University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA 
 
EXAMINING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY WITHIN THE 
LABOUR INTENSIVE PUBLIC WORKS PROGRAMME IN GHANA (LIPWP): A 
CASE STUDY OF THE KASSENA-NANKANA WEST AND NABDAM DISTRICTS 
   
  BY  
  
LORETTA ANENIBA ARUK  
 
 (10386260)   
  
THIS THESIS IS SUBMITTED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF GHANA, LEGON IN 
PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF MPHIL 
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION DEGREE. 
  
 
 
 
JULY, 2018 
1 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
DECLARATION 
I, Loretta Aneniba Aruk do hereby declare that this thesis is the product of my own research under 
the supervision of my Supervisor. All citations and quotations have all been identified and 
acknowledged.  This work has not been submitted in part or full to this university or any institution 
for the award of an academic degree. I, therefore, bear sole responsibility for any shortcomings 
that may arise out of this academic piece. 
………………………….                                                                                           …………. 
LORETTA ANENIBA ARUK                                                                                         DATE 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
CERTIFICATION 
This is to certify that this thesis was supervised in accordance with the laid down rules and 
procedures of the University of Ghana. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
………………………………..                                                                                     ………………… 
PROF. JUSTICE NYIGMAH BAWOLE                                                                             DATE 
(SUPERVISOR)  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ii 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
DEDICATION 
I dedicate this work to God Almighty, my lovely mother, Linda Teni Issaka and my husband, 
Mr. Branden Elvis Anuka for their unflinching love and support, God richly bless you. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
iii 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
ACKNOWLEDGMENT 
To God be the Glory, great things He has done. My greatest and sincerest appreciation goes to the 
Almighty God for His strength and love demonstrated to me throughout my academic pursuit. 
I am also grateful to my Supervisor Professor Justice N. Bawole for his strict supervision, patience 
and advice without which this work would not have been a success. I am once again thankful to 
Dr. Daniel Appiah and Dr. Abdulai Gafaru for their constructive criticisms and pieces of advice 
throughout this work, God bless you. 
I also acknowledge the support of the Regional Coordinating Director of the Upper East Region, 
the staff of the Kassena-Nankana West District, the beneficiaries of the Ghana Social 
Opportunities Project in the Kasssena-Nankana West District and Nabdam Districts for their 
support and cooperation without which this work would not be successful. 
I finally express my profound love for my family, especially my mother, my husband (Anuka 
Branden Elvis), Ishmael Issaka, Uncle Aaron Issaka, Mr. Dominic Bodpii and all my friends and 
course mates for their pieces of advice, prayers and encouraging words, I say thank you and God 
bless us all. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
iv 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
TABLE OF CONTENT  
DECLARATION ............................................................................................................................. i 
CERTIFICATION .......................................................................................................................... ii 
DEDICATION ............................................................................................................................... iii 
ACKNOWLEDGMENT................................................................................................................ iv 
TABLE OF CONTENT .................................................................................................................. v 
LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................... viii 
LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... ix 
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ......................................................................................................... x 
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................... xi 
CHAPTER ONE ............................................................................................................................. 1 
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY ......................................................................................... 1 
1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1 
1.1 Background of the study .................................................................................................... 1 
1.2 Problem Statement ............................................................................................................. 4 
1.3 General objective ............................................................................................................... 7 
1.4 Specific objective .............................................................................................................. 7 
1.5 Research question .............................................................................................................. 8 
1.6 Significance of the study ................................................................................................... 8 
1.7 Scope of the study.............................................................................................................. 8 
1.8 Definition of concepts ....................................................................................................... 9 
1.9 Chapter outline ................................................................................................................ 10 
CHAPTER TWO .......................................................................................................................... 11 
REVIEW OF RELEVANT LITERATURE ............................................................................. 11 
2.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 11 
2.1 OVERVIEW OF ACCOUNTABILITY IN SOCIAL PROTECTION ........................... 11 
2.1.0 Challenges of Traditional Forms of Accountability ..................................................... 13 
2.1.1 Social Accountability ................................................................................................... 14 
2.1.2 Social Protection ........................................................................................................... 16 
2.2   EXAMINING SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISMS ................................. 19 
2.2.1 Impact of Social Accountability Mechanisms within social protection ....................... 29 
2.2.2 Improving service delivery ........................................................................................... 29 
v 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
2.2.3 Improving state-citizen relations .................................................................................. 30 
2.2.4 Changing state-society relations ................................................................................... 31 
2.3 ASSESSING CONTEXTUAL FACTORS THAT AFFECT SOCIAL 
ACCOUNTABILITY ............................................................................................................ 32 
2.4 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ................................................................................... 36 
2.5 Explanation of Framework Constructs ............................................................................ 42 
2.5.1 Access to information ................................................................................................... 42 
2.5.2 Inclusion and participation ........................................................................................... 42 
2.5.3 Accountability .............................................................................................................. 42 
2.5.4 Local organisational capacity ....................................................................................... 43 
CHAPTER THREE ...................................................................................................................... 47 
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................. 47 
3.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 47 
3.1. Study Area ...................................................................................................................... 47 
3.5 Research paradigm .......................................................................................................... 51 
3.4 Research approach ........................................................................................................... 51 
3.3 Research design ............................................................................................................... 52 
3.6 Study and Target population............................................................................................ 53 
3.7 Sample size ...................................................................................................................... 54 
3.8 Sampling technique ......................................................................................................... 55 
3.9 Data collection instrument ............................................................................................... 55 
3.10 Sources of data............................................................................................................... 57 
3.11 Data Analysis ................................................................................................................. 57 
3.12 Ethical Consideration .................................................................................................... 58 
3.13 Limitation to the study ................................................................................................... 58 
3.14 Chapter conclusion ........................................................................................................ 59 
CHAPTER FOUR ......................................................................................................................... 60 
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION ...................................................................... 60 
4.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 60 
4.1 Overview of the Labour-intensive public works programme .......................................... 60 
4.2 Social accountability mechanisms within the Ghana Social Opportunities Project ........ 61 
4.2.1 Participation .................................................................................................................. 65 
4.2.2 Inclusion ....................................................................................................................... 67 
vi 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
4.2.3 Accountability .............................................................................................................. 68 
4.2.4 Local Organisational Capacity ..................................................................................... 70 
4.2.5 Information Campaigns ................................................................................................ 72 
4.2.6 Social Accountability Fora ........................................................................................... 74 
4.2.7 Grievance Redress Mechanism .................................................................................... 75 
4.2.8 Transparency and Accountability Board ...................................................................... 80 
4.2.9 Community committees ................................................................................................ 82 
4.3 Contextual factors that hinder the success of social accountability mechanisms ............ 83 
4.3.1 Cultural factors ............................................................................................................. 83 
4.3.2 Economic ...................................................................................................................... 85 
4.3.3 Social factors ................................................................................................................ 86 
4.4 Chapter conclusion .......................................................................................................... 90 
CHAPTER FIVE .......................................................................................................................... 91 
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................. 91 
5.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 91 
5.1 Assessment of social accountability mechanisms ........................................................... 91 
5.2 Contextual factors that hinder social accountability ........................................................ 93 
5.3 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 93 
5.4 Recommendations ........................................................................................................... 94 
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 97 
APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................ 125 
APPENDIX A ......................................................................................................................... 125 
INTERVIEW GUIDE- FOR BENEFICIARIES ................................................................. 125 
APPENDIX B ......................................................................................................................... 127 
 
 
 
 
 
vii 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
LIST OF TABLES  
Table 3 1: Summary of Respondents ............................................................................................ 55 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
viii 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
LIST OF FIGURES 
Figure 2 1: Empowerment Process Model .................................................................................... 38 
Figure 2 2: Empowerment Framework ......................................................................................... 39 
Figure 2 3: Empowerment Framework ......................................................................................... 40 
Figure 2 4: Empowerment Analytical Framework ....................................................................... 41 
Figure 3.1 District Map of Nabdam……………………………………………………………...52 
Figure3.2 District Map of Kasena Nankana West……………………………………………….53 
Figure 4. 1 Empowerment Framework after Analysis……………………………………………88 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ix 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 
CSOs:                       Civil Society Organisations 
GSOP:                     Ghana Social Opportunities Project 
NGOs:                      Non-Governmental Organisations 
LIPW:                      Labour Intensive Public Works 
IATT:                       Inter-Agency Task Team 
UNDP:                      United Nations Development Programme 
FGD:                         Focus Group Discussion 
OECD:                      Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
x 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
ABSTRACT 
Social protection programmes are redistributive programmes carried out by various governments 
to enhance the livelihood of the poor and vulnerable in society. Unfortunately, these programmes 
are confronted with errors, fraud, and corruption (EFCs), thus rendering them ineffective. This 
study seeks to contribute to the existing knowledge gap in social accountability mechanisms within 
social intervention programmes. The study seeks to examine the extent of effectiveness of social 
accountability mechanisms within the Ghana Social Opportunities Project, using the Kassena-
Nankana West and Nabdam Districts as case studies. To achieve the purpose of the study, the study 
sought to examine the extent to which social accountability mechanisms are able to ensure 
accountability of service providers to beneficiaries and to also investigate the contextual factors 
that are essential to social accountability. A qualitative research approach and interpretive research 
paradigm were used.  A sampling size of 25 comprising of 5 implementers and 20 beneficiaries 
were used. Fifteen (15) in-depth interviews and two (2) focus group discussions were the main 
sources of data for the study. Purposive sampling techniques were used to obtain information from 
the implementers and convenience sampling technique was used for the beneficiaries. The findings 
suggest that, even though there existed social accountability mechanisms within the social 
protection programme, these were not utilised to ensure accountability of the service providers to 
the beneficiaries, because these mechanisms did not empower the beneficiaries to be able to 
exercise the accountability responsibility. Also, there existed social, cultural and economic 
contextual factors that hindered the usage of the accountability mechanisms. The study concluded 
and suggested recommendation for research, practice, and policy. In a nutshell, poor accountability 
mechanisms are the root causes of the ineffectiveness in social protection interventions.
xi 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
CHAPTER ONE 
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
1.0 Introduction 
 This chapter is made up of the background to the study which presents the general overview of 
social protection and accountability mechanisms as well as the need for the inclusion of social 
accountability in social protection. The statement of the research problem explains the limitation 
in the literature about the practice of effective social accountability within social protection 
programmes. The research objectives and questions also serve as a guide to achieving the overall 
objective of the study on social accountability mechanisms. The significance of the study indicates 
the extent to which this study is considered essential for policy makers and practitioners within the 
domain of social protection. The scope of the study indicates the threshold within which this study 
is conducted. 
1.1 Background of the study  
Social protection is a fundamental ingredient for a safe and satisfactory life of the poor and 
vulnerable in human society (World Bank, 2014; Browne, 2015). Social protection can be 
described as pro-poor policies and programs geared towards protecting people at risk and 
enhancing their socio-economic lives. The policies and programs are meant to empower these 
vulnerable people in their context (Hanlon et al., 2010). Formal social protection policies and 
programs are generally funded from the public purse (World Bank, 2001). Invariably the 
significance of Social protection to the development of the vulnerable population cannot be 
overemphasized. However insufficient funding is affecting its successful implementation in most 
1 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
developing nations such as Ghana (Ninno, Coll-Black & Fallavier, 2016). It is against this 
backdrop, that most of the social protection programs in Ghana are co-funded by some 
international organizations such as the World Bank funding the Ghana social opportunities project 
(World Bank, 2013).  
Reflecting on the rationale of social protection, Devereux and Sabates-Wheeler (2004) established 
that social protection concerns some public and private initiatives that are geared towards 
empowering vulnerable population by enhancing their socio-economic lives. Implicitly, social 
protection policies and programs are mostly rolled out to aid the less privileged in society.  In the 
light of this, social protection is conceived as part of the ‘state-citizen’ contract, in which states 
and citizens have rights and responsibilities to each other (Harvey et al., 2007). In this regard, 
various governments and private sector organizations have decided to embrace social protection 
as an essential tool in the development of the poor because of the increasing poverty levels in the 
sub-regions (Barrientos, 2010). Evidence shows that Africa and West Africa for that matter is 
experiencing the highest incidence of poverty in the world (Coll-Black & Fallavier, 2016).  
Studies have shown that social protection thrives on the traditional forms of solidarity based on 
the principles of reciprocity grounded in morality (Abebrese, 2011). The traditional system was 
based on the mutual help of fellow members of the community owing to the moral code of the day. 
However, urbanization and westernization has transformed the traditional system and made the 
state and private sector the building block for the poor and vulnerable. This gave social protection 
issues a new phase in this current dispensation (Norton et al., 2001). According to Gianozzi and 
Khan (2011), governments and private sector organizations have decided to support social 
protection programs and activities because of the difficulty of one entity supporting pro-poor 
2 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
policies and programs. This again explains why the number of Non-governmental organizations is 
increasing in West Africa and Ghana in particular (O’Dwyer, 2007; Jalil, 2011).  
Despite the essentials of social protection programs in alleviating poverty, there still exist some 
faults in its implementation and practice. The errors, fraud, and corruption (EFCs) associated with 
the practice of social protection make it a challenge (Van-Stolk &Tesliuc, 2010; Ringold et al, 
2010). The misappropriation of the resource due to ‘EFCs’ explains the rationale for the diversion 
of resources away from the intended purpose and persons. These EFCs affects the ability to achieve 
more or expected results (Basset, et al., 2012, Giannozzi, 2011).  Literature suggests that one way 
of addressing the errors associated with social protection is to introduce accountability mechanism 
in its implementation. Accountability measures serve as checks on the misappropriation or use of 
social protection resources (Jones & Sharokh, 2013).  
In the view of Ackerman (2004) and Ankamah (2016), it is sometimes challenging to implement 
accountability mechanism for social protection because of government interference. Therefore, 
political will is indispensable in enforcing accountability in the practice of social protection. 
According to O’Donnell (1998), the inadequate policies and autonomy to impose sanctions on 
defaulters of social accountability affect its effectiveness. Schedler (1999) argues that 
accountability without sanctions renders accountability ineffective. Due to the incapacity of the 
traditional forms of accountability, attention has been shifted from the long route of accountability, 
where policy implementers served as an intermediary between citizens and policymakers to the 
short route of accountability where the citizens directly demand accountability from their service 
providers without the aid of an intermediary (World Bank 2004).  
3 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
1.2 Problem Statement 
Literature has established that the fundamental flaws associated with resources wastage in most 
public institutions and projects are attributed to poor planning, and mismanagement which have 
become a bane to the sustainable development of pro-poor communities. According to Van Stolk 
and Tesliuc (2010), resource wastage though is largely a result of poor planning and management, 
sometimes the individual's parochial interest to acquire wealth from resources meant for the 
general public accounts for the majority of resources been wasted in most of the public institutions. 
This explains the failure of government institutions to deliver satisfactory services to the citizens 
resulting in the need for transparency and accountability (Gaventa & McGee, 2013).  
Accountability has been considered an essential tool for effective resource utilization, improve 
service delivery and alleviate poverty (Ackerman, 2005; Dewachter et al, 2018). 
In the opinion of Mogiliansky (2015), accountability is an effective mechanism in addressing 
persistent ‘wicked’ problems, such as corruption and improving quality delivery of service in the 
public sector. Evidence suggests that an increase in the record of cases of errors, fraud, and 
corruption in social protection programmes necessitated accountability for effective social 
interventions (Bassett et al., 2012; Mogiliansky, 2015). The extreme corruption and 
misappropriation of public resources especially those meant for social interventions in needy 
communities in most parts of the middle and low-income countries including Ghana are attributed 
to weak institutional structures (Ackerman, 2005). The negative effects of poor accountability are 
more evident in disadvantaged communities of low-income countries (Fosteri et al,2007).   For 
instance, Catholic Relief Service base-line survey of 2015 on social interventions indicates that 
beneficiaries of social protection programmes in the Northern part of Ghana complain of the poor 
delivery of service, in the sense that, they are not able to predict monies that they are entitled to 
4 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
due to the changes in the amounts that they receive. This has caused most of the beneficiaries and 
beneficiaries household to migrate to the cities to engage in other jobs for a living.   Also, World 
Food Programme report of 2016 on social protection programmes impact, revealed that the 
beneficiaries perceive the programmes to be characterised with corrupt practices and these have 
undermined the objectives of the people to improve upon their livelihood. Accountability is a tenet 
of good governance (Bovens, 2007; Dubrick, 2005) and ensures effective and efficient delivery of 
services for the improved livelihood of the poor. 
Joshi (2013) highlights that invariably the significance of accountability in improving social 
protection interventions, the lack of or inadequate knowledge of beneficiaries to demand 
accountability from service providers is a void to effective accountability mechanisms. Claasen 
and Alpin-Lardies, (2010) established that poor accountability in social protection interventions 
has been associated with traditional forms of accountability, thus, political and bureaucratic 
accountabilities. Though these forms of accountability are significant in addressing resources 
leakages and ensuring effective use of the public purse, their application in social protection 
interventions at the local level is less of importance. In attempts to make up for the inefficiencies 
within the political and bureaucratic forms of traditional accountability, various mechanisms have 
been devised to hold both elected and non-elected public officials accountable for their actions and 
inactions (Gaventa & McGee, 2013; Joshi, 2008, Peruzzotti & Smulovitz, 2006). The alternative 
accountability mechanism is social accountability. 
To ensure that social protection programs achieve their intended and desired objectives, the 
programmes need to be designed to promote social inclusion and accountability (Jones & 
Shahrokh, 2013). But the questions that need to be addressed are: which social accountability 
mechanisms work; and how do they work? The answer to the first question confirms the argument 
5 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
that context matters in the choice and application of social accountability mechanisms. The second 
question looks at the other essentials that need to be present for a successful social accountability 
application. Literature has indicated that information, voice, empowerment, participation and 
citizen action are essential ingredients in demanding accountability, yet the level of literacy, 
knowledge of accountability mechanisms, fear of halting social protection intervention 
programmes are detrimental to social accountability (Heller et al., 2016; Fox, 2016; Joshi, 2013). 
However, there is limited empirical evidence of what really works and how and why it works that 
way. Various studies on the subject of social accountability have focused on what the concept is 
and its importance (Malena et al., 2004, Ackerman 2005; Peruzzotti & Smulovitz 2006; Foresti et 
al.2007) and others on various social accountability mechanisms (Arroyo, 2004; McNeil & 
Mumvuma 2006; Novikova 2007; Sirker & Cosik, 2007; Claasen & Alpin-Lardies, 2010). A study 
also was undertaken by Mcneil et al., (2010), which cantered on drawing lessons from social 
accountability initiatives, showed that very little studies on social accountability centered on social 
protection programs. While the evidence base on ‘what works’ in social accountability has grown 
over the last few years the empirical evidence is still limited (Ayliffe, 2016). Also, there is a gap 
in the literature on what works, how and why? 
It was discovered from a systematic review that, although still limited in number, there have been 
several attempts to assess the impact of social accountability initiatives on various outcomes 
including service delivery, aid transparency, governance and extractive industries, budgets and 
freedom of information (Gaventa & Barrett 2010; Gaventa & McGee, 2010; Joshi & Houztager, 
2012; McGee & Gaventa, 2010). 
 
