa: What Indices Tell Us}}, institution = {South African Institute of International Affairs}, year = {2016}, month = may, url = {https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Occasional-Paper-232.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }