IV. National, Regional and International Activities

The following section highlights the diverse organizing strategies that Social Watchers have developed to raise awareness and strengthen monitoring and advocacy work at the national, regional and international levels.  At the national level this work has served to strengthen civil society groups through the development of new tools and processes.  Regional exchanges have been organized to share experiences and develop common positions in order to present a united force.  International advocacy work is informed, and reinforced by, activities at the national level.  This section ends with an analysis of the impact and challenges of these processes.

 Out of the 26 Watchers whose experiences and priorities are presented below, the vast majority identify themselves as development NGOs, five address women’s rights, four emphasize advocacy and three focus on research (See Appendix 2 for an overview of NGOs interviewed).  More than one-third were from Latin and Central America including Mexico, six from Africa, five from Asia, four from Europe and one each from North America and the Middle East.  More than one-third joined Social Watch from its inception in 1995, another one-third joined the following year, and the remaining linked up at various times over the last three years.  Their main reason for joining Social Watch is to strengthen national activities related to social development and network with similar NGOs in a global movement engaged in monitoring and advocating i implementation of the Social Summit and Women’s Conference agreements at the national and international levels.  As Abdoul Soulèye Sow of Senegal stated, “We live in a world that is increasingly global and in order to carry out our national objectives we must be aware of, and try to influence, what is taking place internationally.” 

The following quotes capture the political spirit that attracts many Social Watchers to join this growing initiative: 

“Social Watch is a process that is building an international movement not just a network.” – Sarba Raj Khadka, Rural Reconstruction of Nepal

 “Social Watch is a broad space to coordinate efforts between social and civil organizations to address the underlying causes of poverty and inequality and thereby strengthen the struggle to eradicate poverty and achieve just and equitable social development.” – Alberto Yepes, Corporación Región, Colombia

 “Social Watch advances new alternatives and perspectives to both society and government.” – Hector Bejar, Centro de Estudios para el Desarrollo y la Participación, Peru

 “Social Watch is a catalyst for connecting the often disparate activities of NGOs around economic and social justice issues.  It provides an important opportunity for national NGOs to link their advocacy to global activities and programs.” – Dave Husy, National Land Committee, South Africa

A. National Organizing Efforts

 A unique quality of Social Watch is the sheer diversity of organizing initiatives.  No single model of organizing exists, rather groups have developed multiple approaches to using Social Watch to create spaces for dialogue and exchange, promote advocacy efforts, and ultimately, engender positive change.  In order to present the breadth of strategies adopted by Social Watchers at the national level, we have developed a typology of approaches used to promote interest and advocacy around social development concerns.  These include: organizing broad NGO coalitions, strengthening grassroots movements, developing consultative NGO processes, complementing existing NGO coalitions and engaging in research-based processes.  These strategies are not mutually exclusive and many organizations use a combination of approaches.  The purpose of the following classification is therefore not to limit their activities to one area but rather to present the overriding approach adopted.  The obstacles that some countries have faced initiating and sustaining Social Watch activities is also addressed in this section.

 Many groups have also developed Social Watch materials to fit national and local contexts and priorities.  We have included names of such materials when appropriate in the following text (see Appendix 4 for examples of Social Watcher’s publications). 

 1.       Organizing Broad NGO Coalitions

 In a few countries NGOs have attempted to develop multi-sectoral and multi-regional Social Watch initiatives to bring together a wide range of civil society actors focused on monitoring their government’s implementation of the Social Summit and Women’s Conference commitments and advocating alternative development policies.  It is notable that the NGOs leading such broad-based efforts were all deeply involved in the Social Summit process and formed Social Watch initiatives in their countries soon after the UN conference. 

 The Brazilian Social Watch initiative is an example of a participatory and decentralized process linking individuals and institutions involved in social development issues and gaining legitimacy with national policy makers over time.  A reference group responsible for launching and managing this initiative was formed by Instituto Brasileiro de Análises Sociais e Economômicas (IBASE) [4] in coalition with Centro de Estudos de Cultura Contemporânea (CEDEC), Federação de Órgãos de Assistência Social e Educacional (FASE), Instituto Nacional de Estudos Socioeconômicos (INESC) and SOSCorpo - Gênero e Cidadania (SOSCorpo) [5].  Overtime this group has developed partnerships with trade unions, academics, women’s organizations and networks, Afro-Brazilian organizations, environmentalists and human rights initiatives.  Partners in this loose network contribute to the analysis published in the annual report and participate in seminars and workshops.  The national initiative aims to: 1) disseminate analysis and information on global debates and the implementation of conferences commitments in other countries; 2) enhance monitoring and advocacy efforts at national and local levels; 3) dialogue with government actors responsible for the implementation of UN conference commitments.

 Brazilian Social Watchers produce a Brazilian edition of the international report – the only publication in the country that undertakes a systematic assessment of the Women’s Conference and Social Summit commitments.  They have also created a comprehensive, internet accessible database, with information on the commitments, indicators used to monitor progress and civil society proposals and initiatives.  In addition, a series of journals providing national perspectives on the international process are published annually.  For the first time the monitoring and report writing process has been regionalized.  In January 2000 a report examining social development concerns in the Amazon region was published, coordinated by Forum da Amazônia Oriental (FAOR), a network of grassroots organizations, NGOs, women’s groups and environmentalists.

 A similar broad based Social Watch process is underway in Italy coordinated by Mani Tese and Movimondo.  A country-wide coalition of civil society members active on poverty, social exclusion and unemployment has been created to monitor Italian social policies.  Given that the Italian government pays scant attention to international agreements, most advocacy efforts are aimed at raising awareness among both policy makers and civil society of the Social Summit commitments as well as the crucial link between domestic and international social and economic issues.  Italian Social Watchers have adopted a two-tiered approach linking policy and public education, as they firmly believe that in order to achieve policy objectives on social development, the Italian population must be educated.  As a case in point, social watch indicators have been integrated in development education curricula and a delegation of students and teachers attended Social Summit + 5 to gain a hands-on experience of how the inter-governmental process works as well as an understanding of the main social development concerns of civil society actors.

 The Italian edition of the Social Watch Annual Report is used as an advocacy tool and contains a series of thematic chapters on globalization also used for development education.  The launches and various local presentations of the Italian report have strengthened the credibility and the legitimacy of grassroots groups to dialogue with institutions around the implementation and impact of social policies.

 The Philippine Social Watch initiative is another example of mobilizing a broad spectrum of civil society organizations across the country.  Action for Economic Reform, Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement and Accessing Support Services and Entrepreneurial Technology, formed a coordinating committee to manage the initiative.  Regular NGO consultations are held on three of the main islands, facilitating a process of networking among an already vibrant development NGO movement.  Regional member organizations prepare reports on social development conditions in their area and relevant sections are incorporated into a common position paper, which is open for edits until finalized. 

 Philippine Social Watchers have established links with government officials, creating a space for civil society to interact with government bureaucrats and advocate for alternative development policies.  At Social Summit + 5 this linkage developed into a strategic partnership as key NGO advocacy points were incorporated into the official government position and a leading member of Social Watch-Philippines was included in the official delegation.  In addition the Philippine national report to the Social Summit + 5 meeting was oriented towards partnership with civil society.

 2.      Strengthening Grassroots Movements

 Social Watch has been used to strengthen capital-based organizations as well as those working on a grassroots level to monitor local government and public agencies.  The development of popular educational tools coupled with awareness raising and capacity building has mobilized local NGOs on issues related to the Social Summit commitments.  This process – described by some as “popular education through practice” [6]  – has helped to concretize the meaning of active citizenship and enhance links between advocacy, grassroots and service delivery NGOs. 

 In Chile the Social Watch process has been used as a mobilizing tool by local women’s organizations in collaboration with peasant groups.  Popular educational materials have been developed by the Centro de Estudios de la Mujer (CEDEM), [7] linking macro and micro economic and social issues including globalization and foreign debt, the commitments of the Chilean government at Social Summit, and domestic violence, health and education.  The process involved in developing these manuals is noteworthy and began with discussions of concepts used such as citizenship, participation, discrimination, power and rights as interpreted and defined by grassroots women.  As these notions implicitly include the concept of the individual, discussions arose enabling women to reflect on both their practical needs as well as strategic interests.  By using Social Watch materials and concepts, this process has opened spaces for discussion of alternative ways of approaching social development concerns among women’s organizations at local and national levels. 

 In Chile processes have been put into place linking grassroots organizations with those working on an international level.  Several tools have enhanced this process such as the production of a popular guide to the practice of Social Watch  - Exercising Social Watch.  Towards Active Citizenship for Women [8] - and other training manuals. 

 In Peru, the Centro de Estudios para el Desarrollo y la Participación (CEDEP), [9] joined Social Watch to place social development issues at the fore of public policies given the dramatic social and economic impact of the implementation of structural adjustment programs in that country.  Meetings, seminars, annual conferences and educational programs have been organized to analyze existing polices, illustrate their impact on women’s and men’s lives, and develop alternative legislation.  This process is carried out through the National Conference for Social Development, Conades, which involves approximately 300 Peruvian non-governmental organizations.  The process of writing the Peruvian chapter of the Social Watch annual report builds on this accumulation of knowledge and experience and takes approximately one month.  It includes several national and local-level consultations with a wide range of civil society actors described as a “pluralistic yet unifying process.” [10] In January 1999, CEDEP launched a jointly authored text El Perú [11] dealing with the various aspects of poverty and development in Peru and highlighting the importance of creating spaces to discuss and advocate for social change.  Articles from this text were subsequently modified to be included in Social Watch’s annual report.

 The Social Watch process in Peru has served to create and maintain stronger links between various members of civil society.  Advocacy work has been strengthened as groups continue the process of analyzing official statistics, developing accountability mechanisms, linking policy with actual situations and working on local as well as national levels. 

 3.      Developing Consultative NGO Processes

 In addition to strengthening grassroots groups, public spaces have been created for sharing information and engendering collaboration among diverse organizations.  NGO consultations have enabled groups that previously were unaware of each other’s activities, due to traditional divides across sectors, to come together on a regular basis, to share experiences and to establish common ground.  Through this effort NGOs have developed awareness of areas of convergence across different sectors as well as the skills to articulate and lobby for their demands. 

 In El-Salvador, few NGOs were aware of advocacy work at the international level prior to the Social Summit and Women’s Conference on a sectoral basis.  As part of the experience gained working at these two international meetings, NGOs began consultations for various civil society actors to discuss common interests and develop related priorities.  For example, a coalition of groups was created including the Asociacion Intersectorial para el Desarrollo Economico y el Progresso Social (CIDEP) [12] working on education, FUMA - the Maquilishuatl Foundation on health, and Las Dignas on women and gender equity.  In addition links were developed with rural communities focusing on domestic violence, those working with populations touched by the tropical storm Mitch and others focusing on the electoral process. 

 The process of organizing cross-sectoral consultations has engendered a unique learning process in El Salvador.  Fora have been created for dialogue between civil society actors and parliamentarians; one example is joint work with the legislative commission on education and health.

 To prepare the Social Watch annual report Nepalese NGOs, such as Rural Reconstruction Nepal (RRN), have initiated a process of consultation with local and regional organizations, government, officials from the Ministry of Women and Social Welfare and parliamentarians.  Such meetings are held in the capital as well as in five different regions in Nepal.  To continue the discussions launched during these consultations three thematic working groups were formed to address issues of productive employment, poverty eradication and social integration.  The strategy to explore these over-arching themes includes: 1) raising awareness of the ten Social Summit commitments at different levels, and 2) determining if and how these commitments have been implemented.  To reach a broader Nepalese population, 1000 copies of a bi-monthly Nepali publication Punarnirman, that explains and discusses the ten commitments, are circulated to local organizations and individuals.  A complementary strategy is that of organizing issue-specific campaigns around national priorities including those related to the Social Summit and Women’s Conference commitments and food security issues. 

