Embassy of Belgium in Dar Es Salaam

Civil Society in Tanzania May 2009




eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009



 TABLE
OF
CONTENT
 ABBREVIATIONS:


2


1.
 INTRODUCTION:


3


1.
 METHODOLOGY:


3


2.
 CIVIL
SOCIETY
IN
TANZANIA:


3


3.
 CONTEXT:


4


4.
 STRENGTHS
AND
WEAKNESSES:


6


5.
 CAPACITY
GAPS:


8


6.
 CHALLENGES
FOR
THE
CSOS:


9


7.
 DONOR
FUNDING:
MANY
MECHANISMS


10


8.
 POSSIBLE
OPTIONS
FOR
STRENGTHENING
CIVIL
SOCIETY


12


9.
 SYNERGY
BETWEEN
DIRECT
AND
INDIRECT
BELGIUM
COOPERATION


15


10.
 REFERENCES:


18


ANNEX
1:
SOCIAL
ACCOUNTABILITY
CONCEPTS


19


ANNEX
2:
SHORT
EXPLANATION
OF
THE
MOST
RELEVANT
CIVIL
SOCIETY
 ORGANISATIONS


23





1 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009

Abbreviations: ALAT APRM ATI BEST-AC BONGA CCM CS CSN CSO DFID DPs EA EAC EKN FBO FCS FS GBS GoT INGO IT JAST KPF LGA LHRC LLGAs MDGs MKUKUTA MP MPI MS NGO NSA PETS PF PRSP REPOA SANGO SDC SGACA SNV TANGO TGNP TMF UNDP UNGO WDR

Association for Local Government Authorities Tanzania African Peer Review Mechanism Access to Information Business Environment Strengthening Tanzania- Advocacy Component. Building Organizational Networks for Good Governance and Advocacy Chama cha Mapinduzi (Tanzanian ruling party) Civil Society Civil Society Network Civil Society Organization Department For International Development Development Partners East Africa East African Community Royal Netherlands Embassy Faith Based Organization Foundation for Civil Society Forum Syd (Swedish Umbrella NGO) General Budget Support Government of Tanzania International Non Governmental Organization Information Technology Joint Assistance Strategy Tanzania Kibaha Policy Forum Local Government Authority Legal Human Right Centre Lower Local Government Authorities Millennium Development Goals Mkakati wa kukuza Uchumi na Kupunguza Umaskini Tanzania (National Strategy for Economic Growth and Reduction of Poverty) Member of Parliament Mwanza Policy Initiative Danish Association of International Cooperation Non- Governmental Organization Non State Actors Public Expenditure Tracking Survey Policy Forum Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper Research on Poverty Alleviation Same NGO network Swiss Development Cooperation Strategic Governance And Corruption Analysis Dutch Development Organization Tanzania Association of Non –Government Organizations Tanzania Gender Network Programme Tanzanian Media Fund United Nations Development Program Union of NGOs Morogoro network World Bank Development Report

2 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009

1. Introduction: The Belgium Embassy is in the process of formulating its Indicative Development Cooperation program (IDCP) for the next 4 years in line with Global Agreements, namely the Paris Declaration and the Action Agenda from Accra. In the context of the High Level Forums, donor organizations have committed themselves to adhere to agreements in the Rome Declaration (2003) focusing on the donor harmonization, the Paris Declaration (2005) focusing on the harmonization between donors and governments and recently the Accra Agenda for Action (2008) focusing on the role of civil society and the citizens in development and especially in holding governments accountable. Supporting1 civil society is one of several measures designed to enhance democracy, develop a more responsive government, and increase domestic accountability. Other mechanisms include support to parliament, political parties, media and rule of law. For effective implementation of Mkukuta, the Tanzanian acronym of the poverty reduction and growth strategy, the citizens of Tanzania need to be encouraged to demand accountability from their government and its authorities. The Belgium Embassy therefore requires to be informed on the current situation and tendencies regarding Civil Society in Tanzania. The Embassy has requested for this background paper, with the aim to obtain the key elements for the Embassy to develop its approach to engage with Civil Society in Tanzania. 1. Methodology: This background paper is based on a desk study and many years of experience in the world of capacity development with civil society organisations in Tanzania. A list of consulted documents is added in chapter…. The foundation for the framework of this paper is based on the concept/principles of social accountability, according to the current general thinking on how to address the civil society situation in Tanzania today. A brief overview of those basic concepts is given in the annex 1. 2

Civil Society : Civil society is about citizens-men, women, boys and girls organising themselves and acting together for their common interest.

2. Civil Society in Tanzania: Civil Society in Tanzania is a relatively young and still growing. The numbers of CSOs/NGOs has been rapidly increasing in the last decade, from around 100 in the 3 mid-80s to 2,700 in 2000 and around 4000 in 2007 . The following types of organisations are considered to be part of Civil Society: • Membership based organisations, CBOs and NGOs • Voluntary and self-help groups, community based groups and societies • Social movements and networks of organisations, professional associations, foundations and non-profit companies • Faith based organisations • Trade unions • Private sector associations

• •

Employers’ associations Co-operatives

1

Guidelines for support to Civil Society, Anders Ingelstam, Oct 2007 Guidelines for support to Civil Society, Anders Ingelstam, Oct 2007 3 Civil Society Networks in Tanzania, FCS, April 2008, pg 19 2

3 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009 • • •

Research institutes working in economic and policy analysis Non-profit media organisations Multi-party organisations

The National Bureau for Statistics has developed a civil society database, which is presented on the web-portal “Tanzania Development Gateway”: www.tanzaniagateway.org in which CSOs are classified according 28 sectors and areas. The website gives a rather comprehensive overview of most of the organisations. 4

“Formal organizations can be divided in social service delivery organisations, like NGOs active in fighting HIV/AIDS, district development trusts and faith basedorganisations and interest-based organisations like community development organisations, rights-based organisations, and advocacy groups. These last two are often linked to informal networks or organisations at lower levels and can mobilise these for various occasions to act as a group. 5

Advocacy : The term advocacy means “a set of techniques for raising awareness, challenging the status quo and calling on different agents to take up their responsibility to bring 6 about change’ at national, regional or local levels. Advocacy work should be based on empirical and validated information. The creation of NGO networks and coalitions is a fairly new development in Tanzanian Civil Society and has arisen as a response from the CSOs to strengthen their legitimacy and efficiency. Most networks and coalitions are still at an early stage”. There are 16 national networks in the field of environment, gender, HIV/AIDS, human rights disabled people’s rights, youth and children. There are only few networks for agriculture, pastoralism and education, while there is no network on health. Most advocacy organisations are based in Dar es Salaam. The CSOs based in rural 7 areas are mostly service delivery oriented. REPOA found in a survey of 81 NGOs that “almost 80% of these NGOs spend all, or almost all, of their time on poverty reduction and development issues, primarily focussing on socio-economic development, health and HIV/AIDs and women’s, children’s or youth development. The largest number of organisations (47%) characterized their work as a mixture of service delivery and advocacy, and over 80% of respondents felt that advocacy work is increasing in importance. Over 90% of the organisations surveyed are donorfunded, 30% receive funding for 60 to 100% of their activities. The remaining 10% are self-supporting through consultancies, or funded by their membership or individuals”.

3. Context: In 2000 the government of Tanzania issued a national policy on NGOs intended to provide for a new institutional and legislative framework, which was translated into the NGO law [Act No.24 of 2002]. In general NGOs welcomed the legislation, but protested the absence of meaningful consultation with civil society actors regarding the specificities of the policy. The Policy is seen by some NGOs as threatening their freedom of expression, especially in governance, policy and advocacy related 4

Support models for CSOs at Country level, Scanteam, Aug 2007 Guidelines for support to Civil Society, Anders Ingelstam, Oct 2007 6 The implications for Northern NGOs of adopting rights-based approaches, INTRAC, Occasional Papers Series No: 41, 2005 7 Tanzanian NGOs- their perceptions of their relationships with the Government of Tanzania and donors, and their role in poverty reduction and development, REPOA, Special Paper No 07.21 5

4 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009 matters. The act enables the government to deny registration or to de-register any seen to be against the “public interest” and to exert control or restriction of political activities. 8

CSOs may be registered under three (or six ?) different government organs: Ministry of Home Affairs, Business Registration and Licensing Agency (BRELA, mainly companies), Administrator General, and presently under the NGO coordination department in the Ministry of Community Development, and Gender, Children, and Women. The relationship between Civil Society and Government has for a long time been characterized by some mistrust and suspicion. Currently it is improving, evidenced by increased communication, interaction and trust. CSOs are invited to participate in policy influencing working groups and are consulted in the process for Mkukuta. Regarding the accountability factors group of access to information, voice and negotiation, the following can be said. Poor access to information: With regards to information, one can distinguish different critical elements in Tanzania. First and foremost, the existing culture of “every file or document regarding government is secret, unless indicated differently” still reigns, which makes access to information rather complicated. The responsiveness of government as well as NGOs is often depending on who is asking and what is his/her status9. Government officers are often not aware, which documents are to be made public. But even if they would want to provide the required information, the LGAs have difficulties to produce the right documents or information, due to complicated systems and variable skills of the officers in IT. Information is mostly not available in the right language, or written and presented in a very inaccessible way. Another issue is the level of aggregation of the data, the level of analysis and the information derived from it, which is mostly according to the needs of the Ministries at the National level. As a consequence, information looses details that are of importance for the district and sub-district levels. Lower level leaders, and councillors, who are supposed to inform the communities, do not have access to the information themselves. Lately much attention is given to the generation of evidence-based information that is objective and accessible for all levels of society, including the parliament. The role of the research institutes has been acknowledged. The Think Thank Initiative which is funded by IDRC, Bill and Melinda Gates as well as Hewlett Foundations, recently has selected ESRF, REPOA and ATPS for a considerable amount of funding (90 million $ over a longer period) and support to enable them to provide sound research that informs and influences national policy. Demand side: In Tanzania participatory monitoring at local level is a recent development. There has been a joint effort by a number of NGOs10 to train CSOs and CBOs in Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys (PETS) and a pilot on Participatory Service Delivery Assessment11 (PSDA) has taken place. However, the training has not sufficiently been accompanied with a campaign to create awareness at community level nor sufficient attention for promotion of local level mobilization. Somehow, the tools have become an objective by itself, instead of instrument whose result should lead to discussions 8

Civil society networks in Tanzania, FCS, April 2008, pg 19 REPOA, “Access to Information in Tanzania: still a challenge”, HakiElimu, LHRC, REPOA, 2005 10 PACT, HakiKazi, HakiElimu, TGNP ea. 11 TANGO and ALAT in Kilosa and Same with UNGO and SANGO 9

5 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009 and improvements of existing processes. Even in these surveys, it is clear that the above-mentioned access to information is a critical factor. PMO-RALG has provided the approval and space to undertaken PETS at all levels, as explained in the “Guidance for the implementation of PETS for LGAs”. However, the LGAs and LLGAs still do feel uncomfortable in making the required documents available. Voice In Tanzania quite some initiatives have tried to enhance public debate and create platforms for citizen-state dialogue. Public debate was organized by a number of national CSOs at regional level with the help of the NGO-networks (eg. UNGO/TANGO/UNDP/SNV) in preparation of the 2005 elections. However, in between the elections the attention has faded again in that area. The reason probably is that this was a donor driven process and therefore not sustainable. NGOs do not seem to be motivated from the inside to take up such tasks. The “citizen–state” dialogue is mostly taking place in a formal and structured way. Meaning, at national level, civil society organizations have been invited to participate in policy making working groups and taskforces, eg. under LGRP I in the Local Governance Working Group. At regional and local level most dialogue is supposed to take place through the statutory meetings. However, in reality, dialogue happens mostly in the informal way, based on mutual interest/affiliation. Voicing needs adequate information on the one hand but there is much more to it. Voicing makes sense only if a critical mass can be found that relates to the topic under discussion and representatives that have the mandate and recognition (both from government and the involved segment of society) to voice on their behalf. This remains a rather big challenge in Tanzania, since it is difficult to find organizations at lower level that can easily link up to the citizens while at the same time are confident and skilled enough to take the voicing role upon their shoulders. Though advocacy and lobbying are supposedly accepted activities, it is often perceived as action against establishment and therefore as activism for the opposition parties, especially in the run towards elections. On the other hand, the new role and position acquired by the media in the last 2 years has greatly changed the perception by national level Civil Society and the middle class citizens in Dar es Salaam on what is “acceptable” in their tolerance for corrupt politicians and the executive. Independent newspapers, radio and television debates are more and more asking tough questions to the relevant highly placed politicians and executives alike.

4. Strengths and weaknesses: The Civil Society in Tanzania is relatively young, but many national level organisations are growing in numbers and in capacity. It has however two main weaknesses:  Big gap between national level NGOs and local level CSOs.  Relatively weak civil society. Does not tall in this context The gap between Local and National/Central Levels 12

The key national organizations like Policy Forum , Foundation of Civil Society, TANGO, TGNP, Hakikazi Catalyst, Haki Elimu, Leadership Forum, TGNP, Legal Human Rights Centre and a good number of others have earned their position at the top of the CS world due to the motivation of a few strong individuals, by learning quickly and being persistent. They are the cornerstones for the build up of a Civil Society in Tanzania, especially Policy Forum, the Foundation for Civil Society, TANGO, HakiElimu 12

see annex 2 for more information on CSOs

6 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009 and therefore crucial in the context of accountability. These organizations all receive financial support from a wide range of donors, which allows them to develop and become a stronger sparring partner to the government. However, at the same time, they have become donor dependant and find it hard to ensure sustainability just because of that. They are also much solicited for taskforces, working groups, workshops and stakeholder meetings. The “transaction costs” for these organizations are high. Their biggest challenge is to link up to local level dynamics and to build critical mass outside the Dar es salaam!.

This gap cuts across both supply and demand sides of accountability. There is a widespread perception (mirrored in evidence from poverty monitoring) that Dar es Salaam is developing ahead of, and out of step with the rest of the country. Almost wherever one looks, the situation is very different in Dar es Salaam or at national level from the local level, for example, accounts and audit capacity, including computerization, access to media/information, understanding of the role of elected representatives (councilors as opposed to MPs), openness to participation of civil society in meetings. 
 SOURCE:
DFID TANZANIA ACCOUNTABILITY STRATEGY 2007-2010, APRIL 2007

Relatively Weak Local Civil Society In Tanzania domestic accountability, particularly at a local level, is a missing component in the development of a more responsive state. Despite the thousands of Non-State Actors in Tanzania, it is a relatively small and high profile few, operating mainly at national level, that play an assertive role in demand side accountability. In part, this is because ‘Civil Society’ is still new and also because it is a product of the liberalization of the 1990s. In many cases, there is a difference in understanding of the role and attitude envisaged for CSOs, especially NGOs, by theorists or observers expecting to see an active role in demanding rights, accountability, participation, transparency and so on. However, some NGOs actively reject the more confrontational approach, seeing constructive citizen engagement as a more productive way of changing mind-sets, policy and practice, especially given the top-down planning tradition from which Tanzania is emerging, and the sense of Tanzanians working together against a common threat. This socio-cultural induced attitude of submission to the greater good, is the legacy of socialist one party rule. On one hand it unifies the people, however on the other hand it prevents active participation, ownership and taking responsibility by the people, which is urgently needed to hold the government accountable. Other features of civil society include the way that: ✦ Many NGOs in practice behave more as ‘contractors’ accountable to donors for delivering certain outputs (safety nets, services, pieces of research or advocacy) than they see themselves as having a role in accountability, let alone seeing themselves as accountable to the poor and marginalized. ✦ Others model themselves on a different style of development intervention, arguably more like the churches and mission organizations, or more traditionally accountable chiefs, ‘bringing development to an area’. ✦ There is a shortage of skills amongst many civil society actors, both in running their organizations (financial management, strategic planning, monitoring etc) and in understanding the context within which they operate (whether that is government policy or the dynamics of globalization or poverty).

7 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009 ✦

Having an NGO’ is sometimes seen as an (private) income generating opportunity - often in the face of retirement or retrenchment from formal sector employment.

These are issues not just for NGOs. Problems faced by small CSOs (whether branches of business membership organizations, small businesses, trade union branches, CBOs or NGOs) are very similar in terms of low educational levels, low capitalization, lack of clear vision and mission, and this contributes to a lack of understanding of their potential different contributions to governance and accountability mechanisms 13 (DFID ).

5. Capacity Gaps: 14

In 2006 UNDP , in collaboration with TANGO and ALAT, carried out an assessment of CSOs capacity gaps in Tanzania. Their findings indicate low technical capacity in the following aspects: Policy Analysis: Very few CSOs have the skills needed to undertake comprehensive policy analysis and therefore are unable to follow the government ‘s policy-making process. Research: Like with policy analysis, most CSOs lack the skills need for undertaking research that is seen as credible by government and other development actors. Programming and Planning: Most CSOs in Tanzania do not have well defined strategic plans and therefore undertake ad hoc advocacy activities that are not well rooted. Communication and information: Most CSOs have poor information and communication systems and therefore fail to reach their constituencies on time when soliciting information or giving feedback on the development process. Advocacy skills: Even when they have an issue to put across, Tanzanian CSOs do not have the skills needed for effective advocacy. Documentation: CSOs in Tanzania engage in a number of development processes, however their impact is not felt due to poor documentation and information packaging. Regarding the issue of functional capacities the following was observed: Vision and mission. It was noted that most CSOs do not have very clear visions and missions, which means that the community or people they are to serve do not identify with the work the CSOs are doing, or the CSO fails to lead by its vision and mission. Relationship: Despite the recent increase in the number of NGO networks, the CSOs are still seen as working too much in isolation, not benefiting from these networks. Accountability: The accountability of CSOs in Tanzania is lopsided in that they are more accountable to the donors and even sometimes to government, than they are to their constituencies who are the reason why the CSO exist. 13

DFID Accountability Strategy 2007-2010, APRIL 2007 Makongo Japhet, Capacity Assessment of Civil Society Organizations in Tanzania, TANGO, UNDP, ALAT, 2007

14

8 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009 Human and Financial Resources: Most CSOs do not have either sufficient number or quality of staff. The study also noted that very few CSOs have sustainable funding. Mindset: There is gross distinct between government and CSOs at all levels national and sub-national levels, therefore it is difficult to build effective partnerships. In another study effectuated by the Foundation of Civil Society on capacity assessment of CSO networks in Tanzania last year (2008), the findings showed that the CSO networks were formed to undertake a great variety of activities, which were clustered into seven primary functions, as follows: o advocacy, lobbing, pressurizing function o resource mobilization function o service delivery function o representation function o empowering function o educating, counselling and public awareness raising function o organization synergy-reaping function In regard to the advocacy, lobbying and pressuring function, the study found the following: ✓ ✓

✓

Over 45% of the 228 CSO networks studied mentioned this function as one of their five most important activities they had performed in the past three years The kind of advocacy performed by the networks represent “soft” politics rather than “hot” politics, for the bulk of the networks focused on rights of orphans and other marginalized groups while other rights received little attention. The networks did not seek to change the system which creates marginalized groups but to effect minor changes within the existing system. Apart from rights advocacy, most of the networks engaged in some policy dialogue and lobbying work for their particular areas of activity and developed a number of advocacy strategies, including seeking representation in policymaking bodies.

About 92% of the networks studied mentioned the “empowering” function as one of their most important activities performed during the past three years. However, the networks understand the concept of “empowerment” almost entirely in terms of education, training and economic activities [such as provision of credit facilities]. This happens to be the understanding of the concept in the government empowerment policy, law and programs.

6. Challenges for the CSOs: “The current15 debate on the challenges facing CSOs in Tanzania includes mainly their integrity and governance in relation to the people they seek to serve. Transparency and accountability have been key issues about CSO performance at community level. The government equally laments and questions whether CSOs have the moral authority to question others on good governance and accountability. The CSOs are seen as requiring greater capacity building in advocacy and good governance for them to engage effectively and constructively in the policy dialogue with both the government and the donors”. CSOs have to deal with many different donors and mechanisms to secure their funding. The development partners tended to be fragmented in their approach to supporting civil society, uncoordinated, shortsighted and often lacking a clear 15

Support models for CSOs, Scanteam, Aug 2007, pg 8

9 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009 strategic focus. Therefore, on request of the CSOs, 21 donors have organised themselves in 2006, in order to improve coordination and to make their support to CSOs more transparent. Guidelines and a common framework were developed for support to civil society organisations working mainly in advocacy and engaging in policy processes. The underlying guidelines, which depict this common framework, follow principles similar to those of the Paris Declaration. The aim is to improve development partner coordination and strategic focus, and ultimately to strengthen the demand side of accountability, and thus make a greater, and more sustainable impact on development in Tanzania.

7. Donor funding: many mechanisms The donors have designed a website, which presents what type of support, to which sector and the amount of funding per year they provide in a very user friendly and transparent way: www.civilsocietysupport.net. In the study done by Scanteam, four support mechanisms were distinguished and assessed as presented in the table below: Table 1. Strength and Weakness of Funding Modalities

Unilateral • Direct Support to • CSO Project / Programme • • Unilateral Direct Core Funding

• • • • • •

Joint Core Funding Model

• • • • •

16

Strengths Given donor capacity, high accountability and monitoring Enable CSOs build experience, capacities Fit for quick-wins/short-term needs Can support large & small, rural & urban CSOs

16

• • • • • •

Lower transaction costs for CSOs Lower admin. time for donors Flexibility for CSOs to adjust to changes Nourish relationship are possible Promote dialogue on strategic issues Nourish CSO-donor relation & partnership

•

Lower admin time for donors Strengthening monitoring through the role of lead donors Increase support to capacity building Boost overall capacity around a organization, theme & sector Nurture successful models for

•

• • • • • •

•

Weaknesses Higher transaction costs for CSOs Higher admin time for donor Enable duplications Double/triple accounting Activities Less coordination between donors Perceived by some as higher risk when trust is breached by CSOs Not transparent in selection process Prone to privilege urban, large CSOs Enable duplications: Double/triple accounting Activities Less coordination between donor Greater donor time spent on coordination Can create “islands of excellence” culture

Support models at Country level, Scanteam, Aug 2007

10 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009

• • • Joint Funding • through • Intermediary • Organisations • •

•

•

smaller CSOs (dissemination of lessons learned) Build critical mass of credible, stronger CSOs Enhance coordination, harmonization Focus on dialogue on strategic issue Transparency in governance Lower admin time for donors Seen as more transparent in selection by CSOs & donor Greater outreach: regional, types & size of CSOs Increase demand for collection and dissemination of lessons learned Provide formal platform for national resource mobilization & dialogue with national/ regional bodies Enhance coordination, harmonization

•

• • • • • •

Non-transparency in governance when managed by INGOs More donor time spent on coordination Prone to creating a bureaucracy Greater the flexibility higher risk Lost relationship CSOsdonors “Mushroom” effect( if funds spread too thin) Donors exercise less monitoring (can be weaker on accountability)

The preferred mechanism by donors and CSOs alike is the Core Funding Model, both unilateral and joint, through intermediary organisations. However, interestingly enough the Unilateral Direct Support to CSO project funding is the most frequently used by donors to channel assistance to CSO in Tanzania. Most donors want to maintain a small portfolio of direct support to projects because it provides them the opportunity to be directly informed about reality in the field, it gives them more control on selection of support themes and thus enables them to cover specific areas. By providing access to funding for smaller CSOs through intermediaries, the donors get the “mushrooming” effect of supporting more CSO in different regions of the country. The mechanisms have been designed with sufficient flexibility in criteria for urban and rural access as well as in terms of size of CSOs. They also provide support to some capacity building activities of the beneficiaries. In line with the Accra Development Action Agenda, most donors are currently in the process of strategic positioning to address domestic and social accountability, and citizen’s engagement as crucial additional elements to their bilateral programs. 17 Consequently, DfID has started its AcT program, which will support CSOs in engaging in accountability issues; PACT will soon start its 2e PETS and Accountability program, which is mainly targeting CSOs; Forum Syd has submitted its proposal to SIDA for a social accountability program with CSOs at ward level; the Swiss Development Cooperation is working on its governance programme with a distinct focus on accountability; the Non-State Actors programme is establishing Zonal Resources Centres to improve access to Information, TWAWEZA will address citizen’s engagement at district level, etc. In short, there are many initiatives regarding Social Accountability and Civil Society strengthening starting this year or are being prepared at this moment. Nevertheless, a weak point remains that all these initiatives rely to a

17

Accountability and Transparency Program

11 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009 large extent on the same organisations, the so-called ”donor darlings”, which might prove to become counterproductive on the longer term. Fortunately, there is also more attention for strengthening the Parliament as an oversight body and the role of the media to inform the citizens, stimulate debate and build pressure the politicians. The donors have organised themselves regarding the support for the parliament in the Deepening Democracy program, which is managed by the UNDP. The program has four axes: 1. Facilitation and implementation of the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM). 2. The National Electoral Commission and the Electoral Process. 3. Civic Education and Civil Society Empowerment, 4. Good and accountable Governance (support to parliament, MPs office of the Clerk). Donors that support the Deepening Democracy program are: DFID, DANIDA, Norwegian Embassy, SIDA, DCI, EKN and UNDP. The Tanzania Media Fund as well as PACT help journalists to provide evidence-based information and to improve the quality of the information. Investigative journalism training courses are being offered next to grants for journalists, as well as coaching/mentoring.

8. Possible options for strengthening Civil Society18 Capacity development requires both an environment conducive to organizational strengthening, and the existence of basic core capacities. Currently steps are being taken to help CSOs and donors to think more strategically about capacity development. One such initiative is the preparation of Codes of Conduct for Civil Society. Codes of conduct for ethical behaviour have been recently been developed by the NGO Policy Forum and the Foundation of Civil Society. Another initiative that can enhance the environment for organizational strengthening is the emerging dialogue between CSOs and donors regarding aid modalities and the need to align aid to civil society with the PARIS declaration and even more with the Action Agenda from Accra. As a result of this dialogue initiated by the NGO Policy Forum, donors commissioned a consultancy to prepare “Guidelines for Civil Society support” (Ingelstad and Karlsen, 2007), which proposes common principles for Development Partners’ support to civil society organizations. The impact of these initiatives depends on the commitment of both donors and civil society organizations to follow up on the recommended steps. In line with the principles of coherence, synergy and complementarity it would make sense for the Belgium Cooperation to adhere to these “Guidelines for Civil Society Support” and also join the donor group that is linked to the “civil society support” group (see website: www.civilsocietysupport.net). Additionally, there are many options to support Civil Society. In this document three options are outlined: 1. Funding and capacity building support to CSOs at regional level 2. Support to accountability via Deepening Democracy Program and the media. 3. Support to democracy through Civic Education and Public Debates Option 1: funding and capacity building support to CSOs at regional level Current existing capacity building institutes and projects in Tanzania are insufficient to meet needs and demand. Funding for capacity development especially for smaller 18

Support models for CSOs, Scanteam, Aug 2007, pg 9

12 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009 CSOs is still short in supply. The most relevant source of capacity building funding for smaller CSOs is the Foundation for Civil Society. The main link for the CSOs to policy influencing is via the Policy Forum, HakiElimu (Education) and HakiKazi Catalyst. TANGO is the umbrella organization of over 600 CSOs, which links local organisations to national level. One way to proceed may be to increase the numbers of intermediary institutes that provide support to capacity building such as the FCS and Policy Forum, though not at national but on regional level. On the other hand, the sectoral or thematic focus derived from the IDCP choices, namely in the field Local Governance and Natural Resource Management would certainly create more complementarity and synergy when it is implemented in the same geographical circle of influence. Intermediary organizations at regional level will help to close the gap between national and local level. Support to the node of networks and coalitions, introducing a regional funding mechanism to assume both a capacity building and a forward funding role where they would take such a sectoral/thematic responsibility could be a welcomed experiment.

