Stakeholders from the demand side have long been working to improve accountability of service providers and policy makers towards efficient and effective service delivery. In recent years there has been an increasing interest in achieving this through social accountability, and related mechanisms, which involve the direct participation of users and their interaction with providers. The discussion will describe the framework for analysing relationships between policy-makers, providers and citizens as the “short route” to accountability involving citizens directly influencing, participating in, and supervising service delivery by providers1 . The paper will analyse the legal framework in Zimbabwe which provides a conducive environment for the implementation of the SAM approach; for example, the new Constitution has progressive provisions that support social accountability (Sections 13, 119, 141, 194, 298, 299, 300 and 309 – 314). Different stakeholders in Zimbabwe including Government, NGOs and donors have experimented with various social accountability tools. The different tools (community scorecard, leadership performance score cards etc.) vary and some aim to inform citizens and communities about their rights, the standards of service delivery they should expect, and the actual performance of their providers. Others seek to facilitate access to formal redress mechanisms to address service delivery failures.
In discussing the applicability of Social accountability in the Zimbabwean context the paper will elucidate how access to information and opportunities to use it enable citizens individually and collectively to hold frontline providers and public officials accountable. The paper will discuss how politically polarized environments make the engagement between the supply-side (Executive) and civil society /citizens very difficult. In addition, it will examine the lack of political will by the Executive to take corrective action regarding the abuse of public resources by senior government officials, and the lack of funding to CSOs wishing to implement SAM programmes (donors are generally sceptical about the feasibility of the SAM approach in Zimbabwe due to the prevailing political environment).
The paper takes stock of citizens and CSOs interventions in the area of social accountability, looking at what is being done and the lessons learnt. It also looks at the growing body of evidence from impact evaluation studies and results coming from social accountability interventions. The paper will look at how strengthening the oversight role of CSOs/CBOs and oversight bodies like Parliament at national level and councils at local level can be done despite the prevailing political situation.