 In Nepal the process of developing mechanisms that link organizations with tools that inform them, has led to increased involvement of NGOs in advocacy work.  One of the key aims of this work is to strengthen civil society actors and to create a more realistic understanding among members of the Nepalese government of the roles of NGOs in general, and those involved in advocacy work in particular.

4.      Complementing Existing NGO Coalitions

 Social Watchers have mobilized interest and activism around the Social Summit agenda through existing, complementary NGO initiatives.  For example, in some countries, NGOs place more emphasis on international human rights covenants compared to the UN conference agreements, as the former is considered to be a binding document.  Faced with this reality, Social Watchers in both Colombia and Mexico have attempted to conceptually and politically link national human rights movements with a broader macro economic and social development agenda.  This value added approach can be useful to support and advance existing NGO organizing and advocacy efforts.

 Corporación Región [13] a development NGO in Colombia, realized the potential of the Social Summit commitments as a new framework to denounce the underlying causes of the forty-year civil war, emphasizing that peace will not be achieved without addressing extreme economic and social inequities.  Instead of creating a new network, they launched a Social Watch process through an existing human rights coalition, the Colombian Platform for Human Rights, Democracy and Development focused on economic, social and cultural rights.  Members of the NGO Platform were initially reluctant to join the Social Watch process, guided by the view that the conference commitments are not binding, unlike the international covenants.  Over time, however, the Social Watch process has led to a growing awareness among NGOs that economic and social development issues can be used to addressing the structural causes of the war.  This strategy has opened a safer, less confrontational space for NGO activism, previously focused on state violations of civil and political rights. 

Social Watch has also provided an opportunity for NGOs to engage in advocacy at the international level.  NGOs have used the international arena to highlight the fact that the growing debt burden, structural adjustment policies and absence of opportunities for fair trade are also fueling the social, political and armed conflict in Colombia, resulting in extreme violence, illegal cultivation of narcotics and violations of human rights.  Given the government’s discomfort with international scrutiny, such efforts have helped strengthen NGOs as a more visible and viable force at home.

 In Mexico NGOs have also tended to focus on the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural rights.  DECA Equipo Pueblo [14], a development NGO, that has been involved in Social Watch from its inception, has recently shifted from a research-based approach to writing the national Social Watch report, to one that involves a group of 10 – 15 NGOs, particularly those focusing on economic, social and cultural rights.  Over the past two years Equipo Pueblo has tried to create a space with these NGOs to promote development from a human rights perspective thus bringing together an array of development and rights-oriented NGOs.  While some of them have contributed to the preparation of the Mexican Social Watch report, it has been a challenge to sustain their interest in a process that appears to be report-driven.  There is also a lack of clarity around how such a report can affect legislative or policy changes, given that the Social Summit commitments are not considered legally binding. 

 Social Watchers in Mexico have realized that “in order for the Social Summit commitments to be relevant, they must be linked to an ongoing national process.” [15]  For example, commitment eight on structural adjustment is linked with the Citizen’s Assessment of Structural Adjustment Programs (CASA) exercise and commitment two on poverty eradication is linked with efforts to monitor PROGRESA, a government program focused on extreme poverty and basic needs including education, health and food.  In addition, given the recent national media’s focus on electoral issues, Equipo Pueblo has highlighted the social development and rights agenda of the candidates.

 In South Africa the National Land Committee keeps the umbrella South African NGO Coalition working on social and economic justice issues, abreast of Social Watch objectives, materials and ongoing efforts.  For example, they have distributed Social Watch materials to activists focused on social development issues, and familiar with global agendas and processes such as the Jubilee campaign, Earth Summit follow-up and monitoring the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).

 Though Social Summit issues are inserted into national NGO agendas they are not explicitly identified as such.  Currently, there are four interrelated processes on the social development commitments or anti-poverty programs: a Commonwealth advocacy initiative, a regional process supported by the International Council on Social Welfare, a National Poverty Forum and Social Watch.  Due to the overlap of issues addressed, defining a "turf" for Social Watch is difficult. 

 5.      Engaging in a Research-based Process

 In several countries an NGO or individuals with research skills have been identified to consolidate existing information on government policies related to the Social Summit commitments and write the national NGO report.  Drawing on a wide array of civil society and government materials, these NGOs or individuals have developed useful tools for activists engaged in monitoring national or local social development policies and issues.

 In Bangladesh two organizations, the umbrella Association of Development Agencies of Bangladesh (ADAB) designated Unnayan Shamannay [16] to coordinate the research and writing of the annual report.  Source materials include government publications and documents generated by civil society actors.  Currently Unnayan Shamannay is completing a report based on information collected by NGOs at the village, union and district levels as well as secondary sources and newspaper clippings.  Realizing the need to ground, at the local level, monitoring and advocacy on government social development policies, ADAB is in the process of developing social watch committees in communities across the country.

 The Social Watch process is used in Bolivia to contribute to national dialogues on relevant international issues, as well as local campaigns related to social development and its relationship to structural adjustment processes.  One of the main goals of these activities is to strengthen civil society organizations.  Coordinated by the Centro de Estudios para el Desarrollo Loboral y Agrario (CEDLA), [17] Social Watchers have developed a two-tiered approach producing theoretical and empirical research designed for academics, social scientists, and government officials, in addition to popular manuals for use on a local level.  Bolivian Social Watchers produce a variety of publications on the content and formulation of economic and social policies, and CEDLA recently launched a survey on employment and living conditions in certain regions in Bolivia.  This work is part of the activities of a broad-based network of three hundred NGOs working on poverty reduction, development, human rights and citizenship.  In addition, the Social Watch report is used as a complementary tool to the statistical report put out by the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean.