Figure 1: Possible support model: building blocks of civil society

FCS= PF= RFM= RPF= LCB= SD=

Foundation for Civil Society Policy Forum Regional Funding Mechanism Regional Policy Forum (advocacy and lobbying) Local Capacity Builder Service Delivery

The blocks, that have black lines around them, are existing structures. The others are the proposed structures. Black lines are existing links. Dotted lines are proposed links.

13 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009 This model promotes the three building blocks of funding (RFM), policy (RPF) and representativeness (regional networks), that are interlinked and enforcing each other, at regional level, the same as already exists at national level. Its aim is to link national level with local level and to further build the capacity of the local civil society. There will be need for financial support to the core functions of RFM and RPF. At same time the LCBs need to be supported in terms of funding to allow them to enhance the capacity of NGO networks to provide capacity building. The creation of a regional information centre could enhance access to information for all citizens, in particular of the CSOs, elected councillors, MPs and the local press clubs. This model could be linked to existing Belgium initiatives and to relevant local partners to jointly fill the gaps. Option 2: Support to accountability via Deepening Democracy Program and the media. Instead of direct (financial) support to Civil Society Organisations, which will implicate extra administrative and time consuming effort, it is possible to find synergy and complementarity in joining other donors that are involved in accountability programs. For example, it would be relatively easy to join the donor group that supports the Deepening Democracy Program. UNDP will implement the program that addresses Parliament, Civil Society engagement and Election process all at the same time. It is, however, advised to have a closer look at the program and its new strategic plan since the current phase will stop in 2010. The program now has four axes: 1. Facilitation and implementation of the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM). For more information: www.APRM.go.tz 2. The National Electoral Commission and the Electoral Process; including technical assistance, capacity building and advice 3. Civic Education and Civil Society Empowerment, 4. Good and accountable Governance; including support to Parliament (Bunge), the House of Representatives in Zanzibar, political parties. The implementing agency is the Tanzanian Centre for Democracy. Support includes also the Members of Parliament, the staff of the National Assembly and the Secretariat of Parliament. Civic education and Civil Society empowerment have never really started. There is some confusion about the terminology of civic education, which is not the same as voter’s/ election education. CSOs, Ministry of education, NEC/ZEC, all claim to be involved in this sort of activities. In order to come to an implementation strategy the Deepening Democracy programme has hired the services of a consultant. A final report must be available by now. One of the earlier recommendations was to install a national steering committee on civic education and good governance. There would be a large representation from society in this national steering committee; representatives of the youth, women, civil society, academia, disabled people, religious entities, PMO-RALG and the Ministry of education. Option 3: Support to democracy through Civic Education and Public Debates In a complete different line of thinking, one could also imagine to invest the totality of the Civil Society funding for 4 years in one important event, like civic education, to increase the possible impact of the amount of funds that is available. In preparation of the election process, there is need to inform the citizens on their rights and responsibilities. Civil Society Organisations have a role to play in order to ensure a non–partisan approach. There are a number of organisations that are specialized in Civic Education, like CETA, the Institute for Adult Education (para-statal), Bunge Foundation for Democracy, and others.

14 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009 In the previous election process (2005) UNDP, ALAT, SNV and TANGO organised a few Public Debates at regional level with the NGO networks, which were much appreciated. The debates contribute to citizen’s understanding of what is at stake and the implications of their choices. Therefore, many more of such public debates at lower levels could have impact on the election participation. A joint approach by the CSOs at national level would be most advisable. This will implicate a considerable amount of energy at very short notice in order to start on time. One of the risks to start civic education just before the elections is that it will get a political connotation, unless specific topics like leadership, human rights and accountability are the core of the message.

9.

Synergy between Direct and Indirect Belgium Cooperation

Synergy, coherence and complementarity are high on the Belgium and International Development Cooperation agenda. Synergy, coherence and synergy with what Belgium institutions (BTC, BSF and others) do, as well as with what other international and national stakeholders do in Tanzania. Therefore, it makes sense to first identify where the Belgium efforts are/will be concentrated according to the new IDCP and where BTC and BSF are active geographically and in which sectors. The IDCP has identified 2 sectors to focus on in the next 4 years: Local Government Reform and Natural Resource Management. These are not new sectors. BTC has been active in both sectors for the last 4 Years. In relation to Local Government Reform, the Belgium contribution consists mainly of providing finances (about 23 million euro) to the LGDG (grants system) basket fund under LGRP II. There is no specific geographical concentration identified regarding this sector. The support is directly sent to PMO-RALG (via the Ministry of Finance), which is implementing the LGRP II program. The LGRP II program addresses 4 main components: enabling environment for D-by-D, Capacity Development of LGAs, enhanced citizen participation and accountability and programme management and accountability. Civil Society would be most involved with objective 3, namely enhanced citizen participation and accountability. In relation to Natural Resource Management, BTC has been involved in a number of projects: Eastern-Selous Community Wildlife and Natural Resource Management project, which is located in 14 villages in 2 districts East of the Selous Wildlife Park and the Kilombero project. The projects could explore relationships with other CSOs active in the NRM sector as well as with the local governments of the relevant districts to find synergy. There are two bigger Belgium NGOs: TRIAS and VECO, which operate under the Belgium Survival Fund. TRIAS supports movements and organisations of farmers and small entrepreneurs in selected divisions of 4 districts (Babati, Monduli, Longodo, Mufindi). It also partners with selected micro finance institutions and service NGOs. VECO TZ supports the development of “value chains” in selected areas of Same, Simanjaro, Chunya, Mkuranga districts. VECO also partners with farmers organisations and service NGOs.