6 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
 Studies that were held on social accountability of social protection programs have mostly been 
conceptual and theoretical (Basset et al, 2012, Browne, 2014; Hansen & Ravnkilde, 2013; Joshi 
& Houztager, 2012). There are, however, limited empirical studies that have addressed the 
constructs of this study, that is, social accountability mechanisms within social protection 
programmes in Africa and most especially in Ghana (Abbey, Odonkor & Boateng, 2014). It is on 
this basis that this study is conducted. The choice of GSOP is because much work on social 
protection programmes in Ghana has focused on the school feeding programme and the conditional 
cash transfer to the neglect of the GSOP component of social protection in Ghana.  This study will 
take an empirical trend to generate on the ground information needed to understand the practice of 
social accountability mechanisms within social protection programmes using the GSOP 
programme as a case. 
1.3 General objective 
To assess the effectiveness of social accountability mechanisms in the Ghana social opportunities 
project in the Kassena-Nankana West and Nabdam Districts. 
1.4 Specific objective 
The study seeks to achieve the following objectives 
i. To examine the extent to which social accountability mechanisms are able to ensure 
accountability of service providers to beneficiaries of GSOP 
ii. To investigate the contextual factors that shape the effectiveness of social accountability 
under the GSOP 
7 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
1.5 Research question 
i. To what extent are the social accountability mechanisms able to ensure accountability of 
the service providers to beneficiaries of the GSOP? 
ii. What are the contextual factors that shape social accountability under the GSOP 
programme? 
1.6 Significance of the study 
This study has successfully contributed to filling the gap in the literature concerning the 
effectiveness of social accountability mechanisms within social protection programmes. The 
findings of the study are useful to researchers who are interested in the ability of beneficiaries to 
hold service providers accountable for their actions and inactions. Since accountability is the 
main foundation of project sustainability and success. It will again help policy implementers to 
know the critical factors to consider when implementing social accountability mechanisms. 
1.7 Scope of the study 
This study is carried out within two Districts in the Upper East Region. The Kassena-Nankana 
West and Nabdam Districts are the areas where the Ghana social opportunities project has been 
implemented. Specifically, the labour intensive public works component of the project is what is 
considered for the study. This is because it is assumed that there are poor accountability issues 
surrounding this component of the project. The implementers and beneficiaries of the project are 
all within the scope of this study.  
8 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
1.8 Definition of concepts 
Accountability: Accountability, as applied in this study, describes efforts made by duty bearer to 
subject themselves to scrutiny on how resources that are meant for the vulnerable are used within 
the context of social protection programs. This is to ensure that resources are judiciously used for 
the purpose in which they are provided.    Bovens (2007) defines accountability as “a relationship 
between an actor and a forum, in which the actor has an obligation to explain and to justify his or 
her conduct, the forum can pose questions and pass judgment, and the actor may face 
consequence”. 
Social accountability: This explains the answerability of the primary and secondary stakeholders 
on the resources provided to elevate the plight of the vulnerable in society. In this case, the 
providers must be able to explain and provide evidence of the resources that are provided for social 
protection and likewise, the beneficiaries at the end of the day must provide evidence of the support 
given them. To have this done successfully, various mechanisms such as participatory monitoring, 
public expenditure tracking, social audit, grievance redress mechanisms, and community 
scorecards are essential. Social accountability refers to ‘the extent and capacity of citizens to hold 
the state and service providers accountable and to make them responsive to the needs of citizens 
and beneficiaries’ (World Bank, 2013). 
Social protection: social protection within the domain of this study implies the use of various 
mechanisms including policies and strategies put in place to protect the vulnerable population. The 
policy may cover various facet of lives ranging from free healthcare, food stamps, school feeding, 
cash transfers, and employment opportunities. 
9 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
1.9 Chapter outline 
The study is divided into five chapters. The first chapter of the study is made up the background 
to the study which presents the general overview of the study including issues of social protection. 
The problem statement of the chapter explains the lapses that affect social protection with 
particular reference on social accountability mechanisms. The research objectives and questions 
are also set in this chapter to serve as a guide to the study. The significance of the study 
demonstrates the extent to which the study is deemed essential to both practitioners and 
policymakers. The scope of the study also explains the delimitation of the study. The concepts as 
applied in the study are also explained in this chapter. The chapter ends with the chapter disposition 
of the entire study.  
The second chapter is made up of the review of relevant literature to establish the purpose of the 
study. It includes empirical literature by scholars in the field of social protection. The theoretical 
framework underpinning the study is also found in this chapter.  The third chapter is also made up 
of the methodology which describes the procedure through which the study was conducted. It 
includes the procedure on how data was collected, sampling techniques and data analysis 
procedure. The fourth chapter consists of the analysis and discussion of findings. The last chapter, 
chapter five summarised the key findings and thereby draws a conclusion and made 
recommendations based on the findings for further actions. 
 
 
10 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
CHAPTER TWO 
REVIEW OF RELEVANT LITERATURE 
2.0 Introduction  
This section of the work is concerned with the review of works that pertain to the variables under 
investigation: social accountability and social protection. The chapter examines social 
accountability in light of social protection in the context of the study. This chapter again looks at 
the concepts of accountability, types of accountability, impediments to accountability, the social 
aspects of accountability and their mechanisms as well as conditions necessary for social 
accountability to work effectively. The challenges of social accountability are among the essential 
accountability concepts. Issues on social protection and the mechanisms that will ensure that social 
accountability is adhered to in the practice of social protection are equally examined in this chapter. 
The empirical literature shall also be discussed in line with the theoretical framework of the study 
and based on the objectives of the study. 
2.1 OVERVIEW OF ACCOUNTABILITY IN SOCIAL PROTECTION 
In the view of Bovens (2002) and Pollitt (2003), the concept of accountability metamorphosed 
from bookkeeping to good governance due to its merits in the practice of public administration. 
Accountability in social protection has become very critical in the context of corruption, 
mismanagement of public resources and the exhibition of incompetence in public administration 
(Greitens, 2012).  In public administration, accountability can be classified based on the actors 
involved in the accountability process (Bovens, 2007). O’Donnell (1999) identified the horizontal 
and vertical classification of accountability.  Horizontal accountability occurs where the 
institutions seeking accountability are state-owned institutions checking on abuses of other public 
11 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
agencies and branches of government. To make this effective, checks and balances, establishments 
of independent bodies to investigate fraudulent activities by state institutions are of the essence. 
Vertical accountability, which is the commonest form of accountability, on the other hand, refers 
to the type of accountability where ordinary citizens are able to use various mechanism to hold 
public officials’ accountable. The vertical accountability is emphasized due to the lapses in 
horizontal accountability (Schacter, 2005). Despite the weakness of any of these two 
accountability forms, they stand to complement each other for an effective accountability system 
(Diamond, 2007; Smulovitz & Peruzzotti, 2003). These two major classifications of accountability 
seek to ensure that social interventions or projects that hitherto are being initiated by public 
officials are duly accounted for in terms of resource utilization (Smulovitz & Peruzzotti, 2000). 
Proponents of accountability established that, besides vertical and horizontal accountability in 
ensuring effectiveness and efficiency in the delivery of social protection interventions, diagonal 
accountability is also very important in social protection.  Diagonal accountability refers to the 
accountability that is exercised by civil society groups and the media in holding the government 
answerable for its actions and inactions. Diagonal accountability also ensures the effectiveness of 
the vertical and horizontal forms of accountability (Goetz & Jenkins 2001). The diagonal form of 
accountability is meant to bridge the gap between the vertical and horizontal forms of 
accountability and ensure that social protection programs achieve the desired objective (Mechkova, 
Luhrmann &Lindberg, 2017).  
 Sound public accountability mechanisms in public administration and governance ensure social 
justice, social equity and an increase in the pace development as well as improving the lives of the 
vulnerable in society (Dubnick, 2005; Koenane, & Mangena, 2017; Malena & McNeil, 2010). One 
key ingredient of a successful public accountability is the practice of democracy. According to 
12 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Pellizo & Stapenhurst (2013), democracy gives the people the freedom to voice out their likes and 
dislikes by holding accountable the custodians of their resources with respect to their optimum 
utility. The fundamental principle of public accountability is to hold public officers answerable for 
the performance of their duties as public administrators (Dowdle, 2017; Mashaw 2006). 
Accountability in social protection according to Dubnick (2002), is a mechanism to ensure 
transparency, responsiveness, liability, and controllability in the use of resources in social 
intervention programs.  
2.1.0 Challenges of Traditional Forms of Accountability 
The traditional forms of accountability according to the World Bank (2004) include general 
elections, bureaucratic accountability, and horizontal accountability. Studies have shown that these 
traditional forms of accountability have their peculiar weaknesses and therefore have become 
ineffective, hence, the emphasis on social accountability (Ackerman, 2004; Claasen & Alpin-
Lardies, 2010; Joshi & Houtzager, 2013; Mogiliansky, 2015). Traditional forms of accountability 
are characterized by administrative bottlenecks, weak incentives, and corruption in both the state-
cantered politics and bureaucratic systems which therefore serves as a hindrance to their 
effectiveness (World Bank, 2004). Mogiliansky (2015) identified that the traditional forms of 
accountability are grossly inefficient in terms of monitoring public officials and fighting corruption 
because the organizations in charge of are corrupt themselves. 
Furthermore, one of the key impediments that account for the inefficiencies of the traditional 
accountabilities is political interferences especially in the recruitment and appointments of public 
officials.  In this regard, the ability of beneficiaries of public resources to hold public agencies 
answerable to their stewardship has become a bane.  The independence of horizontal accountability 
13 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
institutions with regard to financial and human capacity as well as legal standing from political 
interference hinder their effectiveness (Anechiarico, 2010; Chêne, 2012; Maor, 2004). 
Elections as it stands only holds the political leaders accountable but the larger public-sector 
worker who is the bureaucrat is not elected and holding him/her accountable is usually problematic 
(Ackerman, 2004).  Again, there is a lack of second order accountability, that is, who holds the 
accounting agencies accountable, this, therefore, affects their effectiveness (Joshi & Tapasvi, 
2015). To ensure greater accountability for certain elements such as the right to information bill is 
of the essence as it provides citizens with the evidence they need to hold public office holders 
accountable (Joshi, 2008). On the part of governance, there should be a participatory democracy 
where the citizens are involved in the various stages of policy-making and levels of public 
bureaucracy to equip them with the capacity for accountability (Mogiliansky, 2015). 
2.1.1 Social Accountability 
Social accountability is a form of vertical accountability which provides mechanisms through 
which ordinary citizens and civil society can hold public officials accountable aside the formal 
way which involves the use of elections (Ankamah, 2016; Brinkerhoff & Wetterberg, 2015; 
Malena and McNeil, 2010; Smulovitz & Peruzzotti, 2003). The involvement of the ordinary citizen 
makes social accountability a sure way of improving democratization (Bousquet et al. 2012).  
Under the current democratic dispensation where the separation of powers and checks and balances 
are weak, it becomes next to impossible to wield the needed power to hold these institutions 
accountable. Several scholars have therefore advocated the use of various mechanisms aside 
elections that would wield power in the hands of the common man (citizenry) (Joshi, 2008, 
14 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Gaventa et al., 2013, Peruzzotti & Smultovitz, 2006).  When this happens, the core tenet of 
democracy which includes probity and accountability suffers in implementation.  
The underlining premise for social accountability is the efficient use of resources to benefit all. 
The centrality of social accountability is citizen engagement, that is, the extent to which citizens 
are involved in the delivery of services to ensure that resources are not mishandled by power 
holders (Ankamah, 2016). Social accountability as espoused by Malena and McNeil (2010), refers 
to a wide range of actions that the ordinary citizens use to compel public officials and other 
stakeholders to account for their conduct. The emphasis on social accountability is justified by its 
significant contribution to good governance, increase development and empowerment (Fox, 2015; 
Malena et al, 2000; World Bank, 2004). Social accountability makes use of various mechanisms 
or tools to improve efficiency in service delivery. 
  Social accountability has been established as grass root participation in the accountability 
process, needs empowerment and capacity building to be able to aid them in their social 
accountability quest (Kilby, 2006). This argument is far advanced in cases of non-governmental 
organizations and social protection where citizens feel they are being offered a favour and for that 
matter find it difficult to hold service providers accountable (Andrews, 2014). Once this is the 
case, the capacity building and empowerment highlighted as the success indicators for social 
accountability comes to bear. Heller et al (2016) classify empowerment as an approach to social 
accountability and this goes further to advance the argument that empowerment and capacity 
building are critical to achieving social accountability. In line with this, Sirker and Cosaic (2007), 
developed certain key facilitating factors of social accountability; responsiveness and voice, the 
power of information, local ownership, political buy-in, and local capacity building. 
 
15 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Once the audience of the concept are ordinary citizens and in the case of social protection, are 
vulnerable and poor, the need arises for them to be empowered to undertake effective social 
accountability initiatives (Walker, 2009). Empowerment is not an end in itself but a means to an 
end. Empowerment alone cannot do the magic, but rather for accountability to work, it should not 
be limited only to the answerability but rather the component of enforcement needs to strengthen 
for people to exercise its usage (Lakha, 2011). Given the various dimensions of social 
accountability, Bray (2009) views on social accountability seem to be most fitting. Bray (2009), 
established that social accountability involves demands by underprivileged groups for greater 
accountability on the part of bureaucrats and service providers.  For the purpose of this study, 
social accountability would refer to the various ways through which citizens can improve service 
delivery by holding their service providers accountable. 
2.1.2 Social Protection 
Social protection emerged as a critical response to the ‘safety nets’ issues (Devereux & Sabates-
Wheeler, 2004). The World Bank also sees social protection as an effective way of attacking 
poverty (World Bank, 1990). Social protection is embarked by countries because of its potential 
to reduce poverty, enhance health, education, social inclusion, empowerment and state-building 
among others (Browne, 2015; World Bank, 2004). Social protection has been classified to include 
social assistance and social insurance. The social assistance involves the direct transfer of cash or 
kind to the beneficiaries (Arnold et al., 2011; Norton et al., 2011). This is non-contributory in 
nature, it is mostly financed by the taxpayers’ money, and they are referred to as redistributive 
policies (Barrientos, 2011). These take the form of cash transfers, which could be conditional 
(comes with strings attached to it, probably to be used to access healthcare or cater for children 
school) or unconditional in which the beneficiaries use it as they deem fit (Arnold et al., 2011). 
16 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Others take the form of in-kind transfers; for example, school feeding (Bundy et al., 2001).  Social 
insurance is the one which is contributory in nature to take care of life events such as illness, death 
among others (Barrientos, 2010). 
There have been calls on developing countries to establish national social protection strategies 
which seek to integrate the various fragmented programmes into a unified framework (Gentilini et 
al., 2014). This is because most programmes in developing countries are usually fragmented and 
it becomes difficult to scale-up (IATT, 2008). Scale-up is the ability of the developing countries 
to adopt policies from the donor-agencies (Ellis, 2012). Several social protection programs exist, 
but for the purpose of this study, our emphasis is on public work programs. 
Public works program is a form of social protection that provides jobs and infrastructure for the 
people and provides cash or food as well (McCord, 2012). The public work programs are targeted 
at able-bodied poor folks. Here, the beneficiaries while creating the infrastructure for their own 
benefit, are as well earning incomes for themselves. That is to say, in addition to delivering 
immediate assistance to participatory households by paying wages, Public works program can put 
in place productive infrastructure that can permanently improve the livelihood strategies of 
beneficiary communities (Tesliuc et al, 2013).  
The reason attached to the creation of public works programs classifies them under either, social 
protection and or job creation (Norton et al., 2001). McCord (2012), highlights that Sub-Saharan 
Africa is likely to adopt more public works programs for their well-bodied poor than unconditional 
cash transfers as it is perceived as reducing dependency.  The World Bank found out that this form 
of social protection has a great impact on rural livelihood (World Bank, 2014). For example, 
through the public works program initiative in Ethiopia, 600,000 km of soil and stones bunds that 
enhance water retentions and reduced soil erosion were constructed. 
17 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
In the Ghanaian context, the Ghana social opportunities project (GSOP) has a labour intensive 
public works program (LIPW), which is the public works branch of social protection in Ghana. 
The districts for the projects are chosen based on their vulnerability. The LIPW program sets out 
to maximize local employment while rehabilitating productive infrastructure/ assets which have 
the potential to generate local secondary employment and protect households and communities 
against external shocks. Like other public works program, they under that 
rehabilitation/construction works. The rehabilitation/constructional works included improvement 
in the earth embankments, rip-rapping and the planting of vetiver grass to protect the upstream and 
downstream slopes respectively and in some cases increasing the reservoir area by extension of 
embankments or expanding dugouts into small earth dam(www.gsop.gov.gh, retrieved on 17th 
January 2018). 
The objective of labour-intensive public works (LIPW) is targeted at poor rural households with 
the sole aim of providing them with employment and income earning opportunities during the lean 
season. The activities undertaken include rehabilitation and maintenance of community assets such 
as roads, small earth dams, and dug-outs and other related works. They also undertake afforestation 
activities such as planting of trees. These are usually carried out in the lean season to provide a 
source of employment for the seasonal workers. McCord (2008), found out that it is usually based 
on temporary or seasonal deprivation that makes room for public works programs. 
Social accountability has become very essential within the public and private domain because of 
its impact on social protection interventions. Social protection issues are constantly on the rise 
globally with Africa recording the highest numbers (Gentilini et al., 2014).  Social protection 
emerged as a critical response to issues on ‘safety nets’, hence emphasizing poverty reduction, 
enhanced health, education, social inclusion, empowerment and state-building (Devereux & 
18 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Sabates-Wheeler, 2004; Browne, 2015; World Bank, 2004).  Other studies classify social 
protection into two, social assistance and social insurance.  Social assistance involves the direct 
transfer of cash or kind while social insurance takes care of life events such as illness and death to 
the beneficiaries (Arnold et al., 2011; Norton et al., 2011). Social assistance is being financed 
through taxes and is therefore referred to as redistributive policies for poverty reduction 
(Barrientos, 2011). These cash transfers are both conditional and unconditional in nature to the 
beneficiaries (Arnold et al., 2011).  
2.2   EXAMINING SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISMS  
The first objective of the study seeks to examine social accountability mechanisms and their ability 
to ensure accountability of service providers to project beneficiaries. Literature has established 
that the effective implementation of social accountability mechanisms depends on voice, 
information, enforcement, and answerability as well as empowerment (Gaventa & McGee, 2013).  
In the context of social accountability, the voice is usually articulated collectively, as unity is a 
strength.  It is argued that voice can be effective when there is capacity building, which basically 
entails educating people on their rights, providing them with the relevant information and to equip 
them with the skills to embark on various social accountability initiatives (Lynch, 2013).  
Information even though considered as an important condition for social accountability, is not 
adequate to arrive at a successful social accountability (Fox, 2007; Joshi, 2013). Once information 
is obtained, it does not end there, it needs to be transformed into voice through collective action 
(Lieberman, Posner & Tsai, 2013). Another point to note is the need for citizen engagement to 
move toward collective action. Citizens’ engagement, therefore, depends on factors such as their 
trust levels, fear of reprisal and past experiences. These issues need to be settled to get them 
19 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
involved to articulate their voices (UNDP, 2013).  Drawing conclusions from Banerjee et al 
(2010), it was observed that the availability of information to project beneficiaries was not enough 
to achieve desired results.  In his study, the main objective was to enhance the learning outcomes 
of students. The medium that was used was the information intervention in which several meetings 
were organized for parents with the intention that it would improve the learning outcome of their 
children. The findings suggested that the intervention resulted only in an increase in attendance, 
but not learning outcomes as desired. This clearly confirms the assertion that information alone is 
not enough to effect any changes given a prevailing situation even though it serves as a stepping 
stone. Fox (2015) reiterated that information is useful in activating collective action, which will, 
in turn, improve service provider responsiveness. Another necessary condition for the success of 
social accountability is answerability. This refers to the obligation to provide accounts for actions 
and the right to get a response (UNDP, 2010). This is usually triggered by a voice which comes in 
the form of complaints, opinions, and grievances from the service users to service providers. The 
providers of the service per the definition are obliged to respond to the grievances laid before them 
by the users. For the service providers to respond effectively to the complaints of the users depends 
largely on their resource capacity and the available incentives for them to do so. In the absence of 
these, service delivery is adversely affected (Brinkerhoff et al., 2016; Holland et al., 2012). 
Another condition worth noting is the concept of empowerment in the social accountability 
paradigm. Empowerment of the people through the provision of skills, resources and the authority 
to act and knowledge enables them to obtain power which is intended to be used to enhance their 
participation and engagement in projects (Kinyashi, 2006). Adams (1990), further emphasized the 
importance of empowerment by saying that, people stand at an indefensible position without 
empowerment. The dilemma in literature has been whether the participation which takes place in 
20 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
the communities really involve the poor people who are most affected by a decision or is captured 
by the local elites who intend to use it to advance their personal interest (Mosse, 2001; Cleaver, 
2001).  
In the view of Agarwal et al, (2009) enforceability is another vital condition for accountability. 
This usually comes to play when answerability is flawed. Evidence shows that the nature of civil 
society groups and ordinary citizens in cases where answerability fails are unable to impose 
sanctions (Houtzager & Joshi, 2008). Ultimately, social accountability success also borders on the 
close relationship between the government and societal groups, availability of resources by both 
groups as the successful initiatives depend on dual purpose (Sirker & Cosaic, 2007). In the opinion 
of Fox (2015), the inability to enforce social accountability mechanisms can affect the 
effectiveness of service delivery in the context of social protection. Although many social 
accountability initiatives target improvement in service delivery, their success is dependent on the 
effectiveness on the social accountability mechanisms (Jayal, 2008).  
Accountability to beneficiaries is said to have the potential to stimulate effectiveness and 
efficiency in service delivery (Agyemang et al., 2009; Ebrahim, 2003; Wellens & Jegers, 2014). 
It is expected that with the practice of social accountability, corrupt practices would be curtailed 
and ensure that the right beneficiaries get that which is due them at the right time (Ahmad, 2008). 
The effectiveness and efficiency of these mechanisms can be determined by examining the 
outcome that the mechanisms produced. Touchton and Wampler (2013), indicates that social 
accountability has led to the effective utilization of the health sector budget in Brazil which led to 
improved quality health care service delivery; thus leading to a drastic reduction in infant 
mortality. Olken (2007) on the other hand mentioned that, effective social accountability system 
unraveled the leakages in the use of road funds and to ensure proper utilization of the funds in the 
21 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
construction of deplorable roads in developing countries. This was made possible through 
government or public-sector audit of projects meant for vulnerable communities in developing 
countries. This form of accountability mechanism has reduced the level of corruption in over 600 
village road projects in Indonesia (Peisakhin & Pinot, 2010).  Shankar (2010) also found that the 
usage of social audits led to less wage theft in India. 
 On the part of social protection, Peisakhin, and Pinot (2010) studies on India’s food subsidy found 
that the social accountability mechanisms ensured that ration cards were accessed by beneficiaries 
without bribes. Not all the interventions usually produce the desired results. For example, studies 
conducted by Pandey et al., (2007) and Keefer and Khemani (2011), showed that the various social 
accountability tools they used which were the information intervention did not make any impact 
on service delivery. This raises the question of what social accountability mechanism works for 
which program (Fox, 2013).  On the contrary, information intervention worked in Uganda in the 
year 2004 (Hubbard, 2007). The information intervention was employed in their education sector, 
where it was found out that there were leakages in the funds that were released to the various 
schools and this was found out through a public spending tracking survey. To curb this problem 
an initiative dubbed “information for accountability” was embarked upon. In that campaign, 
parents were sensitized to the blockage of funds to schools. Reinikka and Svensson (2004), in their 
analysis of the impact of the intervention, recorded a positive impact as the leakages reduced. The 
context issue, therefore, comes to play as it is important for various interventions to consider the 
context before introducing social accountability mechanisms.  
Some scholars are of the opinion that, the importance of social accountability lies within its ability 
to address errors, fraud, and corruption (EFC), to ensure that the project beneficiaries are able to 
hold service providers accountable thereby paving way for a potential success of social protection 
22 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
programs (Ringold et al, 2010; Stolk & Tesliuc, 2010). The most used of social accountability 
mechanisms is the grievance redress mechanism, where complaints are lodged about targeting 
errors, fraud, and corrupt practices. These are channels usually put in place by the service providers 
to solicit inputs and complaints from beneficiaries to enable them to better their services (Basset 
et al., 2012).  
 
Grievance Redress Mechanisms 
Every mechanism has the objective it seeks to achieve. The grievance redress mechanism is 
focused on targeting and errors on inclusion and exclusion of beneficiaries (Samuels & Jones, 
2012). The grievance redress mechanisms take various forms, such as toll-free hotlines, emails, 
and letters, complaints made publicly constituted council at local and municipal levels (Ayliffe, 
2016; Joshi & Houtzager, 2012). Studies have established that the most common complaints 
received by service providers are payment related in nature (World Bank, 2014; Mott MacDonald, 
2014). These payments related complaints, therefore, receive a low-resolution rate. The weakest 
link in the complaints that affect resolution is state action that is the inability of the state to respond 
to these issues (Fox, 2016; Sharp et al., 2016). The success of social assistance targeting, 
administration, and service delivery depend on the incentives and accountability measures in place 
(Stolk & Tesliuc, 2010, Bassett et al., 2012). Accountability is of importance due to its influences 
on the quality of services delivered. That is program accessibility and quality of the client and 
service provider interactions and transactions.  Quality service is a function of both the supply and 
demand sides of accountability factors (Fox, 2016). 
 
23 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
In this regard, various governments especially within third world countries expanded social 
protection programs with the aim of enhancing human rights and developmental outcomes in the 
areas of poverty reduction, increase in education and access to healthcare (Browne, 2015). The 
major issues in social protection governance basically have to do with the ambiguity and non-
transparent rule of the game. These intend increases the opportunities for discretions, conflicting 
systems of accountability, lack of voice, low implementation capacity and inadequate monitoring 
and evaluation and grievance redress mechanisms (Gannozzi & Khan, 2011).  Improvement in the 
governance of social protection, of which accountability is core, can cater for undesired outcomes 
such as poor targeting, limited coverage, the prevalence of error, fraud and corruption (Fiszbein, 
Ringold & Rogers, 2009). The governance of social protection can be categorized into three:  the 
rule of the game, roles, and responsibilities, and control and accountability (Basset et al., 2012). 
Good governance of social protection programs can be achieved by placing more emphasis on easy 
access to accountability as it aids service delivery, promotes transparency and participation (World 
Development Report, 2004).  
In view of this, social accountability mechanisms also emphasize participatory budgeting, public 
expenditure tracking surveys, community monitoring, grievances mechanisms, citizen report 
cards, social audits and rights and obligation approach (Bassett et al., 2012; Joshi & Houtzager, 
2012; Malena & McNeil, 2010; Peruzzotti & Smulovitz, 2006). Social accountability mechanisms 
focus on improving the performance of governments and governments agencies in charge of 
providing pro-poor social interventions. Social accountability mechanisms can be either initiated 
by governments, non-governmental organizations or donor agencies (UNDP, 2013). This implies 
that citizens or beneficiaries of the social interventions should be given the opportunities to hold 
24 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
providers and implementers accountable (Abbey, Donkor, & Boateng, 2014; Barrett, 2008; 
Giannozzi & Khan, 2011; Samuel & Jones, 2013).  
The commonest social accountability mechanisms used within social protection programs include; 
social audit, citizen report cards, and community scorecards as well as grievance redress 
mechanisms (Heller et al, 2016).  
 
Social Audit and Citizen Report Cards 
The social audit mechanism allows beneficiaries and communities the opportunity to review and 
provide feedback on programme implemented. These audits are sometimes conducted by local 
civil society organizations, which reviews process compliance and operational rules and 
regulations, and present results in a public hearing (Subbaruo et al., 2012). This particular 
mechanism requires technical skills and its usage is usually limited as mots pro-poor policy 
beneficiaries do not possess such skills. On the other hand, citizen report cards are geared towards 
naming and shaming public agencies with the expectation that this will help change the attitude of 
service providers (Ravindra, 2004). This is achieved by making public the results of the reports 
carried out by the citizens, and the necessary social sanctions undertaken to solve problems 
(Houtzager & Joshi, 2008). Citizen report cards can be effective in situations where respondents 
are asked to rate a wide range of providers and permit relative rankings to be made, which have 
proved to be an effective way of providing incentives for improvement (Sundet, 2004).  Citizen 
report cards aid citizens to adopt proactive stances by demanding more accountability, 
accessibility, and responsiveness from service providers (Hansen & Ravnkilde, 2013). 
 
25 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Community Scorecards 
Community scorecards are a community-level tool for exacting local-level accountability that links 
service providers to the community and facilitates assessments of services in order to negotiate 
improvements.  They involve surveys of both citizens and service providers on their perceptions 
of the quality of services provided, using indicators that have been agreed by all stakeholders 
(UNDP, 2013). They make use of facilitated discussions in focus groups to encourage qualitative 
assessments of projects, processes or service provision. They often begin with collective 
discussions of service delivery problems and move to the participatory development of action 
plans, followed up by the assessment of results by using scorecards (Hansen & Ravnkilde, 2013). 
This affords the community the opportunity to point out the shortfalls of the service provided to 
the service providers, possible solutions to improving services are then agreed upon by both parties 
(World Bank, 2014). 
 
Information Intervention 
 Information dissemination is one of the commonest tools employed beside the grievance redress. 
The usage of this tool has its roots in the adage that ‘knowledge is power’. Here various forms of 
information campaigns are embarked on to educate the people on their rights as far as the service 
delivery is concerned and also the quality standards and a performance to expect from service 
providers (Ringold et al., 2012).  
 
 
26 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Community monitoring 
 Beside the grievance redress mechanism, another principal mechanism worth noting is community 
monitoring which has its premise on the idea that service providers are bound to misbehave in a 
quest to carry out their responsibilities, therefore to avoid this, they need to be constantly watched 
to keep them on their toes. The only people who can carry out this activity well is, the community 
members themselves (Ackerman, 2005; Joshi & Houtzager, 2012). It takes the form of informing 
the communities about the quality, standards of service that they ought to expect, mobilizing them 
to monitor the on-going activities of a provider and reporting to authorities any gaps in expected 
standards (UNDP, 2013). The logic behind the mechanisms is that lack of relevant information on 
the status of service delivery and community entitlements, coupled with a failure to agree on what 
can reasonably be expected of service providers, constrain people in holding service providers 
accountable (Björkman & Svensson,2009). 
 
Community committees 
With regards to community committees, teams comprised of members of civil society, local 
authorities, beneficiaries, and/or the general public, allowing groups to provide feedback on 
various program functions (Ayliffe, 2016).  The committee’s responsibilities include verifying if 
the program reaches the most vulnerable and poor, validating the accuracy of beneficiary data and 
the frequency of the recertification process, following the payment process, and ensuring 
monitoring of beneficiary compliance with guidelines (Barca et al., 2012). Committees reports 
irregularities to the municipal government and, if these are not addressed in an appropriate and 
timely manner, they are further reported to the ministry or ministries in charge of the 
27 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
implementation of the project (Basset et al., 2012). Formally established community committees 
sometimes serve as intermediaries between individual complainants and programme staff within 
complaints systems, (Zuberi, 2014).  However, some studies have revealed that there is little 
evidence that these committees go beyond their core mandate to mobilise citizens collectively or 
to engage with providers around common problems faced by social protection programme 
beneficiaries (Sharp et al., 2016).  
  With regards to mechanism aimed at ensuring transparency and accountability, Joshi (2013) 
found that mechanisms helping to expose corruption have had the greatest responsibility of 
bringing to light discrepancies between official accounts and the reality in practice; and that 
initiatives have also been quite successful in increasing awareness of entitlements and empowering 
people to demand accountability, claim rights and increase the practice of active citizenship. 
Ringold et al. (2012) found that even though information has proven to be fundamental in 
improving social accountability, its effectiveness in achieving the full social accountability status 
is yet to be established. But the same conclusion could not be drawn for grievance redress 
mechanisms as the evidence was not much to make such generalization. On citizen engagement 
mechanisms, Gaventa and Barrett (2010) found that citizen participation contributed to the 
strengthening of responsive and accountable states. Citizen participation led to greater state 
services and resources utilization, and greater realisation of rights. Local committees which usually 
comprise of representatives from either the entire community or beneficiaries of social protection 
programmes are common. Though these generally have performed wide functions ranging from 
information dissemination, control, and accountability functions, the mix varies across various 
programmes. These committees are a vital part of the social protection programme design and due 
to their importance are sometimes established independently by civil society organisations. 
28 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
2.2.1 Impact of Social Accountability Mechanisms within social protection 
The effectiveness of social accountability mechanisms within social protection can be evaluated 
based on three main objectives that they seek to achieve: improving services delivered and this is 
achieved through reducing inclusion errors in targeting; accessing the impact of the social 
protection. Another objective is improving the state-citizen relationship which is measured through 
combating corruption: grievance redress mechanisms, empowerment and advocacy, and the last 
objective is targeted at changing state-citizen relations. 
2.2.2 Improving service delivery 
This objective is achieved when there exist no inclusion and exclusion errors in the selection of 
beneficiaries for a given project and the project beneficiaries are able to hold the service providers 
accountable for their actions and inactions thereby improving the service delivery. This is 
advocated to exist when there are massive information campaigns before the commencement of 
projects. According to the World Bank (2007), when information is widespread, then it will 
increase enrolments of people on fairgrounds. It settles the problem of ‘I did not hear’ syndrome 
and the notion of selective selection is done away with (Smith &Watson, 2015). Also, at the design 
stage, some programmes have a local level committee that aims to ensure that the right people are 
selected given the definition of the criteria used in the selection process. Such committees are 
usually made up of members from the said community (Bassett et al., 2012). Evidence from studies 
conducted by Smith and Watson (2015) and Berhane et al (2015) reveals that information 
campaigns improve citizen knowledge of programmes. It was further revealed that the essence of 
information campaigns is targeted at programme access and coverage. The information campaign 
should be able to achieve the aim of letting the people know that the project is a right and not a 
29 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
gift as it has implications for the accountability process. The perception of whether it is a right or 
gift does not solely depend on the content of information campaign but the context in which the 
programme is being implemented (Barca et al., 2012; Jones et al., 2013).  
Also, when it comes to inclusion and exclusion errors, grievance redress mechanisms come to 
play. They take various forms ranging from a formal mechanism to informal. This is the most 
common mechanism that any social protection mechanism can have.  Studies have shown that in 
low-income countries, the informal redress mechanisms are preferred over the formal ones that 
have to do with mostly lodging of a formal complaint in a written form. The beneficiaries in these 
countries prefer face-to-face and informal structures (MacDonald, 2014; World Bank, 2015; 
Ranganathan, 2008).  
2.2.3 Improving state-citizen relations 
The social accountability initiatives concern with this objective are geared towards fighting fraud 
and corruption, improving empowerment and advocacy of beneficiaries. One of the frequently 
used mechanisms in fighting corruption and fraud is the grievance redress mechanism. For 
instance, the Mexican conditional cash transfer ‘Prospera’12 used ‘Community Promotion 
Committees’ to establish a link between beneficiary families, the staff of education and health 
institutions, and programme coordinators. The aim of the committees is to provide a mechanism 
for beneficiaries to raise requests and suggestions, foster community development, and promote 
social accountability and transparency of the programme. The members are volunteers selected 
from among the beneficiaries, and committees exist in every community (Hevia de la Jara, 2008). 
The grievance redress mechanism was able to reduce the incidence of fraud which was surrounding 
vote buying (Hevia de la Jara, 2008). Also, beneficiary committees have proven to expose cases 
30 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
of fraud, a case is the Benazir Income Support Programme (Gazdar & Zuberi, 2014; Government 
of Pakistan, 2015). Social accountability has as one of its major objectives to empower its 
beneficiaries to improve their advocacy.  Some programmes have as part of its design separate 
initiatives to empower the beneficiaries, but others perceive the availability of social accountability 
mechanisms as empowering enough to afford their application (Smith & Watson, 2015). Also, 
community targeting served as an avenue for participation and ensures ownership of projects by 
beneficiaries (Coffey, 2015). 
2.2.4 Changing state-society relations 
Social accountability mechanisms which aim at changing the state-citizen relations are rare. A 
small number of initiatives aimed at this objective explicitly. An example of such an initiative was 
revealed by Aiyar and Walton (2014), where it was found that social audits in the Mahatma Gandhi 
National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS) served as a part of a wider set of 
rights-based legislation aiming to change the relationship between the state and citizens. Similarly, 
El Salvador’s conditional cash transfer programme took a particularly intentional approach to 
citizenship promotion, reflected in the discourse preceding the project implementation and 
programme design (Adato et al., 2016). Another example is the Juntos programme which aims at 
changing the paternalistic relationship between the citizenry and the state, such that citizens start 
to demand that the state fulfills their social and economic rights (Jones et al., 2008). 
 
31 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
2.3 ASSESSING CONTEXTUAL FACTORS THAT AFFECT SOCIAL 
ACCOUNTABILITY 
 Literature has established that context-based and general accountability issues are the two main 
challenges of social accountability. Projects which are donor-financed usually have a problem of 
how to balance the need to secure fiduciary controls of the project, while also supporting the 
longer-term goal of strengthening a country’s capacity to enforce accountability and good 
governance (Kilby, 2006; Lakha, 2011). Andrews (2014), highlighted that this is bound to happen 
because the project implementers have to pay allegiance to the donor agencies and their demands 
are usually financially motivated. The implementers should be able to strike a balance between the 
parties involved in the accountability system. The parties (beneficiaries) and implementers operate 
within a political, social, cultural and environmental context which shapes the success or failure 
of the social accountability mechanism (Malena & McNeil, 2010). Other factors such as capacity 
of the civil society, citizen participation, economic development levels, access to information, 
support of government and the capacity of government to respond to grievances either enhance or 
hinder the success of social accountability movements (Gaventa & Barrett, 2010; Heller et al., 
2016; Joshi, 2013; Ncube & Soucat, 2014). 
One of the major challenges to social accountability is the lack of effective political will.  Various 
governments and political leaders more often than not prefer to focus on their political manifestoes 
that will garner votes than placing proper emphasis on the needs of the poor.  This implies that 
social accountability mechanisms and activities must be in line with governance structure and 
processes in order to be given proper attention. It was found that this is the case because most 
governments feel threatened by the presence and activities of social accountability initiatives 
(Hansen & Ravnkilde, 2013; Joshi, 2013; Lakha, 2011). As Malena and McNeil (2010) 
32 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
highlighted, one experienced practitioner described social accountability as 20% technical and 
80% political. A planned community audit of a social intervention involving implementers and 
government officials was cancelled by governmental powers for the fear of disclosure of lapses on 
the government officials (Lakha, 2011). 
Again, one of the challenges faced is that states especially in African, lack the capacities required 
of them to respond to the various demands put on them by the citizenry. Capacities to manage 
information, consultation and seek feedback from citizen and civil society organization to provide 
grievance mechanism are lacking in most public-sector agencies thus posing challenges to social 
accountability success (Gaventa & Barett, 2010; Malena & McNeil, 2010). Despite the wide 
adoption of democratic governance among African countries, the practice of downward 
accountability is still a challenge.  The political culture of a top-down approach to governance is 
still dominant and this hinders social accountability. For social accountability to thrive, downward 
accountability needs to be prevalent, where the citizens take part in their own governance process 
by holding their officials accountable (Ncube & Soucat, 2014).  
The low resource base of civil society organizations poses a challenge to their ability to perform 
their functions effectively, which is to offer space to citizens to engage with governments to air 
their grievances to the governments.  So, they serve as amplifiers to the demands of citizens. If not 
well resourced, they would not be able to perform well. Literature has it that, most African civil 
society organizations (CSOs) depend heavily on donor funding and it has an implication on their 
authority as an impact on what is included in their agenda. These serve as stumbling blocks for the 
CSOs to perform well to enhance social accountability (Joshi, 2013; Lakha, 2011). 
Context is very crucial to the success of social accountability mechanisms. Usually, social 
accountability initiatives hardly benefit the poor due to the fact that context is mostly not 
33 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
considered (Bukenya et al., 2012). A given context is made up of a different group of people who 
made up the context. In designing social accountability mechanisms, the characteristics of the 
study population should be considered, be it their educational levels, poverty levels, and 
empowerment levels.  When the context is considered it leads to the introduction of feasible 
initiatives that will be used by the target population (Gaventa & McGee, 2013). This is further 
echoed by Fox (2015) who espoused that context-specific explains the reason why the same 
initiative yields different results in different contexts. In the literature on social accountability, 
there is consensus on that fact that context matters when it comes to achieving success with the 
various social accountability initiative but the differing views sets in concerning which context 
factors should be considered (Fox, 2015; Joshi, 2012). 
Other scholars are of the view that, the capacity and commitment levels of the various stakeholders 
in ensuring the success of social accountability is important. This leads us to discuss the political 
settlements of a given context. John and Putzel (2009) define political settlements to include the 
distribution of power that exists between the various segments in a particular context. The 
commitment levels of the elites in the society and the capacity of the state to deliver social 
accountability initiatives are shaped by the political settlements that exist (Rais & Moore, 2005). 
Booth (2011), alluded to the idea that the difference in power distribution that characterises the 
providers of service and the users coupled with the perceived social status is a key limitation to 
the demand of accountability in a certain context. Again, the capture of power by the elites 
especially at the local government levels makes it difficult for the poor to participate because the 
poor is characterized by low capacity (Haque, 2008). 
Another factor that should be considered in a given context is the capacity of citizens and agency. 
The capacity and agency of citizens should be taken into consideration when designing social 
34 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
accountability initiatives for a given context. This is of importance because agency has an 
implication on the usage of these mechanisms. Implicitly, social accountability is dependent on 
the capacity and agency of the population under consideration. Another aspect of the capacity and 
agency that should be tackled is the cultural and social norms that define the confines within which 
a group of people should act. That defines the way of life for a group of people.  Kelsall (2011) 
established that in a context that citizens perceive their relationship with the state as that of a 
paternalistic one, it has severe implications on their ability to exact accountability. In this case, the 
attitudes and perceptions of these people need to be changed.  It is against this that, McGee and 
Kroesschell (2013) argue that, social accountability initiatives should first have as part of its 
objective to empower the targeted population first to enable them to engage properly in the 
accountability process. The impact of social accountability initiatives is further hindered by the 
socio-cultural practices that define the behaviour of a group of people. In African countries where 
the culture encourages ‘not questioning authorities’, social accountability is likely to fail. Also 
relating it to social protection, where they usually perceive it to be a favour instead of a right 
(Samuels & Jones, 2013), civil society will be hesitant to organize social accountability 
movements (Hansen & Ravnkilde, 2013; Heller et al., 2016; Joshi, 2013; Lakha, 2011; UNDP, 
2013). Illiteracy can also hinder social accountability to some extent as the people will not 
understand the importance of the movement and their rights which will enable the design and use 
of accountability mechanisms. For social accountability approaches to be effective, they must be 
context specific. They should take into consideration cultural and social values of the people, and 
other factors necessary for the success of social accountability mechanisms including the capacity 
of the government to implement demands, political commitment of the government, the 
willingness of citizens, and the financial and human capacity of civil society organisations. 
35 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
2.4 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 
2.4.1 Empowerment Analytical framework 
Social protection programs are very essential in alleviating poverty and improving the lives of the 
vulnerable in society (Grabe, 2011). Evidence shows that social protection programs more often 
than not are geared towards improving the economic and social lives of the vulnerable in society 
(Browne, 2015). However, there has been an argument that, though social protection aims to 
improve the lives of the vulnerable in society, the mechanisms to protect these vulnerable 
population remains a challenge (Bassett et al, 2012). Others argue that one key mechanism that 
can be used to ensure that resources meant for social protection interventions are effectively 
utilized is to empower the beneficiaries of the interventions to hold their service providers 
answerable for their stewardship (Bakshi et al., 2017; OECD, 2012; Sen, 2006). Empowerment 
leads to self-efficacy, participation, decision- making the ability of the beneficiaries of social 
protection programs to fully participate in the project. In their analytical framework on 
empowerment, (Alsop et al., 2006; Narayan, 2002), it was established that empowerment is 
fundamental in social accountability mechanisms. This is because, the beneficiaries of social 
protection programmes are able to call the implementers of social protection to order (Samuel & 
Jones, 2013). In view of this, other writers suggest that the concept of empowerment is vague in 
its implementation unless it constructs are well defined. Other theoretical models are of the view 
that, regardless the constructs of empowerment, leadership, and authority can affect the effective 
functioning of those constructs in the implementation of social protection intervention (O’Dwyer 
& Unerman, 2010; Tagarirofa & Chazovachii, 2013). Other writers argue that, although leadership 
and power can serve as a bane to empowerment, knowledge on the process of empowerment which 
includes a well-defined structure, effective functioning of an agent and the desired outcome are 
36 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
very essential in social protection interventions (Alsop et al, 2006; Cattaneo & Chapman, 2010; 
Narayan, 2005). At the individual level, Cattaneo and Chapman (2010), explains that there exist 
certain factors that determine the success of empowerment, these are; actor’s self-efficacy, 
competence, material resources, social and political factors surrounding the person. The 
empowerment process is further hindered by the institutional context in the form of rules, 
processes, and norms that pertains as highlighted by Alsop et al (2006). The availability of the 
elements of empowerment as explained by the Narayan (2005), will help bridge the institutional 
gap that formally made empowerment and accountability difficult. The combination of opportunity 
structures by way of the elements of empowerment and the support factors for both the individual 
and collective produces the desired outcome of increased empowerment, provision of quality 
services, reduced incidence of corruption, accountability among others (Alsop et al., 2006; 
Narayan, 2005; Sen, 1995). Agency, which is defined as an actor’s ability to make purposeful 
choices is therefore dependent on the opportunity structures which determine the availability and 
effectiveness of the elements of empowerment (Alsop et al, 2006). A number of models including 
Cattaneo and Chapman (2010), Alsop et al (2006) and Narayan, (2005) suggest that, empowerment 
can be measured based on the beneficiaries’ involvement in the social protection intervention, 
effectiveness in participation and the quality of services as well as the freedom to hold 
implementers accountable. Other scholars in the field of social accountability, social protection 
and empowerment argue that the cardinal impediment to social accountability and empowerment 
is the institutional barriers that make the vulnerable more powerless in the quest to get involved 
on issues of answerability by their superiors. When this happens, the core essence of accountability 
and empowerment in social protection remains a challenge. When this gap is closed, accountability 
in social protection will triumph. It is within this context that the empowerment framework and 
37 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
other scholarly works presented in this write-up on social accountability and social protection 
seeks to appropriately address as the study conceptualises the ideas in the context of the study.  
2.4.2Empowerment process model by Cattaneo and Chapman (2010) 
This model explains the idea that empowerment needs to be desired and initiated by the actor who 
so desires it. It further explains empowerment at only the individual level. This model is limited 
in the sense that it does not consider other components aside from the individual components as 
determinants of the empowerment process. 
Figure 2 1: Empowerment Process Model  
 
Cattaneo & Chapman (2010) 
 
38 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
2.4.3Empowerment framework as developed by Alsop et al (2006). 
Alsop et al (2006), also developed an empowerment framework to understand, measure and 
explain how empowerment works.  This framework is very useful as it highlights what is known 
as the measurement of empowerment. Level of empowerment as espoused by Alsop et al., (2006) 
framework are; the first level is the existence of choice: Whether an opportunity to make a choice 
actually exists, the second level is whether there is usage of choice: Whether a person or group 
actually uses the opportunity to make choices, and the last level is the achievement of choice: 
Whether the choice results in the desired outcome. This framework is further of importance as it 
helps in understanding which issues need to be addressed in the operative stage and which factors 
need tracking in the monitoring stage. 
Figure 2 2: Empowerment Framework  
 
Alsop et al (2006) 
 
39 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
2.4.4 The empowerment framework by Narayan, 2005 
This framework is important as it highlights the various elements needed for empowerment. That 
is, structure, agency, and context. This framework is very useful as it explains in details the 
attributes needed to change the unequal power relations that exist. 
Figure 2 3: Empowerment Framework  
 
Narayan, (2005). 
40 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Figure 2 4: Empowerment Analytical Framework 
Elements of empowerment Support for Empowerment Outcome 
(Structure) (Agency) 
Information Empowerment of 
(accessibility, people 
Individual 
timeliness,  
understandable,  
relevance, availability) Accountability 
Self-efficacy 
Inclusion and  
Competence 
participation 
Increased freedom 
Knowledge 
(meetings and  
feedbacks, Material resource 
committees,) Agency Quality Services 
Collective 
Accountability  
Voice 
(availability of social 
Representation 
accountability 
mechanisms) Organization 
Local organizational 
capacity 
(mobilisation capacity,  
collect action capacity) 
 
Nature of social and political structures 
Alsop et al., (2006), Narayan, (2002) and Cattanoe & Chapman, (2010) reconstituted by 
Author. 
 
41 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
2.5 Explanation of Framework Constructs 
2.5.1 Access to information 
Information is key in every human society. Informed citizens are better equipped to take advantage 
of opportunities, access services, exercise their rights, negotiate effectively and also hold state and 
non-state actors accountable (Joshi, 2014). The information should be timely and presented in a 
way that can be understood by the citizens (Narayan, 2002). Information can be disseminated 
through written articles, group discussions, debates, and storytelling (Azfar, Kahkonen & 
Meagher, 2001; Alsop et al., 2001).  
2.5.2 Inclusion and participation 
Inclusion is concern about the ‘who’ question, that is who gets involved at a given time. The 
inclusion of the poor in priority setting and decision making is critical to ensure that limited public 
resources are built on local knowledge and priorities and this forms the centrepiece of 
empowerment (WHO, 2006). This is not an easy task to undertake as there would be varied interest 
manifest by varied people and conflict is bound to occur. For this reason, conflict resolution 
mechanisms need to be put in place to manage the unforeseen circumstances which might arise. 
This, therefore, leads to considering capacity building for the local officers to equip them to know 
how to manage conflict when they arise (Narayan, 2002).   
2.5.3 Accountability 
This refers to the ability to call persons to account requiring that they be answerable for their 
policies, actions, and use of funds. When corruption occurs, it is the poor who suffer the most 
because they do not have many options from which to choose from (Kaufmann et al., 2000). There 
42 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
exist three forms of accountability, namely; the political, administrative and social.  The political 
form of accountability is focused on the use of elections to hold politically elected officials’ 
accountability. Administrative accountability is one that exists between the various government 
agencies either vertically or horizontally to ensure answerability among and between the various 
government agencies and social accountability involves accountability initiated by ordinary 
citizens. The emphasis is on social accountability, here, citizens hold government agencies directly 
to account for their actions. This form is known to reinforce the political and administrative forms 
of accountability mechanisms. A range of tools can be implored to ensure social accountability 
works, information intervention, transparency, participation and community committees (Malena 
& McNeil, 2010; Joshi, 2013). 
2.5.4 Local organisational capacity 
This refers to the ability of the beneficiaries to organise themselves and work together to improve 
their quality of service. Organised communities are likely to have their voices heard and their 
demands met than communities that are not well organised.  The ability of the communities to 
organise themselves and demand quality services is dependent on the nature of norms, procedures, 
and resources that support civil liberties (Narayan, 2002). 
Self-efficacy:  is where the individual assesses their beliefs about their abilities (Riger, 1993). 
Gutierrez (1991) describes self- efficacy as personal power and it is argued that it is the central 
element of empowerment. The concern of service providers is to put a mechanism in place to learn 
about clients’ beliefs and the context of those beliefs and know how to tackle them for the greater 
good of all. 
43 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Competence: this refers to the requisite skills needed by beneficiaries of the social intervention to 
better enhance or empower them in the accountability process. Even though some of these skills 
are inherent, others such as communication, negotiation need to be acquired with time (McWhirter, 
1991). These skills enable individuals’ beneficiaries to function perfectly within the domain of the 
social intervention project (Narayan, 2005).   
 Knowledge: knowledge in the context of this study refers to the beneficiaries understanding of 
their social context and that of the intervention. This will help the beneficiaries to appreciate the 
power dynamics at play and the possible ways to achieving the ultimate of empowerment and the 
resources needed as well (Zimmerman, 1995).  
Material resources: The material resources according to the framework explains the core needs 
of the beneficiaries of the project. Infrastructure such as buildings, land as well as financial 
resources that the beneficiaries must be empowered with against shocks or live to threatening 
events. 
Voice: this is an opportunity for people to articulate their views free from intimidation. For the 
purposes of this study, the voice is about poor people expressing their views and interests in an 
effort to influence service delivery. In the case of social intervention programs, the voice is usually 
considered as a collective effort (Goetz & Gaventa, 2001; Narayan, 2002). The effectiveness of 
voice is dependent on the social and political contexts in relation to the existing power relations, 
enabling environment, nature of the state and its institutions, and the social contract between the 
state and its citizens (UNDP, 2008). Citizen's voice is viewed as a precondition for equitable access 
and quality of public goods and services, thereby supporting improved health and education 
outcomes (Rocha, Menocal & Sharma, 2008). 
44 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Representation: this is an opportunity for the poor people to be represented by their leaders when 
it comes to dealing with the implementers. This grants the leaders of the poor people to air the 
views of the larger group and make negotiations on their behalf. It affords them decision making 
power which binds effectively on all (Zimmerman, 2000). These representatives have the 
legitimacy of expressing their opinions on behalf of the larger group (World Bank, 2002). At this 
level, stakeholder preferences are represented in public policy forums, through citizen and/or 
community advocacy groups (UNDP, 2010).  
Organisational skills:  organisational skills in reference to the study implies the strength in unity 
to mobilise and take an action. The civic mobilisation is often necessary to trigger and facilitate 
citizen ‘voice’, especially for vulnerable or marginalised individuals and groups. Civil society 
organisations often play a critical role in civic mobilisation. 
Therefore, as highlighted in the above conceptual framework, the necessary ingredients for 
empowerment to occur are the presence of the empowerment elements as well as the support 
factors which are usually at the individual and collective levels. Both the elements and support 
factors of empowerment depend on one another as the presence of only one cannot be effective. 
That is to say, even if the existing institutional reforms lead to the availability of the empowerment 
elements, and there are no existing individual and collective support factors as highlighted above 
(Cattaneo & Chapman 2010), it would be a wasted effort. This was also echoed by Mosedale 
(2003) that empowerment cannot be bestowed but rather should be claimed.  
The elements of empowerment as highlighted in Narayan’s framework (2005), requires the 
institutional reforms which take the form of rules, laws, norms and values Alsop et al (2006) terms 
as ‘opportunity structures’ that intent influences agency. Agency, which is defined as an actor’s 
ability to make purposeful choices is therefore dependent on the opportunity structures which 
45 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
determine the availability and effectiveness of the elements of empowerment (Alsop et al, 2006). 
Agency is also dependent on the individual or collective makeup. The closest way to predict the 
agency of people or groups is to identify their endowment of assets. At the individual level, one 
needs self-efficacy, resources, and the enabling environment to be able to effectively use the 
elements provided to bring about the desired outcome of social accountability, quality service 
delivery, empowerment and the like. 
One’s ability to put up an action is dependent on the opportunity structures at play, both formal 
and informal. The presence and operation of those institutions affect, first, whether individuals and 
groups have access to assets and, second, the extent to which they can actually deploy those assets 
to achieve desired outcomes. 
2.6 Chapter conclusion 
This chapter reviewed relevant literature in relation to the topic under study. The review took the 
form of discussion of concepts such as accountability, social accountability and social protection 
with a particular focus on public works program. The study further reviewed works around social 
accountability mechanism and their usage, the impact of their usage on accountability and poverty 
reduction and the challenges these mechanisms face. The study employed the use of the 
empowerment framework to explain the effectiveness of the accountability mechanisms. 
 
 
 
 
46 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
CHAPTER THREE 
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 
3.0 Introduction 
This chapter to explains the procedure by which the study was conducted. The chapter comprises 
the research paradigm which explains the worldview of philosophical issues underpinning 
accountability and social protection. The approach to the study also explains the method that was 
implored to carry out the study hence the qualitative research approach. The research design, 
sources of data, sampling technique, sampling size, the target population, data collection 
instruments, the key constraints to this study as well as the ethical consideration are all part of this 
chapter.  
3.1. Study Area 
The Kassena-Nankana West District and Nabdam District are both located in the Upper East 
Region of Ghana. The two Districts are considered to be among the underprivileged communities 
in the Region. The Districts have benefited a number of pro-poor community intervention social 
protection projects from World Food Programme, World Vision, and Catholic Relief Services 
among others.  The Ghana Social Opportunities Project has also been implemented in these 
Districts as a measure of helping to address the financial lapses of the people and to improve their 
domestic livelihoods. The poverty mapping report of the Ghana statistical service of 2015 even 
indicated that these two Districts are really in need of social intervention programmes such as 
GSOP. The dominant economic activity in the Districts is Agriculture, thus, crop and animal 
farming. The irregular rainfall pattern in the Region affects sustainable agricultural production and 
livelihood, hence, inhabitants are unable to enjoy food security.  
47 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
 
Due to the poor levels recorded in the district, a number of NGOs operate in the district. These 
NGOs vary from providing educational needs to providing employment opportunities. Some of 
the NGOs in the district include Camfed, they are into education, World Vision they are also into 
education and USAID they are into agriculture. Aside from the activities of these NGOs, the 
district has also enjoyed social intervention programs that are provided by the state. These include 
the school feeding program, Livelihood empowerment against poverty and the Ghana social 
opportunities project. 
The labour intensive public works of GSOP was introduced into both Districts at different periods. 
For the Kassena-Nankana West, it was introduced in 2012 but for the Nabdam district, the project 
was introduced in 2017. The first projects worked on in the Kassena-Nankana were the 
rehabilitation of the village dam and construction of feeder roads. The project later introduced the 
climate change mitigation part which had to do with the planting of mango trees. The project is 
implemented by the Ministry of Local Government and rural development through the various 
district assemblies where the project is implemented. The aim of the project is to provide targeted 
poor rural households with access to employment and income earning opportunities, in particular 
during seasonal labour demand shortfall through rehabilitation and maintenance of public or 
community assets. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
48 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Figure 3.1 District Map of Nabdam 
 
Source: Ghana Statistical Services (GSS), 2015. 
 
 
49 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Figure3.2 District Map of Kasena Nankana West 
Source: Ghana Statistical Services (GSS), 2015.  
50 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
3.2 Research paradigm 
Researchers are guided by various beliefs and values which explains why certain designs and 
approaches are employed. These beliefs and values are termed by scholars as paradigms (Kuhn, 
1970; Guba, 1990).  A paradigm or worldview is a basic set of beliefs that guide actions (Guba, 
1990). These set of values are based on certain philosophical underpinnings. Positivism, 
interpretative and critical realism are the various paradigms of knowledge that underpin research 
studies (Orlikowski & Baroudi, 1991; Myers & Avison, 2002). This study implored the 
interpretive paradigm as it is built on the assumption that, the reality is subjective, and knowledge 
is established through making meaning from the various meanings attached to reality by people 
(Klein & Myers, 1996). This paradigm was selected because of its ability to help the researcher 
study the meanings associated with the phenomenon of social accountability by the respondents 
while they are in their natural settings. 
3.3 Research approach 
 The qualitative research approach was used for this study. Qualitative research approach 
according to Patton (2012), is an effort to understand situations in their uniqueness as part of a 
particular context and the interactions there.  The qualitative research approach was chosen 
because it offers the researcher the opportunity to discover meanings people ascribe to the 
phenomenon of social accountability while living in their natural environment (Neuman, 2014; 
Denzin & Lincoln, 2005; Boateng, 2015). The study deemed it fit to, therefore, implore this 
research approach to study the extent to which social protection programs include beneficiaries in 
service delivery studying the meanings that these people ascribe to the phenomenon of social 
51 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
accountability with respect to their natural settings. This approach also helped the researcher to get 
to understand the complex issues underlying the phenomenon under study.  
3.4 Research design 
 The case study research design was adopted for this study. Case studies are a strategy of inquiry 
in which the researcher explores in depth a program, event, activity, process or one or more 
individuals (Creswell, 2009). Yin (2009) defines a case study as an empirical inquiry that 
investigates a phenomenon in depth and within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries 
between phenomenon and context are not clear. The case study was considered because it 
emphasizes on depth which is important for my study as the researcher sought to find out the extent 
of effectiveness of social accountability mechanisms within social protection programmes (Rose, 
Spinks & Canhoto, 2015). The case study allowed for the in-depth study of the phenomenon of 
social accountability in social protection programmes in the context of Ghana using the Ghana 
social opportunities project as a case. It helps to explain complexities of real-life situations.  The 
case study was used because it made it possible for various sources of data to be used (observations, 
interviews, audio-visual materials, documents, and reports) to solicit for information on social 
accountability. Aside from these advantages, the case study has been criticised to lack rigour and 
also does not have the generalisation power (Welsh, 2014; Creswell, 2007).  Being aware of the 
generalisation weakness of case studies, the results of the study were specific to the context of the 
participants under study. 
Again, critical to the qualitative approach is “multiple truths and the natural settings” of 
respondents (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005; Lincoln & Guba, 1985) and case study enabled the 
researcher to get various subjective views from the beneficiaries of the Ghana social opportunities 
52 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
project while they lived in their natural settings. The entities that served as cases for the study were 
the Kassena-Nankana West District Assembly and the Nabdam District which are located in the 
Upper East region of Ghana. The choice of District was first influenced by the availability of the 
project. The Kassena-Nankana West District was selected because it was one of the first districts 
to benefit from the project, hence the views of the beneficiaries were needed to establish the 
presence or absence of social accountability mechanisms of the project. On the other hand, the 
Nabdam District was also selected because it is the only District in the Upper East Region where 
the program is currently running. Therefore, finding out from beneficiaries and implementers the 
mechanisms put in place to ensure viable social protection intervention was essential.  
3.5 Study and Target population 
The study population comprises of the inhabitants of the Kassena-Nankana West District and 
Nabdam District respectively, specifically the study targets the implementers and beneficiaries of 
the Ghana Social Opportunities Project which is operational in the two districts.  By beneficiaries, 
the researcher means the people who took part in the Labour Intensive Public Works component 
of the Ghana Social Opportunities Project. The beneficiaries are the focal point of this study 
because they are the ones that the social accountability mechanism is designed for and can, 
therefore, provide the researcher with in-depth knowledge on the level of effectiveness of the social 
accountability mechanisms. The implementers are considered because they are in charge of 
ensuring that the beneficiaries are aware of their rights and responsibilities to demand 
accountability from the implementers for the social protection program initiated. The 
implementers need to be included again in the study because the researcher would want to find out 
from them whether there are certain accountability mechanisms available for the beneficiaries and 
whether they can also hold the beneficiaries accountable of the project. Within the Kassena-
53 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Nankana District, Kadinga, Nabango, and Kayoro were the communities considered for the study 
because they are the beneficiary communities. In the Nabdam district, the Kongo-Avareme 
community where the project is ongoing was also considered. No specific audience was targeted 
in terms of age range or gender-wise. The target population which is the subset (Boateng, 2015) 
of the population is further composed of the implementers, that is the District Assembly officials 
in charge of the project, within the Kassena-Nankana District, the District Budget Officer was 
chosen because he was in charge of the project. The community facilitators were chosen from the 
two districts because they existed in both districts who are in charge of the project at the 
community level were also included in the study. Besides these key personalities selected in the 
two districts, the beneficiaries of the project in the two districts were also considered for this study.  
3.6 Sample size  
 A sample size is the number of the targeted audience a researcher intends to solicit their views on 
a particular subject matter under investigation. The proposed initial sample size for the 
beneficiaries was 20. However, the point of saturation was reached at 18. The point of saturation 
in the conduct of interviews is where the respondents at a point in time are giving the same 
responses to the questions. The study also considered   Assembly members (2), community 
facilitators (2), District Budget Officer (1), contractor supervisor (1), and the Regional 
Coordinating Officer of the Ghana Social Opportunities Project (1). Therefore, the total sample 
size for this study was 25. 
 