 In order to counter the existing “poverty of information,” Bolivian NGOs have developed media campaigns on social issues and are making a consistent effort to produce their research in a language and form that is accessible and meaningful to a broader audience.  For example, they recently developed a community handbook to mobilize awareness around the Social Summit commitments.  The strength of the Bolivian Social Watchers is in conducting research in new areas, incorporating new methodologies and statistics, and developing tools to inform the work of Bolivian NGOs and researchers.

 Shelter Rights Initiative of Nigeria is a relative newcomer to Social Watch and is currently reflecting on how best to create a monitoring initiative that will involve other NGOs in the country.  So far the national reports are written based on organizational materials (including an annual assessment of economic and social rights in Nigeria), journals, business and environment related reports.  The mass media is used as a tool to disseminate the findings of the report and highlight Nigeria’s declining position compared to other countries on a series of social development indicators.

 In the United Kingdom the UK Coalition Against Poverty (UKCAP) which acts as the contact point for the Social Watch network, delegated an Oxfam staff member to write the latest country contribution to the Social Watch Annual Report, on it’s behalf.  UKCAP’s engagement with Social Watch has strengthened NGO monitoring of the government’s performance in relation to poverty by providing an international reference point and addressing wider issues of social development.  The emphasis in the Social Summit commitments on drawing up a national anti-poverty strategy, and on doing this with the participation of people living in poverty and their organizations, has been particularly useful.  In addition the national political development which has most influenced the work of UKCAP (and others) has been the election of a Labor government and its highlighting of poverty as a significant political and policy issue.

 6.      Struggling to Sustain a Process

 The obstacles NGOs face in initiating and sustaining Social Watch activities are instructive to all Social Watchers and raise issues that are further addressed in the challenges section.

 In Canada, since the Social Summit, the government has gradually cut back financial support for groups addressing social equity issues.  Funds have been virtually non-existent for many such equity seeking groups including the Canadian Consortium for International Social Development (CCISD), involved with Social Watch since 1995 and currently without funding.  As a result, CCISD has sought to work with other coalitions and allies to change the national political atmosphere.  Over the years they have attempted to secure competent evaluators to contribute a Canadian report to Social Watch, including the Ecumenical Coalition for Economic Justice.  One idea was to develop a national “report card” to popularize the Social Summit commitments and initiate a participatory monitoring process.  Due to funding constraints however this idea has yet to be concretized.  Social Watch CCISD has, however, brought together the Structural Adjustment Participatory Review Initiative (SAPRI) [18] and Social Watch-related networks to collaborate on a few specialized studies and have held one major national conference.  It has been challenging, however, to merge the two processes, as their frameworks for evaluation are not as compatible as they could be. 

 Despite limited resources, equity seeking groups have taken on the government on a series of issues.  For example, when Canada’s implementation of the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights was up for review in 1998, NGOs challenged their government’s report to the UN Committee.  More recently CCISD mobilized other groups in a national consultation process prior to the Social Summit + 5 to influence government positions at the review meeting.

 Although Third World Network Africa has led in the contribution of a chapter for every Social Watch report since 1996, sustaining the Ghana Social Watch coalition has been difficult.  This is due to a combination of factors - the weak tradition of NGO involvement in policy advocacy as well as the low level of NGO participation in the Social Summit conference and follow-up process.  However, efforts have been made to link the Social Watch coalition with other initiatives including Jubilee 2000, SAPRI and the preparation of Ghana's Human Development report.  Existing relationships between individuals and organizations that cut across these processes makes this collaboration possible.

 India’s Social Watch initiative has been hindered by a number of factors since 1995.  First, the South Asia NGO Caucus for the Social Summit disbanded thereby creating a vacuum of NGO leadership in the follow-up process.  Second, changes in government led to a shift in their commitment to creating a national social development commission to implement the Social Summit agreements, leaving national NGOs without an institutional mechanism to focus their advocacy efforts.  Third, the organization responsible for mobilizing NGO involvement in the Social Watch initiative was unable to fulfill its role due to internal organizational demands and lack of resources.  And finally in August 1999 the Center for Youth and Social Development (CYSD) organized a Social Watch meeting which brought together researchers, NGOs and activists to re-motivate NGOs toward the five year review, however a devastating cyclone affected continuing work.  CYSD is keen on reenergizing the process and plans to set up a Social Watch working group of various issue-based networks to assess the adequacy of government initiatives to implement the Social Summit commitments as well as steer a process of preparing the report and engaging the government in dialogue.

 The inclusion of Francophone NGOs has been a challenge for Social Watch.  While Environnement et Développement du Tiers Monde (ENDA) [19] in Senegal contributed to the first two Social Watch reports and translated the entire 1997 Annual Report into French, the participation of Senegalese and Francophone NGOs in general did not continue for various reasons.  It was difficult to initiate national coalitions to evaluate implementation of the Social Summit agreements, due to the weak mobilization of these NGOs during the Social Summit process and lack of donor interest in supporting efforts in the region.  In addition, as a result of few financial resources, ENDA was unable to continue translating and distributing the Annual Reports. 

 More recently, however, L’Association pour le Développement Economique Social Environnmental du Nord (ADESEN) [20] expressed interest in monitoring and lobbying both the Social Summit and Women’s Conference commitments.  In order to prepare the Senegalese report last year, ADESEN helped to create ten working groups around each of the Social Summit commitments, enabling a diverse group of individuals “to see more precisely what is taking place in our country and to compare it to other countries.” [21]  A synthesis of this report was disseminated in Senegal.  In addition to report writing and submitting proposals to government officials as part of its advocacy work, ADESEN organizes a regular radio show, in various national languages, that addresses a broad range of social development issues.  The process of organizing around the Social Summit + 5 review has furthermore enabled ADESEN to share information with other individuals and NGOs on follow-up to UN conferences and the benefits of linking with international networks. 