15 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009

to be completed Based on the location of the current interventions related to the selected sectors, three regions might be strategically smart to choose in order to enhance synergy and complementarity, namely Arusha, Pwani and/or Iringa In Arusha, there are many CSOs and there is a strong NRM network: TNRF. In partnership with the PF and FCS and other donors, the regional RFM and RPF could be build in order to engage with local government on one hand while building the capacity of the regional network to provide capacity building and to create an information centre on the other hand. The link with TRIAS and VECO is relevant in this case. In Pwani, the Kibaha Policy Forum is currently being constructed and strengthened by the PF. The Eastern Selous project (if decided to continue) together with VECO could link up to support this initiative and help build the RFM part. Other stakeholders could be contacted to join the forum. In Iringa, there is need for more exploration regarding active locally based CSOs in terms of funding, regional NGO networks, Capacity Building and policy influencing initiatives. The Kilombero Project could provide the link to this activity. Initially, the focus could be on NRM CSOs only. Synergy with option 1: Building blocks at regional level In support of the regional processes and the link between national and local levels, the local partners of the Belgium projects could be involved and supported in order to 19 strengthen the networks, citizen’s engagement and policy influencing. DANIDA and possibly other national based stakeholders like TWAWEZA, NSA and TGNP could be approached for joint strategic intervention, regarding supply and demand for accountability and the link to local government (LGRP II), while the NRM related 19

DANIDA announced it will start to support CSOs in the field of environment from 2009 onwards.

16 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009 organisations like TNRF, PINGO, Haki Ardhi, are possible partners to address the sector specific governance issues. In relation to the agricultural sector in support of TRIAS, links with organisations, like MVIWATA, TPSF, and the BEST advocacy component could help create regional networks and links to national level. For VECO, Faida Mali and MIICO are the current partners. Links with national level based organisations that are specialized in market linkages (to be explored) seem to be most appropriate partners.

Synergy with option 2: Joining the others in the Deepening Democracy Programme To find synergy with the second option, it would be more effective to join national based organisations/programs, like the Deepening Democracy programme, and find connection only where and when necessary with the locally based Belgium interventions. Synergy with option 3: Civic Education and public debates Possible partners could be specialized organisations like Campaign for Good Governance and Economic Development (CGG&ED), and Civic Education Teachers’ Association (CETA). While supporting these organisations in their core functioning, specific strengthening could be foreseen for interventions in those regions where local Belgium activity takes place. For example, the public debates could be organised in the three proposed regions, while backed up by the Belgium programs/projects/NGOs

17 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009

10. References: •

•

• • • • • • •

• •

•

Wells Adrian, “Civic engagement and accountability, Africa after the Africa Commission: What priorities for the German G8?” ODI/DfID/DSA/IDS, May 2007, Fighting Poverty Together, Case studies of Collaboration between Civil Society Organizations and the Government in Tanzania, NGO Resource Centre/TANGO. Accountability Strategy, 2007-2010, DFID, April 2007 Context Analysis on social accountability, eMJee/Forum Syd, November 2008 Civil Society networks in Tanzania: a Capacity Assessment study, UDSM/FCS, April 2008 Support Models for CSOs at Country Level, Scanteam, August 2007 World Bank Development report, 2004 Guidelines for support to Civil Society, Anders Ingelstam, Cecilia Karlstedt, Oct 2007 Tanzania Non-Governmental Organisations-their perceptions of their relationships with the Government of Tanzania and donors, and their role in poverty reduction and development, REPOA, Special Paper No 07.21, 2007 Building Dynamic Local Service Provider Communities: A value chain approach, PACT, Nov 2006 Building the capacity of civil society organisations for evidencedbased advocacy and policy influencing in Tanzania (J. Makongo, 2006), Making advocacy Work: Funding for effective social change (G. Mugizi), CSA. Building Governance and Civil Society: Learning and Innovation from local funds, Katie Wiseman, CARE, May 2006

18 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009

Annex 1: Social Accountability concepts The World Development Report 2004 (WDR) argues that the key to making services work for poor people is to strengthen relationships of accountability between policymakers, service providers and citizens. The obligation of government officials to be accountable to citizens is the logical result of basic human rights as often embedded in the Constitution. Social accountability initiatives are needed to help citizens understand their civic rights and play a proactive and responsible role in exercising those rights In figure 1 it is explained how citizens can obtain services either via the long route via the state or the small route, which is directly linking to the service delivery providers. Figure 1: Accountability Actors framework

According to the WDR 2004 framework successful service delivery requires relationships in which citizens can have a strong voice in policy making with politicians and bureaucrats (voice), clients can monitor and discipline providers (client power), and policy makers can provide the incentives for providers to serve clients (contract/compact). By enhancing citizen information and voice, introducing incentives for downward accountability and creating mechanisms for participatory monitoring and citizen-state dialogue and negotiation, social accountability mechanisms can make an important contribution to more informed policy design and improved public service delivery (Ravindra 2004). Accountability elements as disclosed in the WDR Model20: It departs from a situation where two actors have an accountability relationship. The actor on the left is the prime actor, or principle actor. On the right side is the accountable actor, meaning, this agent is held accountable by the prime actor.

20

World Bank Development report, 2004

19 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009 Figure 2: Accountability elements:

WDR describes the 5 elements that come back in every accountability relationship. Stage 1: The principal/rights holder delegates to and finances the agent or duty bearer to carry out specific roles, responsibilities and tasks; Stage 2: The agent/duty bearer performs (ie carries out) what has been assigned to them and informs (reports) back on progress and the status of implementation; Stage 3. The principal/rights holder then enforces performance through control over sanctions or rewards, including control over further Social accountability refers to the broad range of actions and mechanisms delegation and financing. beyond voting that citizens can use to hold the state to account, as well as actions on the part of government, civil society, media and other societal actors that promote or facilitate these efforts. The two frameworks (accountability actors framework and the accountability elements) combined would give the following pictures in Tanzania regarding the actors and the flows in the long route and the short route: Figure 3: the accountability relationships:

Citizens delegate decision making to the state through elections and provide funds through taxes. The donors also provide funds to the state on behalf of the citizens in order to provide services. The state delegates service delivery and provides funds to the service providers The service providers implement and provide the services to the citizens. Normally, providers would inform the citizens and the state on what happens. However, in Tanzania the service providers report back to the central government who than reports to the donors. See annex 1 for the flows of accountability relations.

20 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009 How to enhance social accountability? Figure 4 depicts four groups of factors that are critical to achieving social accountability:

Each of these groups of factors can be looked at in terms of the three key core elements of social accountability – information, voice and negotiation. While social accountability initiatives usually focus on creating or strengthening mechanisms for enhanced accountability, it is also important to take into account factors in each of these four key areas. In order to be effective, social accountability mechanisms often need to be preceded or complemented by efforts to enhance the willingness and capacities of citizens, civil society and government actors to engage in actions to promote a more enabling environment. Citizen-state bridging mechanisms Many social accountability initiatives focus on strengthening bridging mechanisms—mechanisms for information exchange, dialogue and negotiation—between citizens and the state. This can involve the introduction of new tools, opportunities or platforms for citizen-state interaction, or the improvement, renewal or reform of existing mechanisms, systems and agencies. Examples include introducing or improving proactive government information disclosure through the establishment of public information centers or campaigns; creating platforms for public debate and citizen-state dialogue such as radio “call in” programs, public hearings, town hall meetings and citizen’s juries; and establishing fora for negotiation and participatory decision-making such as public meetings, joint committees and participatory budgeting processes.

