Brief 02: Local Accountability in Congo

  • For the economic outcomes, the low per capita investments and the quick measurement timeline may plausibly account for the results. Although the temporal and spatial coverage is great, the per capita investments both in terms of finances and training are small.
  • The simplest explanation for the weak effects on governance outcomes is that existing structures are resilient and that while behavior may change temporarily to meet the conditions of development actors, more fundamental change is not being achieved.
    • Another possibility is that the scale of the project was too small to affect governance: few were directly engaged in training and project management and the grants may have been too small to ensure broad engagement.
    • A third possibility is that the program is pitched at the wrong level to effect change in governance structures and social cohesion; Tuungane has focused on the most local levels which may not display the same problems of cohesion and weak governance that are so visible in Congo at the macro level.