 
 
54 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Table 3 1: Summary of Respondents 
Participants  Number 
Beneficiaries 18 
Assembly Members  2 
Community Facilitators 2 
District Budget Officer 1 
Contractor Supervisor 1 
Regional Coordinating Officer in charge of GSOP 1 
 
3.7 Sampling technique 
The convenient sampling technique was considered for this study.   Convenience sampling is a 
non-probability sampling technique which entails the selection of subjects due to their availability 
and/or closeness to the researcher (Creswell, 2008). The convenient sampling was used to select 
the beneficiaries of the project in the two districts. The purposive sampling technique was also 
used to select the implementers and other stakeholders of the project within the project 
implementation districts. This is because they are deemed to be knowledgeable of the project and 
the accountability mechanisms that can be used to make the project more effective (Boateng, 2015) 
was used to sample the program implementers and other stakeholders. 
3.8 Data Collection Instrument  
In the quest to solicit answers to the research questions of the study, in-depth interview guides 
were designed for both the face-to-face interviews and focus group discussions. The in-depth 
55 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
interview guide was developed in line with the study objectives and the framework of the study.  
The in-depth interview guide was used because it will enable the researcher to obtain detailed 
information on the phenomenon under study. The questions for the in-depth interview guide were 
opened in nature with specific areas for probing. The interviews were diverse and modified to suit 
the audience at a given time. Whilst the interview for the Officials associated with the project was 
held in the English Language, the interview for the beneficiaries was held in the local language, 
that is, the Nankan and Nab language respectively. The respondents were selected to ensure 
heterogeneity that is the beneficiaries were selected to ensure that each community was represented 
in the sample size.  Also, Focus Group Discussions were organized for some of the beneficiaries. 
The focus group discussion was organised for the second district and it was as a result of the fact 
that the project was on-going. In the researcher’s quest to observe beneficiaries on the field, the 
data was collected at the site of operation and to save time and for convenience, it was advisable 
to hold focus group discussion so as not to distract their working hours. The group was made up 
of five people to aid a good discussion as large numbers usually make it difficult to control the 
discussion. Each focus group session lasted between 45 minutes to 1 hour. In all, two focus group 
discussions were organised for the study. These groups were homogenous in terms of sex, that is 
separate sessions were held for both males and females.  This is because the people have a culture 
of when men are talking, women are not supposed to talk, so the discussion was in two folds, one 
for the males and another for the females to ensure that they are free to share their views and 
experiences regarding the subject matter. The researcher also made use of direct observation which 
aids in getting certain vital pieces of information from the study environment. 
56 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
3.9 Sources of Data 
The study made use of both primary and secondary sources of data. Data from primary sources 
were obtained from field observation, interviews with the project implementers with the help of 
an interview guide. The primary source of data again included data obtained from the beneficiaries 
that is past and present beneficiaries of the social opportunities project, who are directly involved 
in the project and have much information about it. Again, the primary source included community 
facilitators of the programme, Assemblymen, and women of the Area Councils were the project is 
understudy and Participant-observation which was based principally on the personal experience of 
the researcher and observations made during the period. Secondly, the experience of the researcher 
who does not only hail from the area but has lived there consistently also helped to gather 
information.  The secondary sources of information were basically an empirical review.  
3.10 Data Analysis 
The data that was obtained through the in-depth interviews were recorded using a voice recorder.  
The interviews recorded were played a number of times and listened to establish first-hand issues 
presented by the respondents. This was followed by a careful transcription of the audio recordings. 
To ensure the accuracy and quality of the information transcribed, the audio of the voice recording 
was played three times while reading through the transcribed script. This procedure was preceded 
by a content analysis and interpretation of the information transcribed. Themes were now raised 
based on the segmented data for easy analysis. The field notes that were gathered during the 
interviews were also used to support the results presented by the respondents. The final results of 
the study were now presented in themes. 
57 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
3.11 Ethical Consideration 
To ensure acceptability, an introductory letter was obtained from the University of Ghana Business 
School, Department of Public Administration and Health Service Management introducing the 
researcher and her intentions to the study participants and institutions. It also served as a legal 
document for the researcher to obtain information from prospective respondents. As part of the 
ethical issues, the researcher obtained ethical clearance from the ethics committee for humanities 
from the Institute of Statistical, Social and Economic Research (ISSER), University of Ghana. 
In compliance with the ethical considerations, the researcher explained in details the aim and 
objectives of the research and assured participants of confidentiality as the work is solely for 
academic purpose before the commencement of each interview or focus group sessions. The 
consent of the participants was sought before they were recorded. The respondents were educated 
about their rights, that is, they had the right to withdraw from the study at any time when they 
deem fit. Participation in the research was solely voluntary. The participants were made up of only 
beneficiaries of Ghana social opportunities project who took part or are still taking part in the 
labour intensive public works component of the Ghana social opportunities project. 
3.12 Limitation to the study 
 The study was limited to the communities that took part in the project, hence the findings are 
specific to the studied communities and cannot be generalized to include the case of other social 
protection programmes and their beneficiary communities. Also, the one-on-one interviews were 
conducted in the Nankan and Nab languages respectively. As a result, there is the tendency of 
misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the interviews but the researcher had an upper hand 
because she spoke the same language with the beneficiaries so this shortcoming was handled 
58 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
properly. Again, even though the sample size was small (25), the in-depth nature of the interview 
made it possible for the researcher to obtain the needed information from the respondents. 
3.13 Chapter conclusion 
This chapter presented the approach adopted in conducting the research. The research design was 
an exploratory in nature. A qualitative research approach was adopted. Data were obtained from 
both primary and secondary sources. Two districts were considered for the study. Convenient and 
purposive sampling techniques were employed to select the respondents for the study. The primary 
sources of data were obtained from both interviews and focus group discussions. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
59 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
CHAPTER FOUR 
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION 
4.0 Introduction 
This chapter presents the analysis and interpretation of the data collected on social accountability 
mechanisms and its implication within the Ghana Social Opportunities Project. The data is 
analysed based on the objectives of the study and supported by the framework underpinning the 
study.   The data address the following research questions: First, to what extent are beneficiaries 
of social protection programmes able to hold their service providers accountable? Secondly, what 
contextual factors shape the effectiveness of social accountability under GSOP? The data analyses 
and discussions were centred around the following thematic areas: empowerment, social 
accountability mechanisms, and contextual factors. The analyses for each of the areas led to the 
generation of sub-themes. 
4.1 Overview of the Labour-intensive public works programme 
 The Ghana social opportunities project is a World Bank funded project which is implemented 
through local governments. This program came about because of the gaps identified within the 
National Social Protection Strategy (NSPS). It was launched in October 2010 but implementation 
commenced in 2011. The project sought as part of its objectives to strengthen the implementation 
of the two-key social protection intervention, namely the country’s conditional cash transfer 
programme(LEAP) and the public works program component of social protection. The study is 
focusing on the Labour Intensive Public Works (LIPW) component, which seeks to provide 
targeted households with access to employment and income earning opportunities, during seasonal 
labour demand shortfalls through rehabilitation and maintenance of public or community assets. 
60 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
The implementation takes place at the district level. Here, the district assemblies inculcate the 
Ghana Social Opportunities Project projects into their medium-term development plan. The 
implementation is further done in collaboration with the particular department involved at a given 
time. For instance, projects that had to do with the construction of feeder roads and dams are 
handled by the public works department and when it comes to the afforestation component, the 
Agric department is involved in the implementation. The beneficiary communities are selected at 
the district assembly level. The selection of the projects is done through expert advice and 
participation and consent from the peoples’ representatives who take the form of assembly 
members. The beneficiaries are selected from the project communities through self-targeting or 
community targeting. The daily wage is set below the minimum wage rate so that the purpose of 
targeting the extremely poor will be achieved. The payment mode is through E-zwich. The 
beneficiaries are to work for 7 hours a day and they are to be paid two weeks into the new month. 
They are entitled to ghc10 for a day’s work. The projects that make use of contractors, such as the 
rehabilitation of dams, the contractors are accountable to the district assembly and not the 
beneficiary community.  
4.2 Social accountability mechanisms within the Ghana Social Opportunities Project 
This objective examines the extent to which social accountability mechanisms are essential for 
improving service quality and ensuring accountability of the service providers to beneficiaries. In 
order to assess the effectiveness of the social accountability mechanisms within the Labour-
intensive public works component of Ghana Social Opportunities Project, the study examined the 
extent to which the project empowered the beneficiaries by using the empowerment analytical 
framework as a yardstick to determine whether the beneficiaries were empowered or not. The 
findings of the study reveal that access to information has the ability to influence voice which is 
61 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
an essential feature of empowerment. Beneficiaries of the project asserted that the prior education 
that was given to them on the rationale of the project formed a sort of empowerment to them since 
they had information of what the project intended to achieve. The beneficiaries further established 
that this information was made available to them through community durbars and fora as it 
indicates in the quotation below; 
“I didn’t know that this project was meant to improve upon our lives. I didn’t even know 
that the project was for the government. I thought politicians were coming to use that one 
to deceive us so that we will be happy and vote for them the next time. But when they asked 
the chief and the ‘Magazie’ to tell us to come out so that they would educate us on the 
project, then I got to know that it was a project that will help us”. 
On the other hand, a respondent mentioned that information is very vital to the success of every 
social intervention. The interviewee indicated that this social intervention project would not have 
been successful without prior education of the project to the beneficiaries as the quotation below 
explains 
“We were sensitized on how the project was going to be implemented, that is, it involved 
the planting of the mango trees, nursing them and watering them frequently. After which 
interested people who would want to take part in the project were registered to be enrolled 
(R5)”. 
Given the essentials of sensitization, it can be inferred that information is very vital on issues 
pertaining to accountability as it empowers individuals with the requisite knowledge on the 
intervention and accountability. Alsop et al (2006) and Gaventa and Barrett (2010), present this 
assertion that access to information is very critical in enhancing the success and sustainability of 
social accountability.  Based on the framework, there was availability of information as the people 
62 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
were sensitized to the essence of the project, but the information was skewed to only what the 
work was about but did not include education on the rights that the beneficiaries have as right 
bearers to be able to hold they (service providers) accountable. Due to this, the knowledge base of 
the beneficiaries is not enhanced and this further affects voice at the collective level. For 
information to be able to empower the beneficiaries, it should be timely, available, accessible, 
relevant and understandable. But from the findings, the information was available but not 
adequate. The results again show that, the sensitization that the beneficiaries of the project received 
enlightened them on their opportunities including the wage rate, Contract Sum, Percentage to be 
paid out as wages, the frequency of wage payment, mode, and means of payment, the role of 
various stakeholders in the delivery process and other entitlements.  The quotation below is a 
classical response  
“In fact, let me say that implementation of a sub-project in a community is preceded by an 
elaborate or robust information education campaign. So, the people are sensitized on what 
the project is all about, the whole community whoever is interested who wants to hear, 
hears about it and we have a robust targeting mechanism. It starts with even the setting of 
the wage rate, it is usually set as a little above the minimum wage rate of the country but 
below the Agric or commercial wage rate of the community such that those who have other 
opportunities can go there and we are left with those who indeed need this opportunity 
(P1).” 
This is in line with the ideas by Alsop et al (2006) and Narayan (2002) that for the disadvantaged 
people to be empowered to undertake decisions concerning their lives, access to information is 
required. A study conducted by Fox (2015) suggest that information though important is not 
enough to ensure accountability of actors. It was further established in a study by Banerjee et al., 
63 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
(2010) on the village education committee, that information alone is not enough to make the 
desired change occur. This invariably makes information the basis for empowerment because the 
other pillars of empowerment rest on the quality of information given. 
Regarding issues of transparency, an interviewee mentioned that information is an important tool 
in the demand for accountability. In line with this, accountability boards are mounted at project 
sites with salient information, such as how much is allocated for the whole project, to the sub-
contracts and daily wage rate. Further questioning of the respondent of the effectiveness of this 
initiative on the basis of transparency and accountability to beneficiaries to non-literate population 
indicates that measures were put in place to ensure that the information was relayed to the 
beneficiaries. 
“Yes, each community has a community facilitator, who can read and write. We have a 
community facilitator whom we pay monthly. They are able to read and write so at least 
they are the focal points to disseminate information to the people. But of course, there are 
other community members who may not necessarily be beneficiaries who can also read 
and write. So, it is there, your child who is in school can read for you or anybody in the 
community can read for you so that you understand.” 
The above confirms the ideas of Gaventa and McGee (2013) and Kim et al (2005) that transparency 
is a vital construct in accountability which is being influenced through information dissemination. 
On the contrary, Kolstad and Wiig (2009), are of the view that, greater accountability may not be 
achieved through transparent information in the context of the non-literate population. Implicitly, 
depending on the audience, it may be prudent to include media channels of conveying information, 
citizen capacity to process the information and the resources to act on it. This, therefore, suggests 
that, in the case of Ghana Social Opportunities Project, where the beneficiaries are mostly non-
64 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
literates, the transparency boards alone are not sufficient, but they could rather include media 
channels in conveying the information they wish to convey or conduct regular meetings to convey 
the information by word of mouth. 
4.2.1 Participation 
The study revealed the views of the respondents and their level of participation. The results indicate 
that Participation is key to empowerment because it provides an avenue for people to partake in 
the governance of the project. By so doing, the beneficiaries are equipped with skills, knowledge, 
competence, and capabilities as espoused by the empowerment framework. It was revealed that 
the project instituted what is termed social accountability fora, where there is a gathering of 
beneficiaries and the project implementers. The meetings or gathering serve as an opportunity to 
bring both the implementers and beneficiaries together to discuss issues arising from the 
intervention. The respondents maintained that, during these platforms of the beneficiaries and 
implementers, financial statements and progress reports are shared with the beneficiaries. What 
this means is that without the assessment of the project carried out with the beneficiaries, 
ascertaining the full potential of the project will not be realized, hence defeating the purpose of the 
intervention.  The inference made by the researcher is well established by an interviewee in the 
quotation below 
“And we do have what we call the social accountability forum or fora. Where let’s say 
three or four weeks after implementation a forum like this is held in the community 
for people to air their views both positives and negatives and what they perceive as 
good remedial measures to make things work out better for them. The information 
65 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
is captured and that informs the refining that I talked about earlier. Once we gather 
all these then we try to see how to fine-tune them.” (P1) 
 However, the findings from beneficiaries present a counter to that of the implementers as the 
quotation below indicates 
“When we were about to commence the work, the meeting we had with them, that is the 
only meeting we have had with them. They don’t come here like that. Sometimes they pass 
by and when we complain they take pictures and say that they will get back to us and that 
is all.” (FGD) 
Another respondent added 
“No, since we started this project they have not come here. And when they do come, they 
not to meet us. I was once told that they are supposed to come and hold a meeting with us 
and our elders but they have not come. But I heard they will come to meet with all of us 
including our elders (R7).” 
 From the views established by the implementers and the beneficiaries on project meetings, it is 
implied that the implementers of the project do not hold regular meetings with the beneficiaries as 
the project schedule requires. This explains why they could not tell the researcher the truth on the 
project meetings with the beneficiaries. This statement of contradiction between the implementers 
and beneficiaries lies within the domain of Ringold et al., (2012) that, implementers of 
development projects in most cases do not accept their lapses during implementation, but the 
beneficiaries will expose the weaknesses of the implementers since it will be in their favour. With 
reference to the framework, for participation to be effective, meetings have to be held to solicit the 
views of the beneficiaries, but this was not done. The impact this has on empowerment is that it 
66 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
affects the agency’s (beneficiaries) self-worth and they are not able to engage service providers to 
account for their actions and inactions because they perceive themselves as powerless. 
4.2.2 Inclusion 
 Evidence from the study again showed that community committee which had the objective of 
ensuring inclusion of the beneficiaries also exists. The beneficiaries are made to select their own 
leaders to represent them and serve as a link between them and the implementers in their 
gatherings. The leaders play a dual role, forwarding their people's grievances and concerns to the 
implementers to address and intend carry back to their people the discussions and concerns from 
the project implementers. This was established in the quotation below 
“They asked us to select our leaders, the women chose and we also chose ours. So that if 
there are any issues like any be misunderstanding, and for them to be the link between us 
and the GSOP officials. But all these our cry has not changed anything. They also say they 
are facing the same difficulties. They told us they have never met with the GSOP officials 
on any matter (FGD)”. 
Inclusion requires that social protection systems are able to meet the needs of the marginalized. It 
usually takes the form of participatory initiatives to include the vulnerable to empower them with 
a voice to be able to demand improvement in service.  The UNDP (2013) report highlights that 
these initiatives usually range from inclusive targeting to decision making. This confirmed what 
the labour intensive public workers adopted. Aside self-targeting, there was community targeting 
as well which was done by the community committee to ensure that there is no discrimination. 
Ayliffe (2017) also supports the idea that community committees if well implemented can ensure 
the inclusion that is supposed to characterize social intervention programmes. The findings of the 
67 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
study suggest that the inclusion ended with the selection process. The inclusion was not extended 
to the implementation process as the beneficiaries were not included in decision making or 
anything concerning their welfare. 
4.2.3 Accountability 
In relation to accountability, the findings of the study revealed that social accountability is 
preferred to the traditional forms of accountability. The social accountability mechanisms are 
intended to empower the beneficiaries to hold the service providers accountable. The data gathered 
from the field revealed the following social accountability mechanisms that the Ghana Social 
Opportunities Project rolled out. The findings indicate, there existed social accountability 
mechanisms namely; grievance redress mechanisms, community committee, social accountability 
fora, information campaigns and transparency and accountability boards in the programme. It is 
noted that these mechanisms are simplified based on the context in which they are applied, thus, 
the rural settings. It was further revealed that, due to the contextual nature of social accountability 
mechanisms, this project adopted a transformational approach to the implementation of social 
accountability. It was further made known that the social accountability mechanisms were 
implemented to deal with certain accountability challenges. Even though social accountability is 
inherent in the project, it does not give specifics as a respondent indicates 
“The programme design did not talk about the transparency board, the project design will 
talk generally about the use of social accountability mechanisms, accountability and all 
that, you get it. It may not have described exactly how it looked like, so a lot of these have 
been innovations on the part of the project. But of course, the project design recognized 
the need for social accountability mechanisms” (R1). 
68 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
The variations of the social accountability mechanisms in various communities could be agitated 
for or by beneficiaries. On one hand, it could be reviewed by implementers to suit current 
situations. This is depicted in the quote below 
 
“ooooh from the onset there had been these accountability mechanisms except of course 
we do improve upon all those social accountability mechanisms from time to time. Each 
year happenings inform what we do the subsequent year so we have been refining it year 
in year out till date. oooh, it was part of the project design but as I said, there has been an 
improvement over the years 
Reflecting on issues pertaining to social accountability mechanisms as posited by some 
respondents, it can be said that program designers need to have strategic plans towards the targeted 
population in which the poor and vulnerable are the likely beneficiaries.  This explains why social 
accountability mechanisms more often than not demand-side are not, but rather supply sided since 
the vulnerable population stands in fear of demanding accountability. This is in line with the 
assertion by Andrews (2014): Abbey, Donkor, and Boateng (2014): Samuel and Jones (2013), that, 
social accountability mechanisms have more supply-sided than demand-sided based on the 
population under investigation. 
 The social accountability mechanisms that were unravelled during the study are meant to ensure 
efficiency and beneficiary satisfaction with service delivery, promote transparency and 
accountability, encourage participation, assist in reducing leakages, promote community 
management and ownership and provide a voice to the beneficiaries. This is in consonance with 
the views of Malena and McNeil (2010) that, social accountability mechanisms are significant in 
69 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
the development of the vulnerable in the community. In a nutshell, these will possibly lead to 
improve governance and eradicate poverty among vulnerable groups, especially in a challenging 
context. With reference to the framework, for the accountability mechanisms to be able to 
empower the beneficiaries, the beneficiaries need to be educated on the usage and advantages of 
the available mechanisms. The subsequent findings suggest that the beneficiaries were not even 
aware of the availability of these accountability mechanisms. 
4.2.4 Local Organisational Capacity  
It was revealed in the study that, to be able to demand good services, the beneficiaries need to be 
organised into a unifying force to demand quality services. This, however, was not the case as 
findings indicate that, the beneficiaries are not able to mobilize themselves to advocate for their 
rights. This was found to be attributed to cultural reasons where beneficiaries do not usually 
challenge their benefactors on reasons of the support given them. The findings again established 
that beneficiaries coming together and advocating for their rights from the implementers could 
lead to them the losing their jobs and the support given them, hence leaving them to perpetual 
poverty. This is established in the quotes below 
“The problem is that, as we have selected our leaders, they are supposed to rise and say, 
ooh! Let’s do this, but only one person cannot take an action. You know our culture the 
way it is, if one person says let’s do it, there will be some people here who will say that 
they cannot do it, and they will one day say “this person said it” and it’s because of that 
fear that we are in it like that. But if the leaders had organized and said and let’s go we 
will go or it’s not like that (FGD).” 
Another respondent added; 
70 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
“We are not unified and that is why we are suffering. The men sometimes usually tell us to 
stop the work, and when they say that some will agree with them and some will not agree. 
So, when it happens like that, if something happens they would say that it was this person 
who said it, and it is for this reason that they concluded that we should work whatever it is 
we should take it like that (FGD)”. 
Another respondent shared her experience 
“One day I asked one of our leaders that now that we are getting close to the end of the 
project, if we go home without taking the money, we will follow him for the money and he 
said he told us to stop work until they come to pay us and we refused and continued.  It’s 
the male leaders who are even helping but the female leaders we chose are not even saying 
anything (FGD).” 
 Joshi (2014) asserted that collective action is a key ingredient for a poor group to demand 
accountability. From the above inference, it can be concluded that the beneficiaries are not able to 
hold the service providers accountable for failing to provide quality of service because they were 
not able to organize themselves to take collective action. This explains the inability of beneficiaries 
to demand accountability. Zuberi (2014) postulated that, aside from the community committees 
that are usually created for beneficiaries, the beneficiaries are not able to mobilise themselves to 
take actions. This was evident in the study, the only committee that existed was the one that the 
service providers constituted. 
 