 B. Indicators and Indices

 While Social Watch activities at the regional level have been limited, recent initiatives demonstrate how regional partnerships and exchanges can both benefit from and contribute to national and international level activities.  Regional meetings serve to break the isolation of national groups and are a forum for groups to learn from their common interests, debate areas of divergence and develop mutually-reinforcing strategies (see Table 1 for a list of regional meetings).  The accumulation of knowledge inherent in such exchanges is conducive to the process of preparing and presenting alternative perspectives on policy and development and ultimately contributes to strengthening national-level advocacy efforts.

Table 1: List of Social Watchers’ Regional Meetings

 A diverse group of NGOs from Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama came together in Guatemala City in 1998 for the first Central American Social Watch Seminar.  This initial meeting presented a unique opportunity for NGOs to discuss substantive issues particular to their context, share experiences and build alliances.  The Second Central America Social Watch meeting was held in 1999 with the goals of continuing the process of exchanging experiences, sharing information on monitoring and advocacy strategies and coordinating work plans.  Mexico joined the regional coordination at this time.  The first joint publication prepared for the Social Summit + 5 meeting in Geneva, Evaluación de la Cumbre Mundial Sobre Desarrollo Social 1995-2000, [22] compiled seven national reports on government implementation of the Social Summit commitments along with a regional analysis.  The Central American Social Watch network is currently coordinated out of El Salvador by the Asociacion Intersectorial para el Desarrollo Economico y el Progresso Social (CIDEP), and includes NGOs working on cultural, economic and social rights.

 In preparation for the Social Summit + 5 review several regional meetings were convened including two Regional East Africa Social Watch Workshops in Uganda and Nairobi and the Middle East, South and Central Asia (MESCA) conference held in Kathmandu.  Approximately forty Kenyan, Tanzanian and Ugandan NGOs met on a sub-regional basis in August 1999 to highlight and share best practices, review and analyze strategies at national, regional and international levels and develop a plan for wider civil society participation in the Social Summit process.  This was followed by another workshop in Nairobi attended by 10 participants from the region with the objective of developing a regional platform of action.  Highlighting national and regional priorities was deemed important in order to ensure that the “African agenda does not get submerged when working on an international agenda.” [23]

 One of the first steps was that of sharing experiences of how Social Watch was being advanced on a national level.  In Kenya, fifteen national grassroots Social Watch groups have been working in a variety of areas including: monitoring social services, advocating for debt cancellation, gaining a handle on and influencing the budget process, addressing anti-corruption concerns and advocating for more transparent and equitable government expenditures.  Through this process advocacy NGOs are becoming increasingly recognized for their work by government officials. 

 In Tanzania Social Watch activities are coordinated by the Women’s Legal Aid Center (WLAC) on behalf of a network of sixty Southern African human rights organizations (SAHRINGON).  They address existing gaps in policy development and its implementation through a two-tiered approach sensitizing and developing educational campaigns around policy priorities and lobbying for their inclusion in policy formation.  To ensure wider awareness of the Social Summit commitments, radio programs, based on the secretariat's models, have been developed in local languages and two popular education books have been published.  WLAC uses its existing network – consisting of nine paralegal units – to disseminate Social Watch information in different regions of Tanzania.  In addition to sharing experiences of such national- level activities, workshop participants aimed to assess and analyze the gains that had been made, as well as the existing challenges to successful implementation of the Social Summit commitments in East Africa.

 Organizations from the Middle East, South and Central Asia gathered in Kathmandu for a regional meeting “Rights and Responsibilities of NGOs: Creating Political Space for Whom?” held in September 1999.  [24]   Divided into three over-arching themes – advocacy, capacity and policy – this meeting addressed the relationships of NGOs to government and multilateral actors, in addition to addressing the related issue of NGO accountability.  In an effort to focus the discussion on concrete examples of NGO work in the field of advocacy, Roberto Bissio was invited to discuss the approaches and strategies developed through Social Watch.  His discussion of international lobbying and advocacy galvanized interest among several participants and when the Arab NGO Network held their own regional meeting the following December, Patricia Garcé from the Social Watch secretariat was invited to discuss Social Watch with a larger number of network participants.

 The Arab NGO network was formed after the Social Summit meeting by 65 Arab NGOs from 12 Arab countries.  While this group has been active since 1995 in monitoring Social Summit agreements and developing shadow reports they began to establish closer links with Social Watch in early 2000.  They are an interesting example of a network that insists on maintaining an independent yet mutually supportive relationship with Social Watch.  They are involved in Social Watch by using common language and tools and participating in joint activities at international meetings.  For example, the Social Watch Radio Spots on the ten Social Summit commitments have been translated into Arabic and used to mobilize awareness locally.  While several individual Arab countries have submitted regular contributions to the Social Watch annual report, members of the Arab NGO network contributed a regional article for the year 2000 version.  During the Social Summit + 5 meetings, Arab NGOs actively participated in the Development Caucuses and organized their own Arab caucuses.

C. International Advocacy

The strength of Social Watch is its connection of local experiences with an international advocacy agenda, use of the internet as a mobilizing tool, consistent monitoring and measuring of progress, dissemination of information and drafting of proposals and benchmarks.  These different approaches serve as organizing tools to advocate a civil society agenda on social development in national and international arenas.[25]

 Many of the Southern and Northern NGOs currently involved in Social Watch played a pivotal role in positively influencing the process and outcome of the Social Summit.  The Development Caucus was the main political vehicle through which these NGOs shared information, developed common agendas and discussed advocacy strategies to influence national government positions.  Given that Social Watch emerged from this Caucus, it has maintained a leadership role in the Social Summit follow-up process, primarily at the annual meetings of the UN Commission on Social Development (CSD).