21 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009 Attitudes and capacities of state actors The willingness and ability of politicians and civil servants to account to the people is a third critical factor in achieving social accountability. From the perspective of the three building blocks of social accountability—information, voice and negotiation—the willingness and ability of state actors to disclose information and to listen to and engage with citizens is key. Many governments have taken important steps towards enhancing their capacity to share information and engage with citizens. Such actions, sometimes undertaken with donor support and in collaboration with civil society actors, include improved information management systems, staff training to enhance communication and facilitation skills, the use of rewards and sanctions to promote transparent and responsive behaviour, the adoption of professional codes of ethics, and information campaigns on accountability policies or citizens’ rights. Attitudes and capacities of citizens and CS actors The willingness and ability of citizens and civil society to actively seek government accountability is another key determinant of successful social accountability. These factors can represent a major obstacle in contexts where civil society may be weak and notions of citizenship are undeveloped. Key issues include: the capacity of civil society actors—including independent media—to research, analyze, demystify and disseminate relevant information; the capacity of citizens to organize, mobilize, build coalitions and speak with a common voice; the willingness and ability to interact and negotiate with government and to adopt a constructive and solution-oriented approach; and the capacity of CSOs to build public support and to demonstrate credible and accountable behaviour. A wide variety of training, capacity building and support measures targeting diverse civil society actors—including citizens associations, community based organizations, intermediary NGOs, social movements, media, think tanks, and public interest law centers—can be used to address capacity issues in this area. Efforts by civil society to build organizational capacities and improve internal governance practices, as well as initiatives by government and development partners to support such efforts, are an important component of enhanced social accountability. An enabling environment Finally, social accountability is strongly influenced by a range of underlying political, legal, social, cultural and economic factors. These factors play an important role in determining the feasibility and likelihood of success of social accountability initiatives. Some aspects of the enabling environment are so critical that they can almost be considered prerequisites for social accountability.

22 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009

Annex 2: Short explanation of the (in this case) most relevant Civil Society Organisations On request of the Belgium Embassy a short explanation of the relevant CSOs is provided here under.

Foundation of Civil Society The Foundation for Civil Society is a Tanzanian non-profit company, designed and funded by a group of like-minded development partners, and governed by an independent Board. It provides grants and other capacity building support to civil society organisations to enable economically disadvantaged and vulnerable citizens. The Foundation is one of the largest support mechanisms for civil society in Tanzania. It is funded by at least 6 different donors: SDC, Norway Embassy, DfID, EKN, CIDA and Irish Aid.

Policy Forum Policy Forum (PF) is a national membership (more than 90 member org.) organization, based in Dar es Salaam. It is working, amongst others, on social accountability for 3-4 years now. PF has developed Tanzania specific tools, which they call SAM (social accountability monitoring), and identified organizations to work with at local level. Related to this is the initiative to establish regional policy forums, which now has taken off. There are 2 pilots: KIBAHA NGO coalition or Kibaha Policy Forum (KPF) and the Mwanza Policy Initiative (MPI). These pilots serve as learning Guiney Pigs for PF and for the Budget and LG working groups in Dar. Training has taken place including the local MP, and the CSOs. The MPI has finalized its proposal where 7 organizations have been involved in a 2day exercise. FCS was also involved as co-funder of the pilots. Policy Forum is financially supported by its members (25%), but Google is their main funder.

Leadership Forum (TLF) The Leadership Forum is a NGO established in 2000 and financed by the Norwegian Embassy, via NPA. Its objectives are as follows: 1. To identify, recruit, train, groom and release the emerging young leaders for exploring, sharing and utilizing potential opportunities of human kind and play their leadership role in society. 2. To equip Tanzanians, men and women with useful skills and knowledge in exercising productive careers, talents and professions. 3. To enlighten Tanzanians about their abilities and responsibilities in tapping endowed potential resources (human and material) available in the country. 4. To create a forum for Tanzanians, where people at various societal levels may meet to share their experiences, opinions, contributions and suggestions towards making true leaders in the country. TLF has implemented amongst others 6 PETS at district level last year.

Legal and Human Rights Center The LHRC was formed as a private, voluntary, non-profit and non-partisan organization founded in 1995. It has its main office in Dar es Salaam and a regional office in Arusha. The main three purposes are aimed to: 1. Improve policy and legislative framework and community capacity for social justice 2. Strengthen partnership for human rights and good governance; and 3. Improve institutional capacity building to ensure good performance and sustainability of the organization The LHRC is financially supported by the Embassies of Finland and Sweden.

23 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009

TANGO TANGO is an Association of some 600 NGOs in Tanzania. It is based in Dar es Salaam at national level. Its mission is to increase the qualitative and quantitative contribution of the NGO sector in development. It promotes the growth of the NGO sector and civil society at large through mandated representation on and advocacy of common issues and interests concerning NGOs to other stakeholders in the development process. TANGO seeks to contribute to the improved performance of the NGO sector and related institutions through capacity building, coordination of its members, and by acting as a resource hub for information and skill exchange. It is not clear whether TANGO is funded by its members only or also by other donors as well.

TGNP Tanzania Gender Networking Programme (TGNP) is a non-governmental organization working in the civil society sector since 1993. It is an activist organization focusing on the practical promotion and application of gender equality, equity and women’s empowerment objectives through policy advocacy and mainstreaming of gender and pro-poor perspectives at all levels in the Tanzanian society and beyond. The organization strives to enhance the mainstreaming of gender at all levels of society from grassroots communities to the highest levels of national policy-making and legislation. For effective and systematic realization of its vision and mission the organization has over the last fourteen years, blocked its work into five programmes areas namely: • Activism, Lobbying and Coalition Building (ALC); • Analysis, Research & Publications (ARP); • Feminist Information Centre (FIC); • Gender Training Institute (GTI); • Programme Support Management (PSM); TGNP also seems to be autonomous from donors.

HakiElimu HakiElimu is a citizens-centered organization aimed at policy influencing and is specialized in Education and Democracy. It is based in Dar es Salaam at national level and it is famous for its clash with the government 2-3 years ago on tv spot and advertisements questioning government on the quality of primary education in Tanzania. It was almost banned forever, but because of its public support by parliament as well as citizens and back up by the donor community they are allowed to continue on certain conditions. HakiElimu has a strong link with the grass level through its “Friends of HakiElimu/Education” mechanism. HakiElimu works to realize equity, quality, human rights and democracy in education by facilitating communities to transform schools and influence policy making, stimulating imaginative public dialogue and organizing for change, conducting critical research, policy analysis and advocacy and collaborating with partners to advance common interests and social justice. It is funded by the Embassies of Sweden and Ireland

HakiKazi Catalyst: HakiKazi is a lobbying and advocacy organization, that is based in Arusha. It is well known for popularizing information for the citizens of Tanzania. They are active at national level and local level: policy formulation, poverty policy implementation, monitoring and feedback, policy reformulation. They are mainly active in Arusha and Manyara at national level. 14 officers working in 96 villages. Norwegian Church Aid will support them to do PETS into 14 districts outside Arusha.