With the background of empowerment given, now the effectiveness of the social accountability 
mechanisms can be assessed and possible reasons attached to their effectiveness or otherwise. 
71 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Effectiveness to a large extent is measuring whether the objectives of a particular mechanism is 
being achieved or not. With this in mind, for this project, the effectiveness will be examined under 
the following themes; usage of mechanisms, responsiveness/answerability, and empowerment. 
The discussions will, therefore, be developed around the available social accountability 
mechanisms. By usage, the researcher means the rate at which the beneficiaries employ these 
mechanisms provided for them and more to enhance accountability. The usage of the mechanisms 
is what will ensure that the purpose for which they were provided to some extent has been met 
from the perspective of the implementers. For answerability, the study operationalized it as the 
extent to which the demands and the grievances of the beneficiaries are addressed. 
4.2.5 Information Campaigns 
The findings of the study revealed that the information campaign which is a form of community 
sensitization was carried out before the commencement of the project.  This session educated the 
community on what the project is about, the task involved and the criteria for selection. The aim 
of this exercise is to ensure that targeting is devoid of errors and to increase participation. This 
conforms to what Smith and Watson (2015) found in their study of information interventions. To 
assess the extent to which this program was able to achieve the objective of ensuring equal 
opportunities, the study revealed that the sensitization was all inclusive and the whole community 
was informed about it prior to the day of sensitization. After the sensitization interested persons 
were made to register. This is indicated in the quotation below by a respondent.  
“In fact, let me say that implementation of a sub-project in a community is preceded by an 
elaborate or robust information education campaign. So, the people are sensitized on what 
the project is all about, the whole community whoever is interested who wants to hear, 
72 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
hears about it and we have a robust targeting mechanism. It starts with even the setting of 
the wage rate, it is usually set as a little above the  minimum wage rate of the country but 
below the Agric or commercial wage rate of the community such that those who have other 
opportunities can go there and we are left with those who indeed need this opportunity 
(P1).” 
The beneficiaries also had this to say about the information intervention 
“We were sensitized on how the project was going to be implemented, that is, it involved 
the planting of the mango trees, nursing them and watering them frequently. After which 
interested people who would want to take part in the project were registered to be 
enrolled.” (Beneficiary from KNWD)” 
Access to timely and relevant information is the basis of the success of the usage of the available 
social accountability. It is therefore evident from the study that, the beneficiaries were not educated 
on their entitlements as Gazdard and Zuberi (2014) concluded in their study that information 
intervention usually does not include the entitlements of beneficiaries. Knowledge of the 
availability of these mechanisms can one way or the other enhance their usage. But it was revealed 
that most of the beneficiaries did not have an idea about the existence of these mechanisms which 
they could use to enhance accountability. When asked about their knowledge of accountability 
mechanisms. 
“I don’t have any idea of any mechanism in place to aid social accountability activities 
(R2)”.  
Another respondent added 
“I don’t know anything about it (R5)” 
73 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
It can, therefore, be concluded that the non-existence of knowledge of the accountability 
mechanisms can be attributed to the idea that the education did not cover the availability of these 
mechanisms. As highlighted from the empowerment framework, the availability of information 
leads to the enhancement of the Agency’s capability to be empowered. This in turn provides 
beneficiaries the voice to demand their rights and privileges. Even though information on its own 
does not guarantee accountability, but it is a catalyst for accountability (Hubbard, 2007; Fox, 2015; 
Ackerman, 2004). Therefore, the information session has achieved its objective of ensuring 
inclusive targeting but has not achieved its aim of equipping the beneficiaries with salient 
information on the available accountability mechanisms for their usage and also their rights as 
beneficiaries. This has the tendency to enhance voice and intend to influence the usage of the other 
social accountability mechanisms. 
4.2.6 Social Accountability Fora 
The social accountability fora initiative is geared towards ensuring participation of the 
beneficiaries in the implementation of the project. The findings showed that the districts under 
study had no social accountability fora held for them to participate in the implementation process. 
It was revealed that aside from the sensitization exercise that brought the implementers and 
beneficiaries together, they never came as a group. This is established in the quotation below 
“When we were about to commence the work, the meeting we had with them, that is the 
only meeting we have had with them. They don’t come here like that. Sometimes they pass 
by and when we complain they take pictures and say that they will get back to us and that 
is all. If they had told us that come out and work on your dam without the payment we 
74 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
would have done it knowing that, we have nothing to expect, but not to say you will pay us 
and we are not getting it (FGD)”. 
Participation, as highlighted in the empowerment framework should be made up of regular 
meetings, consultancy and, feedback system which will serve as a platform for the beneficiaries to 
exercise the voice or to strengthen their voice. The feedback from participants and beneficiaries of 
the intervention is the main yardstick for ascertaining whether the full potential of the programme 
has been realised or there would be the need to take a second look at the intervention. It could also 
help to decipher whether there will be the need to make alterations from the implementers’ end as 
well. This will enable project implementers to identify the benefits and challenges associated with 
the intervention. The ultimate goal therein is to improve the quality of social intervention as well 
as creating legitimacy. The study revealed that the fora were to serve as a platform for the program 
assessment and for issues to be addressed. It was to be held within the period of three to four weeks 
after implementation, but the Nabdam district where the project was still operational had been in 
force since November 2017 and the time the researcher visited, that is March 2018, the fora had 
not been organized yet. This is further a challenge considering the target group which is poor, it is 
easier for them to part take in participation when they are offered the opportunity than organizing 
it themselves as they are usually vulnerable and see the intervention as a gift (Samuel & Jones, 
2013; Andrews, 2014). This explains the stances of the study that structure first before the agency, 
which is said to help strengthen agency (Alsop et al., 2006; Narayan, 2002). 
4.2.7 Grievance Redress Mechanism 
This is an avenue created for beneficiaries to participate in the project. The mechanisms, thus; 
helplines and the use of a community facilitator were created to ensure the inclusion and 
75 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
participation of the beneficiaries. The grievance redress mechanism is inculcated in projects to 
encourage and manage complaints to prevent potential risk associated with delays of vital views. 
The mechanism also ensures that project results are achieved on the part of implementers and 
ensure service quality on the part of beneficiaries. The implementation of the grievance redress 
mechanism takes various forms, ranging from manual to electronic. For this intervention, it was 
found that it took the electronic form that is through the use of helplines where the beneficiaries 
can call to lodge a complaint and the use of the community facilitator. The helplines comprise of 
numbers for the district office, regional and the national offices of the project as a respondent 
indicates;  
“Yes, on the transparency board you see hotlines, our national office, our office here and 
the district assembly. The hotlines are there. Here, we do have a complaints desk and so 
all the complaints that are received are captured and then dealt with. At the district level, 
there is also where they deal with issues, at the community level, there is a three-man 
grievance committee who deals with issues (P1)”. 
In the case of the GSOP, the phone numbers were written on the transparency and accountability 
boards mounted at each district site. It is one thing putting the numbers on the board and another 
thing informing the people about the availability of such a mechanism. It was revealed that, at the 
project site of Nabdam district, the transparency and accountability board were actually there with 
the numbers of the district, regional and national offices respectively.  But when the beneficiaries 
were asked whether they were aware that something of that sort existed, they replied; 
“They didn’t tell us that their numbers are there. Me, for instance, I cannot read and write 
but she does so if she was aware she could have called them (FGD)” 
76 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Another respondent added; 
“If we were aware of the numbers by now we would have called them a long time ago 
(FGD)”. 
Further questioning of the respondents revealed that, if they were aware of the numbers, they 
would have followed with calls as the quote below established; 
“Why not, like by now they would have been further-up self.  For me who worked for 21 
days and they paid me and it was short of 6days wouldn’t I have called them? When I 
wanted to ask Oldman (Community Facilitator) about it he told me that is for another day 
and he never returned to the matter again (FGDs)”. 
From the above, it means that the beneficiaries were in a position to call and lodge complaints if 
they were informed that helplines were on the transparency and accountability boards. This 
reiterates the argument that, it’s not enough to provide information, but the information should be 
easily accessible (Fox, 2014). This also highlights the point that the literacy of the population under 
study should be considered before introducing specific mechanisms. Also, it was revealed in the 
study that, the main issue that they would have been complaining about is delay and payment 
irregularities. This conforms to the views of Ringold et al. (2012), World Bank (2014) and Mott 
MacDonald (2014) that complaints are usually centred on payment of allowances. The next issue 
is the responsiveness when issues are reported. Due to the ignorance of the mechanisms, the people 
resulted in the face-to-face that is when the implementers came around for monitoring. Further 
interrogation on the length of time to receive feedback on their complaints, some respondents 
shared similar answers 
 “to be frank it keeps very long; it takes months” 
77 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Of the issues mostly complained about, irregularities of payment are most dominant. The 
allowances paid to beneficiaries are usually not a true reflection of their due. The findings revealed 
that the contract between the beneficiaries and implementers indicates Ghc10 per day per person. 
Therefore, an individual beneficiary is expected to receive Ghc240 a month given that the 
beneficiary has worked all the days of the month with the exception of Sundays. However, some 
of these very beneficiaries have worked full time are paid between Ghc70 and Ghc100 in a month. 
In a focus group discussion, it was mentioned that beneficiaries do not receive their actual amount 
as the quotation indicates;  
“Yes, the money will come and it’s not up to the number of days you have worked for. They 
say one day is Ghc 10 so we do not even take up to what a government worker is given. 
You can work for 25days and they come and pay for 20days. You can work for 26 and they 
pay you for either 22 or 23. There are some old women here, they don’t absent themselves, 
they are supposed to be taken Ghc240 every month but when their monies came it was 
ghc70 only (FGD)”. 
This is an issue well established in the literature as confronting social intervention programs. The 
problems with the various complaints mechanisms are the inability of the state to respond to these 
numerous complaints which are payment related (Sharp et al., 2016; Barca et al., 2012). It is 
therefore not surprising that, Fox (2016) states transparency, participation, and accountability are 
as strong as their weakest links. The weakest link therefore for complaints mechanisms as 
highlighted above and supported by this study is the inability of the state to respond to complaints. 
In the accountability process, demands are made and in reacting to those demands, the actors 
become responsive and are in a way being answerable to the service users. In an attempt to meet 
78 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
up with the rising demands of the beneficiaries especially in payments matters were a lot of 
irregularities are recorded, there has been the introduction of an electronic component into the 
service provision. The clock- in system was introduced to track attendance and fasten compilation 
of payment list. This is because one of the reasons for delayed payments was attributed to the fact 
that it took a lot of time for the various process to be done manually. The community facilitator 
had to tick against each person’s name every day as a way of ensuring attendance.  At the end of 
the month, the attendance list was sent to the district office for verification, after the verification, 
the list then proceeds to the regional office for further confirmation. After which it comes to the 
district again where the document is then scanned and forwarded to national before any payments 
can be made. But now with the introduction of the clock system, once the beneficiaries clock in 
and out for the day, he only needs to sync the tablet and it automatically reflects in the district and 
regional offices. So, it is hoped that with the introduction, it will reduce the bureaucracy which 
causes the delay and that problem will be a thing of the past. The responsive nature could be seen 
in the transformational nature of social accountability mechanisms. It was disclosed during the 
study that, at the initial stages the beneficiaries were paid by the accountants on table-top and due 
to the fraudulent nature of this initiative and the numerous complaints, the project adopted an 
electronic mode of payment which addressed these inefficiencies of the manual payment mode. 
“Yes, in 2012 we were paying the beneficiaries on the table by the accountants, if they go 
some beneficiaries are likely not there to take their monies. The accountants and other 
people will collude and take the monies that are left after payments were made. So, the   
complaints were so much such that we decided that we go the e-zwich” (P2) 
 
 
79 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Another respondent added 
“Currently, we are piloting the use of an electronic system to even mark attendance, at the 
various sites which will speed-up the whole payment processing system and it is all in 
answer to the complaints of delay payments.” 
 
It can be deduced that the grievance redress system helped to do away with discrepancies and 
corrupt practice as it led to the adoption of the e-zwich which reduced the human elements. This 
mechanism has therefore achieved one of its objective which is to reduce corruption as espoused 
by scholars in the field of accountability (Malena &McNeil, 2010; Gaventa & McGee, 2013). 
4.2.8 Transparency and Accountability Board 
It was again revealed in the study that; the transparency and accountability boards had the objective 
of ensuring openness in dealing with issues concerning the project. This initiative came into being 
to deal with rumours that were speculated by non- beneficiaries which had implications on the 
trust level of the implementers and also the success of the intervention. The objective, therefore, 
is to ensure an open form of governance. The objective of this project was partly achieved because, 
if you could not read it didn’t work for you. This initiative, therefore, targeted selected audience.  
“When you go to any project site, there is something we call transparency and 
accountability board. That giant board that is there, you see the inscription; contract sum, 
the amount paid to the contractor, the amount paid to labour and they update it until the 
project is completed. So anytime you go there you see the amount spent on the project 
(P2)” 
80 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Information according to Beck, Mendel, and Thindwa (2007) and as demonstrated by the 
empowerment framework should be relevant and accessible to the end users. In an attempt to 
provide the people with transparent information to aid in their accountability process, the 
transparency and accountability boards were mounted at each project site with relevant 
information. This, of course, is a good initiative, but once again, the beneficiaries were not 
considered. These people are mostly non-literates, so the mode of information transparency was 
not appropriate. For instance, the helplines were put on the boards and the people expressed 
ignorance of the existence of helplines which is another accountability mechanism which they 
could have used. This weakness identified in the implementation of the social accountability 
mechanisms has downplayed its ability to achieve the desired results. This goes to enforce the 
argument made by scholars in that context is of importance when it comes to the choice and 
application of social accountability mechanisms (Joshi, 2013). Since the information was not 
accessible, it was difficult putting it into use. Alternative ways as suggested by (Kolstad &Wiig, 
2009; Keefer & Khemani, 2011) could have been the use of media, for example, radio to 
disseminate information. The intention of the supply-side mechanisms which were to remove the 
barriers as illustrated by the framework, the attempt to remove the barriers and ensure easy access 
by the service users is in futility due to the lapses in the implementation of the mechanisms. As 
espoused by King et al, (2010), these poor people usually lack the time and technical skills to 
engage with the mechanisms available and this leads to their capture by the elite. This was revealed 
in the study, the implementers sought to satisfy the curiosity of the elite group by way of instituting 
the transparency and accountability boards. 
81 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
4.2.9 Community committees 
 It was revealed that the community committee was instituted to serve as a liaison between the 
beneficiaries and the implementers.  This committee was usually made up of members from the 
beneficiary group of people to seek the welfare of the larger group. They are to ensure that the 
welfare of the larger group is addressed. This has the tendency of ensuring validation of the 
accuracy of beneficiary data and the frequency of the recertification process, following the 
payment process, and monitoring of beneficiary compliance with guidelines. For the purpose of 
this project, the beneficiaries were made to choose their leaders who were to make up the 
committee that was to champion the cause of the larger group. The community committee which 
has been established to serve as a means of demanding for quality services has not been successful 
as the people complained of not having met with the Ghana Social Opportunities Project officials 
to have any discussions as it’s supposed to be. Below highlights the response of a beneficiary; 
“They asked us to select our leaders, the women chose and we also chose ours. So that if 
there are any issues like any be misunderstanding, and for them to be the link between us 
and the GSOP officials. But all these our cry has not changed anything. They also say they 
are facing the same difficulties. They told us they have never met with the GSOP officials 
on any matter”. 
As highlighted in the empowerment framework, the emphasis is usually placed on the collective 
action when it comes to poverty reduction because the individuals are deemed weak to demand 
their entitlements at the individual level (Narayan, 2002). This, therefore, explains the need for a 
collective voice which the community committee is to serve such a purpose.  For accountability 
efforts to be fruitful, one of the measures that need to exist is the capacity of the local people to be 
able to mobilize themselves and raise-up and ensure accountability. Beneficiaries do not have the 
82 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
capacity to organize themselves into a unifying force to demand quality services.  The findings of 
the study have shown that these committees are not able to ensure the purpose of their 
establishment which includes improving transparency, increase user input and report bad conducts 
among both beneficiaries and contractors.   
4.3 Contextual factors that hinder the success of social accountability mechanisms 
Accountability is said to be hindered or supported by contextual factors which include social, 
cultural, economic and political as shown in the framework of empowerment. It must, however, 
be noted that these factors are context specific.  For this study, it was revealed that the contextual 
factors that hindered the usage of the mechanism were economic, social and cultural factors are 
identified as contextual factors in this study.  
4.3.1 Cultural factors 
The study revealed that, per the cultural practices of the people, a subordinate is not supposed to 
interrogate the superior. Based on this assertion, the beneficiaries of the project did not consider it 
as their right to demand accountability from the implementers.  On the other hand, the 
implementers were of the view that, cultural dimensions should not hinder or prevent the 
beneficiaries from demanding quality of service including adequate pay for what they work for.  
“oooh! I don’t think there is anything wrong with beneficiaries demanding for adequate 
pay and quality of service because it is for them and they also work for it (PI2)”. 
On the contrary, another respondent (beneficiary) established that the socio-cultural dynamics of 
the community did not allow them to call the implementers directly to lodge complaints. That 
83 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
could be a sign of disrespect. They would rather channel their concerns through their community 
leaders notably the assembly member. As the quotation below indicates; 
“How can we just call the service providers directly to lodge complaints? We cannot do 
that. It’s a sign of disrespect, the worse we can do is to inform our assembly who brought 
the project to us. But we cannot just call the office straight away. Are we fighting with 
them? In doing that we can even say something that is not right and thereby annoying them 
(R1)”. 
The statement above was in the validation of the fact that, they could use the helplines to carry out 
communication between them and the providers. But the quotation indicates that the socio-cultural 
dynamics of the beneficiaries would not allow them to have a direct communication through the 
helplines with their providers especially when the beneficiary is a female.  
Another respondent established that;  
“Even if they provided us with their phone numbers to call them in case of any challenge, 
we could not have called them, because for instance if I call them how will I talk to them, 
I might end up annoying them. So, we prefer giving the information to our mouthpiece to 
relay it on our behalf (R5)”. 
Another beneficiary indicated 
“As for me, I cannot just call them, even going to the office I cannot do it (R2).” 
The above revelations confirm the ideas of Kelsall (2011), Malena and McNeil (2010) that the 
beneficiaries of social intervention programs usually perceive the relationship between them and 
the state as a paternalistic one and that has implications on voice. Also, arguments have been made 
84 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
that these poor people perceive the intervention as a gift and therefore cannot exhibit an ungrateful 
attitude (Samuel & Jones, 2013; Andrews, 2014). Implicitly, it can be deduced from the above that 
culture limits voice, and this confirms what the framework predicted and this has dire implications 
for accountability. Due to their cultural beliefs and practices, the people do not regard themselves 
as capable of demanding accountability and this affects the self- efficacy of the beneficiaries. Self-
efficacy is about the belief that one holds about their abilities. Once the beneficiaries belittle 
themselves as seen in this study, it affects their ability to enforce accountability. It is based on this 
background that Ayliffe (2017) recommend a change of attitude as a remedy to this issue. A change 
of attitude will lead to citizen engagement, where beneficiaries will now be willing to engage in 
social accountability activities properly. 
4.3.2 Economic  
The findings of the study again revealed that the beneficiaries were unable to demand 
accountability from the service providers because they were afraid that such demands of 
accountability may lead to the implementers of the service stopping them from working. What this 
means is that, because of the level of poverty of the beneficiaries, they are unable to demand 
accountability for that might lead to loss of a job. Also, their poor nature makes them very 
vulnerable and lack the voice and resources that they need to demand quality services. It was also 
established that the poor nature of the beneficiaries affects their ability to organize themselves into 
a unifying force to demand accountability as an interview questioned; 
“How can we even let that happen? When we were here sometimes during the lean season 
we had nothing doing, so if someone has found it useful to help us make a living during the 
lean season what possible problem can we have with the person (FGD)”. 
85 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Another respondent also indicates 
“But as you know, we are poor people and powerless and this initiative is even helping us 
in a way so if someone has come to help you and you are pressuring them. It’s not good. 
We work for the sake for the future and not only today (R4)”. 
For empowerment to exist, it depends on the interaction of both the structure and agency. However, 
the social norms and values of the beneficiaries limit their level of interaction with the service 
providers. Thus, affecting the elements of empowerment (structure).  This is further worsened by 
their poor economic status. Malena and McNeil (2010) postulate that poor people are most likely 
to be excluded both politically and socially in matters concerning them and this affects citizen 
engagement. Beck, Mendel, and Thindwa (2007) found the ability to mobilize resources as a 
condition to influence the ability of citizens and their groups to engage in accountability. Jones et 
al (2013) further explain that due to the poor nature of beneficiaries, they are usually faced with 
the fear of victimisation and removal from the social intervention programme which prevents them 
from demanding accountability.  Alsop et al (2006) further attribute the inability of the poor people 
to organise themselves to demand accountability on factors such as poor economic status and 
inadequate technical skills to obtain them another economic venture. It is based on that the OECD 
(2012) asserted that it is important to invest in poor people's capabilities and assets to enable them 
to undertake the accountability as desired. This, therefore, explains the stands why the people are 
not able to demand accountability from their service providers. 
4.3.3 Social factors 
The results of the study have unravelled education, social class, community groups, and 
socialization and religious beliefs as principal factors underpinning the success of social 
86 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
accountability mechanisms. The study revealed that some of these social factors have implications 
for the use of social accountability mechanisms. Every human society can be put into three main 
segments, the lower class, the middle-class and the upper class. These segments of people have 
their unique characteristics and competence. The lower-class people perceive themselves as not 
up to the task of holding the service providers accountable. This was made manifest in the 
interviews where the beneficiaries felt powerless and attributed the role of accountability to the 
elite in the society. 
“How can we be poor people and have gotten this favour be questioning those who have 
given us the favour on money issues.” (R4) 
 Again, the educational levels of beneficiaries are considered vital in designing social 
accountability mechanisms has it has implication on their usage. The transparency and 
accountability boards though existed within the beneficiaries’ communities, it did not achieve its 
aim because the majority of these people are not able to read the information on these boards. This, 
to some extent, affected the effective implementation of the intervention. The findings again 
indicated the beneficiaries’ understanding of accountability is when there is a misunderstanding 
between beneficiaries and implementers over resource distribution, hence the demand of the 
beneficiaries for accountability. This is established in the quote below; 
“Yes, we were told that we can report any complaint or any breach of contract on their 
part, but since we started working, we have not had any misunderstanding with them. Even 
in cases where some of our monies are not paid or there exist mistakes, we take it that it’s 
not their faults because mistakes are bound to happen. So, we do not hold them to it.  Even 
if there existed mechanisms that we could use to hold them accountable. But we will not 
use them because we did not have any misunderstanding with them (R3)”. 
87 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
It was also revealed that the beneficiaries were not in a position to demand accountability as they 
thought by so doing they would dent the image of the community as they would be labelled a 
difficult community and might not get favours any longer from and through the district assembly 
any time an opportunity presents itself.  
Figure 4. 1 Empowerment Framework after Analysis 
Elements of empowerment Support for Empowerment Outcome 
(Structure) (Agency) 
Information Poor delivery of 
(timeliness, services 
Individual 
availability) Errors 
 