 Prior to the Social Summit, in 1994, the ‘Quality Benchmark’ was developed by members of the Development and Women’s Caucus defining twelve common demands by which to measure the final Declaration and Programme of Action.  This document addressed the economic and political environment necessary to allow for social development and ensure the implementation of the Social Summit commitments.  More than 1,000 organizations endorsed the document and used it to generate debate at the national level and engage domestic groups in the substantive issues of the Social Summit.[26]

 At the end of the Social Summit, in 1995, the Development Caucus released ‘Did We Achieve the Quality Benchmark?’ which assessed to what extent those demands were achieved.  The final agreements included a reaffirmation of the right to development and human rights, calls to review structural adjustment programs to include social development goals, increase coordination between the UN and the Bretton Woods institutions and integrate a gender analysis in the implementation of the agreements.  The analysis also highlighted issues that were not addressed in the final agreements including corporate accountability, mechanisms to examine the implications of the new trade regime or the operations of the World Trade Organization, the impact of the patenting of life forms on social development, and new initiatives on debt.

 For the Social Summit + 5 process, Social Watch actively monitored and participated in both preparatory meetings with a small team of Watchers attending the May 1998 meeting and a larger contingency at the May 1999 meeting when the key issues in the drafting of the document were deliberated.  As the first preparatory meeting ended without any concrete results, Social Watch produced and disseminated a report entitled “a diplomatic shame” through its website and mailing lists. 

 In preparation for the last phase of the review process, a ‘Geneva Benchmark’ was prepared stating that government efforts toward achieving the Social Summit goals and commitments are far too slow and are severely hampered by macro economic decisions taken by unaccountable, non-transparent bodies, often without due participation of the concerned governments themselves.  Ten major demands were identified as the “key aspects to be addressed to make up the backlog on commitments in the first years of the twenty-first century.” The ‘Geneva Benchmark’ document was endorsed by most Social Watchers and Development Caucus NGOs and served as a comprehensive advocacy tool for NGOs particularly on the issues of the currency transactions tax, trade versus human rights and social development, debt cancellation, structural adjustment and holding Bretton Woods institutions accountable.

 In addition to these ‘benchmark’ tools, the Social Watch secretariat has developed numerous position papers on key issues, proposed amendments to the negotiated text and follow-up analyses for virtually every CSD meeting following the Social Summit.  These have been prepared with the input of the Social Watch coordinating committee, other Watchers participating in these meetings, members of the Development Caucus and at times with members of other NGO networks and caucuses.  These advocacy tools provide invaluable political and intellectual leadership for Social Watchers as well as for an array of NGOs active in the inter-governmental arena.  One example of this leadership role was seen at the Special Session in Geneva, when Social Watch galvanized NGO protests around the “Better World for All” report, which presents seven pledges, made by Northern member countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), as a new consensus between the OECD, International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank and the United Nations.  A statement was drawn up calling on the UN to withdraw its endorsement of the report and was eventually endorsed by several dozen NGOs.

 The Annual Report, discussed at length in the next section, is also used as a tool to link advocacy and activism across national and international levels. [27]  Key messages from the report are formally presented to CSD members and copies are widely distributed among government, UN officials and NGOs attending those meetings.  The Annual Report has achieved a high level of credibility and is considered important to the CSD process, as it consolidates data and analysis from a perspective outside the UN. [28] Social Watch is furthermore respected for embracing a broad-based agenda of social development and maintaining the strong involvement and leadership of Southern NGOs. [29]

With regard to the Women’s Conference + 5 review process, given the existing leadership and organizing capacity of women’s NGOs, Social Watch consciously decided to play a background role, primarily supporting Latin American and Caribbean women’s NGOs use of the Fulfilled Commitments Index as an integral part of assessing government implementation efforts.[30]

 Beyond the UN conference process, Social Watch staff are continuously invited to address international meetings organized by key bodies such as the UNDP, the Organization for Economic and Co-operation and Development, the International Development Conference and the Society for International Development.

D. Impact on Government Processes and Policies

 Assessing the impact of the Social Watch initiative on government and civil society actors, is a difficult task for a variety of reasons.  First, this evaluation is being conducted over a relatively short period of time (1995-2000). [31]  New concepts and processes initiated by Social Watchers take time to be understood, internalized and put to use.  Second, understanding national contexts is critical to a more comprehensive evaluation of the multiple ways that groups have used Social Watch in their respective contexts.  As travel funds did not exist for site visits (except to the Social Watch secretariat) our ability to assess and analyze the impact of Social Watch efforts in each national context is limited.

 In several countries consistent NGO advocacy efforts have contributed to an increased recognition by government officials of the role of NGOs in general and the importance of their inclusion in the development of plans and policies, in particular.  In Kenya, NGOs have worked in collaboration with government officials in conceptualizing and producing a Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper, as well as a national budget to ensure its implementation.  During the mid-term evaluation of the Social Summit in Nairobi, governments joined with NGOs to access the progress made and the challenges encountered in fulfilling the Social Summit commitments.  In the United Kingdom, UKCAP member organizations were given the opportunity to meet with civil servants involved in the Labor government’s drawing up of an annual poverty report.  In addition the UK government’s report to the UN on its performance in relation to the Social Summit commitments contained sections on domestic as well as development policies.  South African NGOs have established a National Poverty Forum to engage government on key issues in its development strategy.  Social Watchers in El Salvador have created a forum for exchange between civil society and members of the legislative assembly called “Parliament - Civil Society.”  NGOs bring their ideas and priorities to the table and interact with parliamentarians who present their documents and proposals.  Topics like the privatization of health care, priorities in the national budget and reconstruction after hurricane Mitch, have been addressed in this forum.

