OWT's Christmas present

One World Trust today published its 2007 Global Accountability Report. It compares 30 intergovernmental, non-governmental and corporate bodies on measures of transparency, participation, evaluation and complaint handling.

The international non-governmental organisations (INGOs) under study (in order of best to worst performing) are:

• Christian Aid
• International Accounting Standards Board
• International Save the Children Alliance
• Aga Khan Foundation
• Human Rights Watch
• International Organization for Standardization
• Medecins Sans Frontiers International
• MERCY Malaysia
• Greenpeace International
• Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA)

The headline findings are:

• Only 3 INGOs have transparency policies and two lack readily-accessible ‘contact us’ functions
• All the examined INGOs make commitments to engage external stakeholders but only four have organisation-wide guidelines in this regard
• Over half the INGOs have evaluation policies but only two commit to being open with evaluation results.
• The overall quality of INGO internal complain handling is high but external complain procedures are where the sector’s accountability capabilities are least developed.

One World Trust are now carrying out their survey of 30 organisations every year. One suggestion: why don't they also include a review of a selection of previous years' organisations to see if they've improved or not?

The meaning of accountability

Here's a classic article on the meaning of 'accountability' as it applies to a range of players in world politics.

Grant and Keohane argue that forms of accountability of an institution can be split between

1. Participation: performance is evaluated by people affected by use of power by the institution
2. Delegation: performance is evaluated by people entrusting the institution with power

The authors identify three components of accountability: standards, sanctions and information. It is difficult to pinpoint the use of any of these components when it comes to international development NGOs. Neither the poor nor donors effectively hold them to account.

Institutional mechanisms are particularly weak in terms of information:

Crucial to the efficacy of an information system for controlling abuses of power is that control over it not be limited to power-wielders and the entities that originally authorized their actions. On the contrary, the system should be open to new groups, seeking to provide information relevant to the question of whether power-wielders are meeting appropriate standards of behavior—–and to make that information widely available...Furthermore, the costs of providing information through web sites are now so low that it is difficult to use cost or inconvenience as an excuse; people around the world are increasingly used to being able to get the information that they want almost instantaneously...NGOs must also be increasingly transparent if they are to remain credible.