Inclusion and          Corruption 
participation Self-efficacy 
 Payment irregularities 
(committees) Competence 
 
 Knowledge 
              
Accountability Material resource 
Agency              
(availability of social Collective 
accountability         
Voice 
mechanisms) 
 
Representation 
  
Organization 
Local organizational 
capacity 
 
 
 
Nature of social and cultural factors  
 
By Author 
88 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Conclusion 
The foundation of this study was based on three empowerment frameworks; Alsop et al (2006), 
Cattaneo and Chapman (2010) and Narayan (2002), to ascertain the extent of effectiveness of 
social accountability mechanisms in the Ghana social opportunities project in the case of the 
Kassena-Nankana West and Nabdam Districts respectively. The outcome of the analyses of the 
data revealed significant features on the usage of social accountability and that necessitated the 
modification of the initial framework as shown in the diagram above. As established earlier, it is 
impossible to achieve accountability results, especially within social protection programmes 
without empowerment. 
The limited nature of the application of the elements of empowerment such as information, 
inclusion and participation, accountability and local organisational capacity as espoused by 
Narayan (2002), undermined the structure’s ability to enhance the agency to be able to embark on 
accountability. The relationship between the structure and the agency is iterative as highlighted by 
Alsop et al, (2006). Cattaneo and Chapman (2010) predict that when agency is not enhanced then 
empowerment becomes a mirage so as its advantages that come with it. From the findings, it 
suggested that there existed social accountability mechanisms, but these mechanisms were not 
accessed because of the lack of empowerment of the beneficiaries of the intervention as 
demonstrated by the results. On the part of the element of information, the information was 
available, but on the other hand, it was not accessible due to the mode of communication, the 
information was not adequate as well, it did not educate the beneficiaries on their rights as right 
bearers to be able to hold the service providers accountable. On the part of inclusion and 
participation, the beneficiaries were not met to seek for their views, the committees that were 
organised for them were not functional and this made them not have any form of input in the 
89 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
services that were provided them. On accountability, the mechanisms existed, but due to the 
ignorance of the beneficiaries on the existence and usage of the mechanism, they were not put into 
use by the beneficiaries. The organisational capacity of the beneficiaries was equally weak as they 
were not privileged to enjoy the above elements of information, inclusion and participation and 
accountability. This, therefore, has adverse effects on the agency as, the voice, representation, 
knowledge, self-efficacy and organisational skills depended on the effectiveness of the structure. 
This, therefore, led to the poor delivery of services on the part of service providers and persistence 
of corrupt activities.   Based on the rankings of Alsop et al, (2006), on empowerment levels, the 
findings suggest that the empowerment level of the citizen is at the first stage, where there exist 
choices to be made. In this sense, there exist social accountability mechanisms. But to achieve 
accountability, empowerment has to move beyond this level to the second level where one is able 
to make choices from the available options and then to the final level where the choices are able 
to achieve the desired outcomes.  On the part of contextual factors that affect accountability, it was 
revealed that these manifested themselves in the form of economic, social and cultural.  These, if 
not tackled well, will always affect accountability efforts. Once beneficiaries are not empowered, 
they cannot demand quality services from their service implementers 
4.4 Chapter conclusion 
In a nutshell, the labour intensive public works though meant to empower the beneficiaries, it did 
not work effectively due to poor existing structures. In this regard, the effectiveness of social 
accountability mechanisms was void. The findings suggested that there exist cultural, economic 
and social factors that hinder the success of the available social accountability measures. 
90 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
CHAPTER FIVE 
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 
5.0 Introduction 
The study examined the social accountability mechanism within the Ghana Social Opportunities 
Project in the Kassena-Nankana West and the Nabdam District. The study specifically focused on 
social accountability mechanism to ensure effective accountability of the social intervention 
project. This chapter presents a summary of the key findings of the study. The key findings are 
based on the effectiveness of social accountability mechanisms within the Ghana social 
opportunities project. The key findings are also aligned with the objectives of the study and that 
of the analytical framework and are summarized below; 
5.1 Assessment of social accountability mechanisms  
The ability of beneficiaries to hold service providers accountable depends on their level of 
empowerment. Empowerment is an important element in social intervention programs because it 
enhances the beneficiaries’ ability and willingness to engage in the accountability process. The 
study, therefore, sought firstly to ascertain whether the project empowered the beneficiaries. In 
practice, the study revealed that the available mechanisms thus, transparency and accountability 
boards, social accountability fora, complaints and redress system, community committee and 
information campaigns were not able to empower the beneficiaries, this is because these 
mechanisms were not well implemented. The information campaign which has as part of its 
objectives to inform and educate the beneficiaries about their rights and entitlements focused 
mainly on the job description. The information session did not also educate the beneficiaries on 
the available mechanisms at their disposal for their usage. This affected the social accountability 
91 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
because the beneficiaries did not make use of the mechanism to demand accountability and better 
services.  
 Participation is deemed a necessity for accountability. It provides the opportunity for the 
beneficiaries to be part of the governance of the project and therefore enhance their ownership of 
the project. Social accountability fora were the mechanism put in place to ensure the participation 
of the beneficiaries, to increase their skills and capabilities necessary for accountability.  It was 
again revealed in the study that; fora were not held within the project lifespan in the understudy 
districts. This, therefore, deprived the beneficiaries the opportunity to take part in the governance 
of the project.   
Another mechanism to ensure participation, as well as inclusion, was the community committee 
mechanism. This mechanism was to enable the collective action of the beneficiaries, that is the 
opportunity to bargain and negotiate for their members yet the community committee did not have 
the opportunity to hold a discussion with the implementers because the implementers never 
organised the meeting. The other alternative which includes the beneficiaries taking actions 
themselves was hindered by lack of local organising capacity which made it difficult for the 
beneficiaries to organise themselves into a unifying force to demand accountability. 
The non-literate nature of the beneficiaries made them not able to access the information projected 
on the transparency and accountability boards. This deprived the beneficiaries of the needed 
information to engage in accountability and this limits voice and capabilities.  The grievance 
redress mechanisms which took the form of helplines were not equally used effectively as the 
study revealed that, the numbers for the complaints were written on the transparency and 
accountability boards and these could not be accessed. The second part of the same objective which 
was to assess the effectiveness of each mechanism recorded limited or no success due to the 
92 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
ignorant nature of the beneficiaries about their rights and entitlements, their misunderstanding of 
the concept accountability and other context-specific factors. 
5.2 Contextual factors that hinder social accountability 
The success of social accountability depends on the context in which it is being implemented. An 
analysis of the field data revealed that there existed cultural, social and economic factors that 
affected the beneficiaries’ ability to hold service providers accountable. The cultural values of 
respect for authority made it difficult for the beneficiaries to demand accountability from the 
service providers.  
Economically, the impoverished nature of the beneficiaries incapacitated them to be able to hold 
the implementers accountable as they perceive their efforts as rather helping them out of poverty.  
On the social aspect, the social makeup of the beneficiaries, their non-literate nature, the social 
status of lower class citizens, their weak local group capacity made them more vulnerable and 
unable to demand accountability. 
5.3 Conclusion 
Social accountability emphasizes the use of the short route of accountability to demand quality 
delivery of services. As such, the objective of the study sought to assess the extent of the 
effectiveness of the social accountability mechanisms as applied in the Ghana Social Opportunities 
Project in the Kassena-Nankana West and the Nabdam Districts respectively. The study was 
guided by an analytic framework that explains the conditions necessary for the effectiveness of the 
social accountability mechanisms in the project. The study revealed the existence of supply-sided 
social accountability mechanisms. These mechanisms served as an avenue to empower the people 
93 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
first so that they can later demand accountability. The study revealed that the available mechanisms 
were not able to achieve the goal of empowering the beneficiaries. The mechanisms existed but 
were not well executed to achieve their established purpose. This had implications on the ability 
of the people to demand accountability as both empowerment and accountability go hand in hand.  
The disempowered nature of the beneficiaries affected their ability to demand accountability and 
quality service delivery from the implementers.  In a nutshell, social intervention projects can only 
work well or be effective if the necessary social accountability mechanisms are put in place. These 
mechanisms can also be effectively applied if the beneficiaries are made aware of their rights and 
responsibilities towards the project. 
5.4 Recommendations 
Based on the key findings of the study, the following recommendations are made for; 
Practice 
The various social accountability mechanisms were not well understood and implemented because 
of the lack of sensitization programs on the intervention. Based on this, it is recommended that 
implementers of social intervention projects, aside feasibility studies, for the implementation of 
the intervention, there should also be carried out education on the project for beneficiaries. This 
education can take the form of community durbars, local radio programs, community fora and 
community drama play to educate the people on the intervention. The education of the beneficiary 
community during the sensitization should include information on what accountability is, its 
importance and the available accountability mechanisms that exist and how they are used. This 
would equip both the beneficiaries and non- beneficiaries with the needed information and tools 
needed to hold service providers accountable. 
94 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
 
 It is again recommended that there should be frequent meetings organised and, in these meetings, 
the social accountability tools should be re-echoed has much as possible. These meetings will also 
enhance communication and feedback systems which are necessary for quality service delivery.  
 Since collective action is key to social accountability mechanisms within the pro-poor, it is 
recommended that the community committee is strengthened both with voice and communication 
flows between them and the implementers to aid them to work effectively. The community 
committee should be made to understand their roles and responsibilities; this will make them more 
effective in carrying out their duties. 
It is evident that the inability of the beneficiaries to read the information on the transparency board 
is due to the fact that most of them have not had an appreciable level of formal education. It is 
therefore recommended that government policies on formal education should make it compulsory 
for every household and parent to let their children attain at least a junior high school certificate. 
In addition, beneficiaries of social intervention projects should be allowed to choose user-friendly 
mechanisms that can best address their grievances or concerns. 
The implementers should always study the cultural and social norms as well as the economic 
values of a beneficiary community before implementing a project. This will aid them to implement 
culturally, socially and economically friendly pro-poor interventions. On the part of the 
beneficiaries, they should likewise be able to align their cultural, social and economic values with 
an existing pro-poor intervention. 
 
 
95 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Policy 
There should be in existence an independent body in charge of the monitoring of social 
accountability mechanisms within social intervention projects to ensure that, the people are 
empowered to demand quality services.  As implementers do not want to be held responsible for 
their actions and may not undertake the sensitization properly. Also, the state should respond to 
the grievance that is levelled before them to serve as a motivating factor for social accountability 
mechanisms. 
Research 
The findings of the study suggest that the success of accountability does not only depend on the 
ability of the citizens to hold the providers accountable, but also the ability of the service providers 
to handle and implement accountability mechanism effectively. It is therefore recommended that 
further studies should focus on whether service providers have the capabilities, capacity and, 
resources to respond to the demands of the ordinary citizens, thus engaging in the accountability 
process. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
96 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
REFERENCES 
Abbas, M. H., & Ahmed, V. (2016). Challenges to Social Accountability and Service Delivery in 
Pakistan. Social Change, 46(4), 560-582. 
Abbey, C. O., Odonkor, E., & Boateng, D. (2014). A Beneficiary Assessment of Ghana’s Cash 
Transfer Programme (LEAP) in May 2014. Accra: African Development Program in 
Ghana. 
Abebrese, J. (2011). Social Protection in Ghana: An overview of existing programmes and their 
prospects and challenges. Fredrich Ebert Stiftung, Germany. 
Ackerman, J. (2004). Co-governance for accountability: beyond “exit” and “voice”. World 
Development, 32(3), 447-463. 
Ackerman, J. M. (2005). Human rights and social accountability. Participation and Civic 
Engagement, Social Development Department, Environmentally and Socially Sustainable 
Development Network, World Bank. 
Adato, M., & Haddad, L. (2002). Targeting poverty through community-based public works 
programmes: Experience from South Africa. Journal of Development Studies, 38(3), 1-36. 
Adato, M., Morales Barahona, O., & Roopnaraine, T. (2016). Programming for citizenship: The 
conditional cash transfer programme in El Salvador. The Journal of Development Studies, 
52(8), 1177-1191. 
Agarwal, S., Heltberg, R ., & Diachok, M. (2009). Scaling-up social accountability in World Bank operations. Washington, DC: World Bank 
 
97 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Agbaam, C., & Dinbabo, M. F. (2014). Social grants and poverty reduction at the household level: 
Empirical evidence from Ghana. Journal of Social Sciences, 39(3), 293-302. 
Agyemang, G., Awumbila, M., Unerman, J., & O'Dwyer, B. (2009). NGO accountability and aid 
delivery. London.ACCA 
Ahmad, R. (2008). Governance, social accountability, and civil society. JOAAG, 3(1), 10-21. 
Alsop, R., Bertelsen, M. F., & Holland, J. (2006). Empowerment in practice: From analysis T
 implementation. The World Bank. Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-
0-8213-6450-5  
Alsop, R., Sjoblom, D., Namazie, C. and Patil, P. (2002). Community-Level User Groups in Three 
World Bank-Aided Projects. Do They Perform as Expected? Social Development Papers, 
No. 40, September, ESSD Network Washington: World Bank. 
Anand, P. B. (2011). Right to information and local governance: An exploration. Journal of 
Human Development and Capabilities, 12(1), 135-151. 
and Public Oversight in Mexico’s Opportunities Programme. IDS Bulletin Volume 38,  
Andrews, A. (2014). Downward Accountability in Unequal Alliances: Explaining NGO 
 Responses to Zapatista Demands. World Development, 54(4): 99-113. 
Anechiarico, F. (2010). Protecting integrity at the local level: the role of anticorruption and public 
management networks. Crime, law and social change, 53(1), 79-95. 
Ankamah, S. S. (2016). Toward a framework of improving horizontal and social accountability 
mechanisms: Case studies in Asia. Asian Education and Development Studies, 5(3), 288-
304. 
Arnold, C., Conway, T., & Greenslade, M. (2011). Cash transfers literature review. London: 
Department for International Development, 
98 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
 
Arroyo, D. (2004) Stocktaking of Social Accountability Initiatives in the Asia and Pacific Region, 
World Bank Institute Working Papers, Washington, DC: World Bank. 
Ayliffe, T., Schjødt, R., & Aslam, G. (2017). Social Accountability in the Delivery of Social 
Protection. Development Pathways. 
Azfar, O., Kahkonen, S., & Meagher, P. (2001). Conditions for effective decentralized 
governance: A synthesis of research findings. IRIS Centre Working Paper, University of 
Maryland. 
Baird, S., Ferreira, F. H., Özler, B., & Woolcock, M. (2013). Relative effectiveness of conditional 
and unconditional cash transfers for schooling outcomes in developing countries: a 
systematic review. Campbell systematic reviews, 9(8)1-124. 
Baird, S., McIntosh, C. & Ozler, B. (2011). Cash or Condition? Evidence from a Cash Transfer 
Experiment. Quarterly Journal of Economics 126(4), 1709-1753. 
Bakhshi, F., Shojaeizadeh, D., Sadeghi, R., Taghdisi, M. H., & Nedjat, S. (2017). The relationship 
between individual empowerment and health-promoting lifestyle among women NGOs in 
northern Iran. Electronic physician, 9(2), 3690. 
Banerjee, A. V., Banerji, R., Duflo, E., Glennerster, R., & Khemani, S. (2010). Pitfalls of 
participatory programs: Evidence from a randomized evaluation in education in India. 
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 2(1), 1-30. 
Barca, V. and Notosusanto, S. (2012). Review of, and Recommendations for, Grievance 
Mechanisms for Social Protection Programmes Final Report. Oxford, UK: Oxford Policy  
Management. 
 
99 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Barrett, S. (2008, September). Achieving accountability in cash transfer programmes: the case of 
the social protection rights component of the Kenya hunger Safety Net Programme. In 
Compendium of Papers Presented at the International Conference on Social Protection for 
the Poorest, 8th–10th September. 
Barrientos, A. & Niño-Zarazúa, M. (2011). Social transfers and chronic poverty: objectives, 
design, reach and impact. Manchester: Chronic Poverty Research Centre, available at 
www.chronicpoverty.org/publications/details/social-transfers-and-chronic-
poverty(Accessed on18th April,2018). 
Barrientos, A. (2007). Financing Social Protection. BWPI Working Paper 5. Manchester: Brooks 
World Poverty Institute (BWPI). 
Bassett, L., S. Gianozzi, L. Pop, and D. Ringold. (2012). Roles, Rules and Controls: Governance 
in Social Protection with an Application to Social Assistance. Social Protection 
Discussion Paper Series. No.1206. Washington, DC: World Bank. 
 