 Determining a causal link between Social Watch activities and changes in government processes and policies is not feasible in most cases as change, or lack thereof, is conditioned by numerous factors including the existing space for civil society organizations and their relations with the state.  In addition, many Social Watchers highlighted factors that are undermining the implementation and attainment of the agreements and goals made at the Social Summit and Women’s conferences including the external debt burden, structural adjustment program’s fiscal austerity measures and lack of government resolve.  While some headway has been made in the inclusion of NGOs in policy making processes, as highlighted and analyzed above, genuine, long-term transformations are harder to identify.

 In Colombia for example, changes to the general education law were made with strong NGO participation and the elaboration of a law against domestic violence was developed with the participation of women’s NGOs.  New concepts, such as equity and gender, have also been integrated in government policies.  A significant political advance in El Salvador was the recent signature of a protocol entitled “civil society and candidates to the presidency of the Republic” in accordance with the commitments of Social Summit and Women’s Conference.  British Social Watchers have worked to broaden the perspective of both the poverty lobby and the UK government on domestic and international social development and poverty concerns.  In Italy, though some progressive social policies have been developed, they are not explicitly linked to implementation of the Social Summit agreements, but rather according to broader national social priorities.  For example, the recent reform of the school and health care systems attracted a wide public debate on social issues.  Neither reform, however, made any reference to the Social Summit agreements on education or health.  Despite this gap, the Social Watch Italian chapter is engaged in assessing such social reforms.  In Canada, NGO advocacy efforts resulted in the agreement of the Canadian government to include the Currency Transaction Tax initiative and the Emergency Debt Standstill in their position to the Social Summit + 5 meeting.

E. Impact on International Processes and Policies

Through their advocacy work and publications, Social Watchers have made consistent, substantive contributions at the international level, particularly in relation to the Social Summit’s inter-governmental processes.  Social Watch has made an impact on numerous government and UN officials who have expressed appreciation for their work and contribution to the annual meetings of the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) and the Social Summit + 5 process.  This is evident in the fact that Social Watch was the only NGO invited to speak at the opening of the Social Summit + 5 alongside the UN Secretary General.

 In addition to using the Social Watch annual report Watchers active in the Development Caucus have advocated alternative proposals with government and UN officials, thereby pushing the debate further and influencing the outcome of each stage in the Social Summit process.  In the words of Barbara Adams of the UN Non-Governmental Liaison Service,

 “Their [Social Watch’s] participation along with the Annual Reports are very significant.  They are efficient at pooling information to effectively work the inter-governmental process.”

 While the final language that emerges from the inter-governmental process is a product of negotiations between governments and therefore often waters down the original alternative proposals, a number of innovative concepts and actions can be traced to the persistent advocacy efforts of Social Watchers.  In addition a number of Social Watchers (ex.  Brazil, Philippines and Thailand) have been included in their government delegations, which enhanced their access to information and influence over government positions.

 For example, as a result of concerted NGO advocacy efforts, a number of gains were made in the outcome of the five year review of the Social Summit, including: the agreement to conduct a study on “new and innovative sources of funding” which includes the contentious currency transaction tax; reference to a ‘debt standstill’ and the need to regulate capital flows; and a call for ‘participatory mechanisms’ to assess the social impact of structural adjustment programmes. With regard to a major Social Watch proposal to initiate global discussions toward an international binding convention against poverty, though not included in the final outcome it is being considered at various levels within the UN system.  To this end the UN Secretariat has requested Roberto Bissio to write a paper on the issue to introduce the idea in UN fora later this year.  Furthermore, despite the fact that implementation of commitments on structural adjustment and other macro-economic issues were not reviewed by government delegates, NGOs lobbied to ensure that all ten Social Summit commitments be addressed in the section on ‘further initiatives.’  This was significant as it ‘reaffirmed the role of the UN General Assembly as the place to debate macro-economic issues, inspite of the attempt by developed countries to shift that debate to the fora where they prevail: Bretton Woods and the WTO or even institutions where the South is excluded altogether, like the OECD and the G8.’ [32]

 Beyond the CSD and Social Summit + 5 meetings, Social Watch has influenced other arenas within the UN system.   For example, the Secretariat for the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights used the Annual Report to develop questions for governments being reviewed by their committee.  The reports have also influenced the content of NGO shadow reports that are part of these committee meetings.  Social Watch has also cultivated a working relationship with UNDP.  The 1998 UNDP Human Development Report references Social Watch in a box on ‘Monitoring progress in eradicating poverty’ (p.  115) as well as in their 1998 report on “Overcoming Human Poverty.”   Social Watch was also commissioned by UNDP to write a paper on the Social Watch experience, “Strategy of Shame,” analyzing their involvement at the international level, the development of alternative indicators and providing national case studies of the initiative in Brazil and Chile.[33] 

F. Challenges to National and Regional Organizing

 Numerous challenges exist to evaluating Social Watch activities on national and regional levels.  First, due to weak traditions of advocacy in some countries, organizations find it easier to lobby on an international level than nationally.  Advocacy is furthermore arduous due to the policy contradictions and competing agendas that exist in, and are imposed on, many southern countries.  While on one hand national anti-poverty plans are being created designed to benefit the poor, structural adjustment programs are being implemented leading to increased disparity and destitution.  In addition, while policy changes have taken place, these modifications are often primarily symbolic and inadequate, addressing the symptoms in lieu of the causes of poverty and inequalities.  Though some gains have been made on paper, and some social development indicators show quantitative improvements, this masks the fact that qualitatively conditions are often worsening.  Most governments furthermore attach a low profile to the Social Summit and its follow up process.