24 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009

Funding by: 1. (60%) donors now 950.000 $ for 3 years (2006-2008). There are 7 donors including the government. 2. (40%) own revenue: 20% of time for consultancies that fall within strategic plan.

TNRF TNRF is a collective civil society-based initiative to improve natural resource management and conservation in Tanzania by addressing fundamental issues of governance. The Tanzanian Natural Resource Forum is based in Arusha. TNRF was formed in 2001 as the Wildlife Working Group (WWG) by a small informal group of people wishing to promote a new rights-based approach for addressing critical natural resource management issues in Tanzania. This approach holds that natural resource management challenges should not be simply approached as technical and often isolated 'conservation' issues. Instead, resource management needs to be achieved holistically taking into consideration the integrated management of different resource bases, such as forests, fisheries, wildlife and rangelands. Critically there is a great need to engage with the fundamentals upon which the management of natural resources is dependent - governance, democracy and livelihoods. These key factors are integral to TNRF's promotion of a devolved 'rights-based' approach necessary for achieving its vision of equitable, sustainable and transparent management of Tanzania's natural resources. In October 2005, the Wildlife Working Group became Tanzania Natural Resource Forum, in recognition of the fact that many of the issues that the WWG was working on were common to all natural resources, and that a holistic and cross-sectoral approach was required. In February 2006, TNRF became an independently registered NGO, with its own membership and governing steering committee. Since its inception TNRF has worked to leverage funds and resources for a variety of participant demand-driven activities and events that contribute to TNRF's strategic objectives. • Bi-monthly barazas: • Facilitation of member- and partner-driven thematic working groups. • Occasional law and policy seminars: These workshops, customised to member needs, on natural resource laws and policies aim to disseminate information on laws and policies relevant to natural resource management, such as the Wildlife Conservation Act, the Land Acts, or the Poverty Reduction Strategy. • Publications: TNRF works to produce a wide range of documents in collaboration with participants to disseminate information and raise awareness of natural resource issues. These include: The forum is financed by over 25 donors, eg. NGOs, private sector and international organisations, of which Danida and WCS are the biggest.

TWAWEZA: TWAWEZA, meaning “we can make it happen”, is a programme (2009-2018) that seeks to enable people in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda to improve their quality of live through bold, citizen-centred approach to development and public accountability. It will use existing formal and informal channels (mobile phones), either through the private sector, government, politicians or media that have direct connections to the citizens in order to achieve outreach straight away. It avoids seeing the society in terms of structures and schemes, but more in terms of individual people that are driven by incentives, motivation and power relations living in the real world. The program is supported by more unusual donors, like HIVOS, Google, HP, and others. The program will identify 2-3 partnerships (selected by topic) per year to

25 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009 support a specific goal, to be identified based on “signs”, but within the sectors of education, water and health or others as determined by citizens. Key actors being: local media, religious bodies, consumer goods networks, trade unions, schools/clinics, government oversight bodies, key NGOs/think tanks. It will build on coalition of partners. Key programs will be : • Access to information • Media effectiveness • Citizen monitoring There will be a strong focus on learning. Twaweza also proposes to promote one-stop info shops at regional level in support of the strategic interventions.

Tanzania Media Fund: The TMF is closely linked to Twaweza. Tanzania Media Fund (TMF) is a new fund that seeks to promote independence and quality in media, with a particular focus on public interest and investigative journalism. TMF believes that independent media is the lifeblood of a free and democratic society. To support quality journalism, they offer: • A competitive grant-making facility for individuals and institutions involved in media production (print, television and radio), and • A tailor-made learning facility for grantees that offers learning-by-doing resources, coaching, mentorship and networking opportunities. The Media Fund is an initiative of a group of development partners in Tanzania. They include: SDC, DfID, EKN, Irish Aid, Danish Embassy.

SNV SNV is in the process of finalizing (end 2008) its joint program with the Netherlands Embassy, called Capacity Building for Local Governance Actors (CBLGA). The program started in 2004 and focussed on LGA capacities to deliver services while adhering to good governance principles, the link between LGAs, Civil Society and the Private Sector at district level and vertical linkages for the three pillars of society. Based on the recently undertaken evaluation, SNV will repackage the best practices learned from the first phase and engage with 35 districts in 7 regions to roll out the developed “products” in the next 3 (?) years. SNV will pilot the Local Capacity Development Fund in a limited number of districts. SNV will collaborate with Twaweza and the TMF in the selected districts. SNV is also currently testing out the Strategic Governance And Corruption Analysis (SGACA) at local level in collaboration with the EKN and DED.

PACT Pact Tanzania is an international NGO implementing a program called MCA-BONGA that deals with advocacy in fighting corruption and insisting on Good Governance. In its BONGA program, PACT has been very active in promoting Public Expenditure Tracking Systems throughout the country by jointly21 developing a manual on PETS, and by providing training to NGOs and NGO networks. Until today, over 120 organizations have been trained and are planning or doing PETS some where in the country. PACT also provided training for journalists on investigative journalisms (but not linked to TMF) and anticorruption, which has lead to the disclosure of some very high level scams and corruption cases. The BONGO programme is entirely funded by USAID.

21

The manual called “follow the money”, was prepared In close collaboration with HakiKazi Catalyst and TGNP.

26 eMJee Development Consult

Civil Society in Tanzania, Blegium Cooperation, 2009 Non-State Actors Programme Program management unit is set up by the Ministry of Finance and has a semi-public status (funding from the European Community). Tanzania has opted for support to more than 1000 organizations all over the country, while at the same time it is acknowledged that the concept of “Non-state Actors” is still relatively new. Nevertheless it is expected the target organizations are involved in policy processes!!! One of the interventions has been Capacity Building support to 400 organizations. This was developed with support from MS-TCDC. Implementation was done through UDSM/MDF targeting higher level staff and organizations and through TRACE/HAKIKAZI targeting community level organizations. Topics dealt with were information management, lobbying and advocacy. Other initiative was the establishment of learning platforms (debate form) on, for example, Urban waste policy, mining issues (rights on natural resources management) Workshops on EPAs. For next year, the program will work on monitoring and mentoring to the organizations that participated in the workshops, since it is about the use of skills. Workshops alone are not enough. The modality to do this is to support 7 organizations as focal point organizations (Mwanza, Kigoma, Mbeya, Msasi, Arusha (HakiKazi) and Zanzibar) to become a zonal information center. The centers will be equipped with basic information management tools and ensure links between the national level and district level. From the coming years the Tanzania country strategy paper will continue to focus on non-state actors, and resources are set aside of around €20 million. 5 million will be made available for grants.

MS- TCDC MS –TCDC is a training centre for Development Cooperation in eastern and Southern Africa based in Usa River (Arusha). Originally it was created by MS (Danish NGO). Its target group is: CBOs, FBOs, traditional institutes, media. MS-TCDC is also in a phase of reorientation towards building local democracy: political empowerment, and holding government accountable. It can be considered a Local Capacity Builder (LCB)

27 eMJee Development Consult