 Second, the capacity of organizations differs greatly across the Social Watch network and is linked to national historical and political factors.  In some regions, NGOs have a strong tradition of autonomous organizing and advocacy work, while in others independent civil society actors are just beginning to emerge.  Structural and organizational concerns, in addition to lack of human resources and time, have been highlighted as challenges.  The burden of responsibility often falls on the core NGO that initially lead the Social Watch initiative as it is difficult to delegate tasks and alternate roles.  This leaves insufficient time for strategic planning or to think through the sustainability of the monitoring initiative.  The need to decentralizing the initiative to regional levels within a country given the differences in political and social realities, is also critical to strengthening Social Watch activities.

 Third, the possibility of securing funds differs greatly across countries and regions; in some places financial resources are not available for advocacy-related national and regional work and few possibilities exist for in-depth research and publications.  The need for funds for translating relevant documents was also highlighted. 

 Fourth, following-up on both the Social Summit and the Women’s Conference agreements has been impractical.  As human resources, expertise and finances are limited, most Social Watchers have been compelled to choose one or the other conference and the Social Summit has taken precedence for various reasons.  Different sets of NGOs were involved in organizing for the conference and consequently in the follow-up process.  Given the far greater level of NGO organizing for the Women’s Conference compared with the Social Summit, women’s groups and organizations are actively working to promote and demand implementation of the conference agreements in many countries.  In addition organizations working on broad economic and social development issues tend to use the Social Summit commitments as a reference point.  This is the case for example with the UNED-UK and the European Anti-Poverty Network in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

 In some countries Social Watchers are attempting to overcome these challenges and spaces have been created for dialogue, building on the areas of convergence between two sets of actors.  The UK Coalition Against Poverty for example maintains that addressing questions on gender is inherent in the Social Summit commitments and thus intrinsically involves an assessment of the government’s performance in implementing the Women’s Conference agreements.  In Bulgaria, the Women’s Alliance for Development and the Gender Research Foundation have focused more on the Women’s Conference than the Social Summit; recent involvement in Social Watch however has underscored their interest in social development issues and the importance of incorporating work on both conferences into their activities.  Recently in Colombia, Social Watchers organized several events in collaboration with women’s networks monitoring the Women’s Conference and is an example of how spaces are being created for dialogue between groups previously working in parallel to each other. 

While regional activities have recently gained momentum, financial, structural and linguistic reasons have affected Social Watch’s capacity in this area and the coordinating committee has not been able to fulfill its function of galvanizing and coordinating work on a regional basis.  As a result, regions such as Francophone West Africa (and other parts of Africa) are under represented in the Social Watch process.  The challenges of including French speaking countries in general needs special attention.

G. Challenges to International Advocacy

International advocacy work is affected by factors both within and external to the UN.  The raison d’être to monitor the Social Summit commitments and focus on the Commission on Social Development (CSD) as the key site for their advocacy needs to be questioned as the CSD is a relatively weak body of representatives from national social development ministries, that are better equipped to negotiate social issues rather than some of the more controversial enabling environment issues, including macro economic concerns and financial resources.  Despite concerted NGO advocacy no plans were made after the Social Summit + 5 meeting for a ten-year review of the Summit commitments. 

Furthermore, the UN’s development agenda is increasingly marginalized in light of the enhanced political role and power of the multilateral institutions including the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank (WB) and the World Trade Organization (WTO).  A related challenge is whether and how Social Watch should relate to the WB/IMF anti-poverty strategies.

Social Watchers are concerned not to get overexposed with increasing prominence and visibility at the international level and become dependent on an international process to define the network.  It is critical to continuously question how engagement at the international level benefits groups on the ground.

[4] Brazilian Institute of Economic and Social Analysis
[5] Center for Contemporary Cultural Studies, Federation of Organizations for Social and Educational Assistance, National Institute for Socio-economic Studies and SOSCorpo - Gender and Citizenship
[6] Interview with Hector Bejar from Peru on April 5, 2000.
[7] Centre for Women Studies
[8] Ibid.  Chile: 1999.
[9] Center for Development and Participation Studies
[10] Ibid.
[11] The Real Peru
[12] Intersectoral Association for Economic Development and Social Progress
[13] Regional Association
[14] Development, Education and Culture Self-Management People’s Team
[15] Interview with Areli Sandoval Teran from Mexico on April 4, 2000.
[16] Coordination for Development
[17] Center for Labour and Agrarian Development Studies
[18] This initiative is a tripartite discussion -  World Bank, governments and NGOs - of structural adjustment programs in fifteen select countries.
[19] Environment and Development Third World
[20] Organization for the Environmental, Economic and Social Development of the North
[21] Interview with Abdoul Soulèye Sow from Senegal on June 28, 2000.
[22] Mexico, Central America and Panama Region Evaluation of WSSD 1995-2000
[23] Interview with Professor Eduard Oyugi from Kenya on April 4, 2000.
[24] This meeting was one of Novib’s partner conferences, held every five years, “to inform participants about recent policy developments in Novib, to review current issues in Novib-partner relationships and to explore cooperative strategies among partners and between partners and Novib at national and international levels, notably in the field of advocacy and lobbying.”  Minutes: MESCA Regional Conference.  September 21-23, 1999 Kathmandu, Nepal. 
[25] Strategy of Shame.  New York: UNDP.  2000 p.  20.
[26] ‘Did We Achieve the Quality Benchmark?’ 1995.
[27] Interview with Barbara Adams, UN Non-Govenmental Liaison Service, on April 10, 2000.
[28] Interview with John Langmore, UN Division for Social Policy and Development, on May 26, 2000.
[29] Interview with Nitin Desai, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, on May 26, 2000.
[30] Exercising Social Watch: Monitoring the Copenhagen Summit and the Beijing Conference.  Instituto del Tercer Mundo.  1999.  p 44.
[31] In addition many Social Watchers joined this initative in the past two or three years.
[32] ‘Geneva 2000: Elements For An Assessment.’ Instituto del Tercer Mundo.  July 2000.
[33] Strategy of Shame.  New York: UNDP.  2000