Bawelle, E. B. G. (2016). Impact of Livelihood Empowerment against Poverty Programme in 
Ghana: The Case of Wa West District. International Journal of Social Science Research, 
4(2), 24-43. 
Béné, C., Devereux, S., & Sabates‐Wheeler, R. (2012). Shocks and social protection in the Horn 
of Africa: Analysis from the Productive Safety Net Programme in Ethiopia. IDS Working 
Papers, 2012(395), 1-120. 
 
100 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Berhane, G., Hoddinott, J. F., Kumar, N., Taffesse, A. S., Diressie, M. T., Yohannes, Y. & Sima, 
F. (2015). Documenting progress in the implementation of the productive safety nets 
programme and the household asset building programme. Institute for Development 
Studies and the International Food Policy Research Institute, Brighton: IDS 
Bjorkman, M., & Svensson, J. (2009). Power to the people: evidence from a randomized field 
experiment on community-based monitoring in Uganda. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 
124(2), 735-769. 
Blair, H. (2000). Participation and accountability at the periphery: democratic local governance in 
six countries. World development, 28(1), 21-39. 
Boateng, R. (2016). Research made easy. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. 
Booth, D. (2011, April). Working with the Grain and Swimming against the Tide. Barriers to 
Uptake of Research Findings on Governance and Public Services in Low-Income Africa. 
Paper presented at IRSPM conference. April,2011, Dublin. pp.11–13. [Google Scholar] 
Bousquet, F., Thindwa, J., Felicio, M., & Grandvoinnet, H. (2012). Supporting Social 
Accountability in the Middle East and North Africa: Lessons from Transitions. World 
Bank, Washington DC. 
Bovens, M. (2010). Two Concepts of Accountability: Accountability as a Virtue and as a 
Mechanism. West European Politics, 33(5), 946-967. 
Bovens, M. (2007). Analysing and assessing accountability: A conceptual framework 1. European 
law journal, 13(4), 447-468. 
101 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Bratton, M. (2012). Citizen perceptions of local government responsiveness in Sub-Saharan 
Africa. World Development, 40(3), 516-527. 
Bray, y, D. (2009). Appendix 4. Social Accountability for Development Effectiveness: A 
Literature Review. In Promoting Voice and Choice. Exploring Innovations in Australian 
NGO Accountability for Development Effectiveness, (pp. 43-53). April. ACFID, Deakin 
ACT (Australia). 
Brinkerhoff, D. W., & Wetterberg, A. (2016). Gauging the effects of social accountability on 
services, governance, and citizen empowerment. Public Administration Review, 76(2), 
274-286. 
Browne E (2013). Community-based social protection. Governance and Social Development 
Research Centre Helpdesk Research Report 1020. Birmingham, United Kingdom: 
Governance and Social Development Resource Centre, University of Birmingham. 
Birmingham 
Browne, E. (2014). Social protection accountability. Helpdesk research report. Birmingham, 
GSDRC. 
Browne, E. (2015). Wellbeing through empowerment, improved enabling environment, and assets. 
GSDRC Helpdesk Research Report 1211. Birmingham, UK: GSDRC, University of 
Birmingham. 
Bukenya, B., Hickey, S., & King, S. (2012). Understanding the role of context in shaping social 
accountability interventions: towards an evidence-based approach. Manchester: Institute 
for Development Policy and Management, University of Manchester. 
102 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Bundy, D. A. (2009). Rethinking school feeding: social safety nets, child development, and the 
education sector. World Bank Publications. 
Bundy, D., Burbano, C., Grosh, M., Gelli, A., Jukes, M., Drake, L., (2009). Rethinking School 
Feeding: Social Safety Nets, Child Development, and the Educational Sector, Directions 
in Development: Human Development. The World Bank, Washington, DC. 
Casley, D. J. & D. A. Lury. (1981). Data Collection in Developing Countries, Oxford University 
Press, New York. 
Cattaneo, Lauren & Chapman, Aliya. (2010). The Process of Empowerment a Model for Use in 
Research and Practice. The American psychologist. 65(7). 646-59.  
Catholic Relief Services (2015). Baseline survey on effective implementation of social 
interventions in poor communities of the Kassena-Nankana West District. 
Chêne, M. (2012). Centralized versus decentralized anti-corruption institutions. U4 Expert 
Answer, available at: www. u4. no/publications/centralised-versus-decentralised-
anticorruption-institutions (accessed 5 May 2015). 
Claasen, M., & Alpín-Lardiés, C. (Eds.). (2010). Social Accountability in Africa: Practitioners' 
experiences and lessons. African Books Collective. 
Cleaver F (2001) Institutions, agency and the limitations of participatory approaches to 
development Cooke & U Kothari (eds) Participation: The New Tyranny? pp 36–55 
(London: Zed Books) 
Coffey (2015). Process Evaluation of the Child Protection Fund in Zimbabwe. London, UK:  
Coffey International Development Ltd. 
103 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Cornwall, A. (2000). Beneficiary, consumer, citizen. Perspectives on participation for poverty 
reduction. SIDA studies, (2). 
Cornwall, A., Lucas, H., & Pasteur, K. (2000). Introduction: accountability through participation: 
developing workable partnership models in the health sector. Ids Bulletin, 31(1), 1-13 
Cox, R. W., Buck, S., & Morgan, B. (2015). Public administration in theory and practice. 
Routledge. 
Crawford, G. (2005). Linking Decentralisation and a Rights-based Approach: Opportunities and 
Constraints in Ghana (First Draft). ‘The Winners and Losers from Rights-Based 
Approaches to Development’. Paper presented at the University of Manchester 
Conference, Manchester, UK, February 21–22. 
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach. 
(2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Mapping the field of mixed methods research. 
Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative Enquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five 
 Approaches. SAGE publications. London 
Del Ninno, C., Coll-Black, S., & Fallavier, P. (2016). Social Protection: Building Resilience 
among the Poor and Protecting the Most Vulnerable. Confronting Drought in Africa’s 
Drylands: Opportunities for Enhancing Resilience, 165-84. 
Dewachter, S., Holvoet, N., Kuppens, M., & Molenaers, N. (2018). Beyond the Short versus Long 
Accountability Route Dichotomy: Using Multi-track Accountability Pathways to Study 
Performance of Rural Water Services in Uganda. World Development, 102, 158-169. 
104 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Dempsey, I., & Dunst, C. J. (2004). Helpgiving styles and parent empowerment in families with a 
young child with a disability. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 29(1), 
40-51. 
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2011). The Sage handbook of qualitative research. Sage. 
Devarajan, S., & Reinikka, R. (2004). Making services work for poor people. Journal of African 
economies, 13(suppl_1), i142-i166. 
Devereux, S. & R. Sabates-Wheeler (2004) Transformative social protection. Working paper 
series, 232. Brighton: IDS. 
Devereux, S. & Sabates‐Wheeler, R. (2007). Editorial introduction: Debating social protection. 
IDS Bulletin, 38(3), 1-7. 
Devereux S, Masset E, Sabates-Wheeler R, Samson M, Rivas A, te Lintelo D. (2015). Evaluating the 
targeting effectiveness of social transfers: a literature review. IDS Working Paper and Centre 
for Social Protection Working Paper, 11. Institute of Development Studies: Brighton. 
Di John, J., & Putzel, J. (2009). Political settlements. Issues paper, Governance and Social 
Development Resources Centre. International Development Department, University of 
Birmingham. 
Diamond, L. (2007). Building trust in government by improving governance. In 7th Global Forum 
on Reinventing Government: “Building Trust in Government” Sponsored by the United 
Nations Session V: Elections, Parliament, and Citizen Trust Vienna. 
Diener, E., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2005). Psychological empowerment and subjective well-being. 
Measuring empowerment: Cross-disciplinary perspectives, 125. 
105 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Dogbe, T., & Kwabena-Adade, J. (2012). Ghana: Budget Monitoring by SEND-Ghana and its 
Partners Helps Improve Nutrition for Children and Support Local Farmers. 
Dollar, D.R. (1998). Assessing Aid: What works, what doesn't, and why, Oxford University Press 
Dowdle, M.W., (2017). Public accountability: conceptual, historical and epistemic mappings. In: 
P. Drahos, ed. Public accountability: conceptual, historical and epistemic mappings. 
Regulatory theory: foundations and applications. Canberra: ANU Press 
Dubnick, M. (2005). Accountability and the promise of performance: In search of the 
mechanisms. Public Performance & Management Review, 28(3), 376-417. 
Dubnick, M. J. (2002,). Seeking salvation for accountability. In annual meeting of the American 
Political Science Association.Vol. 29, pp. 7-9. 
 
Duflo, E., Dupas, P., & Kremer, M. (2015). School governance, teacher incentives, and pupil-
teacher ratios: Experimental evidence from Kenyan primary schools. Journal of Public 
Economics, 123, (7) 92-110. 
Ebrahim, A. (2003). Accountability in Practice: Mechanisms for NGOs. World Development. 31 
 (5):813-29. 
Ebrahim, A. (2003). Making sense of accountability: Conceptual perspectives for northern and 
southern nonprofits. Non-profit management and leadership, 14(2), 191-212. 
Ebrahim, A. (2005). Accountability myopia: Losing sight of organizational learning. Non-profit 
and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 34(1): 56–87. 
Ebrahim, A., & Herz, S. (2007). Accountability in complex organizations: World Bank responses 
to civil society. 
106 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Edwards, M., & Hulme, D. (1996). Too close for comfort? The impact of official aid on 
nongovernmental organizations. World development, 24(6), 961-973. 
Edwards, M., & Hulme, D. (Eds.). (1996). Beyond the magic bullet: NGO performance and 
accountability in the post-cold war world. 
Ellis, F. (2012). ‘We Are All Poor Here’: Economic Difference, Social Divisiveness and Targeting 
Cash Transfers in Sub-Saharan Africa. The Journal of Development Studies 48(2), 201-
214. 
Essuman, A., & Bosumtwi-Sam, C. (2013). School feeding and educational access in rural Ghana: 
Is poor targeting and delivery limiting impact? International Journal of Educational 
Development, 33(3), 253-262. 
Felipe J. H. (2014).  The Role that Civil Society can play in Ensuring Accountability in Social 
Protection Programmes. Retrieved from http://socialprotection-
humanrights.org/expertcom/the-role-that-civil-society-can-play-in-ensuring-
accountability-in-social-protection-programmes/. 
Fisher, B. J., & Gosselink, C. A. (2008). Enhancing the efficacy and empowerment of older adults 
through group formation. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 51(1-2), 2-18 
Fisher, C. (2010). Researching and writing a dissertation: an essential guide for business students. 
Pearson Education. 
Fiszbein, A., Ringold, D., & Rogers, F. H. (2011). Making services work: indicators, 
assessments, and benchmarking of the quality and governance of public service delivery 
in the human development sectors: The World Bank. 
107 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Fiszbein, A., Kanbur, R., & Yemtsov, R. (2014). Social protection and poverty reduction: global 
patterns and some targets. World Development, (61), 167-177. 
Fiszbein, A., Ringold, D., & Rogers, H. (2009). Making Services Work. Indicators. 
Fiszbein, A., Ringold, D., & Srinivasan, S. (2011). Cash transfers, children, and the crisis: 
Protecting current and future investments. Development Policy Review, 29(5), 585-601. 
Flore, L. (2004). World Bank (by)," World Development Report 2004: Making Services Work 
for Poor People", London, Oxford University Press. Diritto Pubblico, 10(1), 385-402. 
Fox, J. (2007). The uncertain relationship between transparency and accountability. Development 
in practice, 17(4-5), 663-671. 
Fox, J. A. (2015). Social accountability: what does the evidence really say? World Development, 
72, 346-361. 
Fox, J. (2016) Scaling accountability through vertically integrated civil society policy monitoring 
and advocacy, Brighton: IDS 
Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum. 
Friis-Hansen, E., & Cold-Ravnkilde, S. M. (2013). Social accountability mechanisms and access 
to public service delivery in rural Africa (No. 2013: 31). DIIS Reports, Danish Institute 
for International Studies. 
Garcia, M. & Moore, C. (2012). The cash dividend: the rise of cash transfer programs in Sub-
Saharan Africa. Washington DC: World Bank. 
Gaventa, J., & Barrett, G. (2010). So what difference does it make? Mapping the outcomes of 
citizen engagement. IDS Working Papers, 2010(347), 01-72. 
108 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Gaventa, J., & McGee, R. (2013). The impact of transparency and accountability initiatives. 
Development Policy Review, 31(s1). 
Gazdar, H., & Zuberi, S. (2014). Final Report of the Beneficiary Feedback Survey, National 
Cash Transfer Programme–Pakistan. 
Gentilini, U., Honorati, M. & Yemtsov, R. (2014). The state of social safety nets 2014. Washington 
DC: World Bank.  
Giannozzi, S., & Khan, A. (2011). Strengthening governance of social safety nets in East Asia. 
Gillis, M., Shoup, C., & Sicat, G. P. (2001). World development report 2000/2001-attacking 
poverty. The World Bank. 
Goetz, A. M., & Gaventa, J. (2001). Bringing citizen voice and client focus into service delivery. 
Goetz, A. M., & Jenkins, R. (2001). Hybrid forms of accountability: citizen engagement in 
institutions of public-sector oversight in India. Public Management Review, 3(3), 363-383. 
Grabe, S. (2012). An empirical examination of women's empowerment and transformative change 
in the context of international development. American journal of community psychology, 
49(1-2), 233-245. 
Greitens, T. J. (2012). Moving the study of accountability forward. State and Local Government 
Review, 44(1), 76-82. 
Grosh, M., Del Ninno, C., Tesliuc, E., & Ouerghi, A. (2008). For protection and promotion: The 
design and implementation of effective safety nets. World Bank Publications. 
Guba, E. G. (Ed.). (1990). The paradigm dialogs. Sage publications. 
109 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Guitierrez, L. (1991). Empowering women of colour: A feminist model. Feminist Social Work 
Practice in Clinical Settings, Sage, Newbury Park, CA, 199-214. 
Gummesson, E. (2003). All research is interpretive! Journal of business & industrial marketing, 
18(6/7), 482-492. 
Handa, S., Park, M., Darko, R. O., Osei-Akoto, I., Davis, B., & Daidone, S. (2013). Livelihood 
empowerment against poverty program impact evaluation. Carolina Population Center, 
Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina. 
Hanlon, J., Barrientos, A. & Hulme, D. (2010). ‘Chapter 9: Cash Transfers Are Practical in Poor 
Countries’. In Hanlon, J., Barrientos, A. & Hulme, D. (eds.) Just Give Money to the Poor: 
The Development Revolution from the Global South. Sterling, VA: Kumarian Press. 
Haque, M. S. (2008). Decentering the state for local accountability through representation: social 
divides as a barrier in South Asia. Public Administration Quarterly, 33-58. 
Harris, E. (2013). Financing social protection floors: Considerations of fiscal space. International 
Social Security Review, 66(3-4), 111-143. 
Harvey, P., Holmes, R., Slater, R. & Martin. (2007). Social Protection in Fragile States. London: 
Heller, K., van Wicklin III, W., & Kumagai, S. (2016). Integrating Social Accountability 
Approaches into Extractive Industries Projects. 
Henry, N. (2015). Public administration and public affairs. Routledge. 
Hevia de la Jara, F. (2008). Between Individual and Collective Action: Citizen Participation  
Hickey S. 2007. Conceptualizing the Politics of Social Protection in Africa. Brooks World. 
110 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Holmes, R., & Jones, N. (2010). How to design and implement gender-sensitive social protection 
programmes. 
Houtzager, P. P., Joshi, A., & Lavalle, A. G. (Eds.). (2008). State reform and social 
accountability: Brazil, India, and Mexico. IDS. 
Hubbard, P. (2007). Putting the power of transparency in context: Information's role in reducing 
corruption in Uganda's education sector. 
Humanitarian Accountability International (2010). Humanitarian Accountability Partnership 
 standard in Accountability and Quality Management. 
Ika, L. A., Diallo, A., & Thuillier, D. (2010). Project management in the international 
development industry: the project coordinator's perspective. International Journal of 
Managing Projects in Business, 3(1), 61-93. 
Inter-Agency Task Team (IATT) on Children and HIV and AIDS: Working Group on Social 
Protection. (2008). Expanding Social Protection for Vulnerable Children and Families: 
Learning from an Institutional Perspective. Inter-Agency Task Team (IATT) on Children 
and HIV and AIDS: Working Group on Social Protection. 
Jaha, I. R., & Sika-Bright, S. (2015). Challenges of the Livelihood Empowerment against Poverty 
Programme in the Upper West Region of Ghana: The Institutional Perspective. UDS 
International Journal of Development, 2(1), 188-205. 
Jalil, Z., (2011). An Evaluation of NGO-Led Development Interventions and their Sustainable 
Management in the Savelugu-Nantong District (unpublished). 
111 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Jayal, N. G. (2007). New directions in theorising social accountability? IDS Bulletin, 38(6), 105-
112. 
Jones, N., & Shahrokh, T. (2013). Social protection pathways: shaping social justice outcomes for 
the most marginalised now and post-2015. ODI Background Note, April, 41-60. 
Jones, N., Vargas, R., & Villar, E. (2008). Cash transfers to tackle childhood poverty and 
vulnerability: An analysis of Peru's Juntos Programme. Environment and Urbanization, 
20(1), 255-273. 
Joshi, A. (2007). Producing social accountability? The impact of service delivery reforms. IDS 
Bulletin, 38(6), 10-17. 
Joshi, A. (2013). Context matters: A causal chain approach to unpacking social accountability 
interventions. Work in Progress Paper, Brighton: IDS. 
Joshi, A. (2013). Do they work? Assessing the impact of transparency and accountability 
initiatives in service delivery. Development Policy Review, 31(s1). 
Joshi, A. (2014). Reading the local context: a causal chain approach to social accountability. IDS 
Bulletin, 45(5), 23-35. 
Joshi, A., & Houtzager, P. P. (2012). Widgets or watchdogs? Conceptual explorations in social 
accountability. Public Management Review, 14(2), 145-162. 
Joshi, A., & Tapasvi, S. K. (2015). Issues and Challenges in Ensuring Public Accountability: The 
Indian Context 
Joy, L. (2003). Decentralization and Human Rights: A Systemic Approach. UNDP. 
112 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Jupp, D., Ali, S. I., & Barahona, C. (2010). Measuring empowerment? Ask them. Sida Studies in 
Evaluation. 
Kabeer, N. (1999). Resources, agency, achievements: Reflections on the measurement of women's 
empowerment. Development and change, 30(3), 435-464. 
Kaufmann, D., Zoido-Lobaton, P., & Lee, Y. (2000). Governance and anticorruption: Empirical 
diagnostic study for Ecuador. World Bank, Mimeo. 
Keefer, P., & Khemani, S. (2012). Do informed citizens receive more... or pay more? The impact 
of radio on the government distribution of public health benefits. 
Kelsall, T. (2011). Going with the grain in African development? Development Policy Review, 
29, s223-s251. 
Kilby, P. (2006). Accountability for empowerment: Dilemmas facing non-governmental 
organizations. World Development, 34(6), 951-963. 
Kinyashi, G. F. (2006). Towards genuine participation for the poor. Tanzania. Spring. 
Klein, H. K., & Myers, M. D. (1999). A set of principles for conducting and evaluating 
interpretive field studies in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 67-93. 
Koenane, M. L., & Mangena, F. (2017). Ethics, accountability, and democracy as pillars of good 
governance: the case of South Africa. 
Korboe, D., Dogbe, T., & Marshall, C. (2011). Participatory poverty and vulnerability assessment 
(PPVA): Understanding the regional dynamics of poverty with particular focus on 
Northern Ghana. Government of Ghana, Accra.  
113 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions, 2nd edition. Chicago: University of 
 Chicago Press. 
Lakha, S. (2011), “Accountability from below: the experience of MGNREGA in Rajasthan 
 (India)”, ARI Working Paper No. 171, Asian Research Institute, Singapore. 
Lambert-Mogiliansky, A. (2015). Social accountability to contain corruption. Journal of 
Development Economics, 116, 158-168. 
Lieberman, E. S., Posner, D. N., & Tsai, L. L. (2013). Does information lead to more active 
citizenship? Evidence from an Education Intervention in Rural Kenya.” MIT Political 
Science Working Paper, 2. 
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry (Vol. 75). Sage. 
Lynch, U. (2013). What is the evidence that the establishment or use of community accountability 
mechanisms and processes improves inclusive service delivery by governments, donors, 
and NGOs to communities? 
Malena, C., & Forster, R. (2004). Social Accountability An introduction to the concept and 
emerging practice. 
Malena, C., & McNeil, M. (2010). Social accountability in Africa: An introduction. Demanding 
good governance: Lessons from social accountability initiatives in Africa, 1-28. 
Management. 
Maor, M. (2004). Feeling the heat? Anticorruption mechanisms in comparative perspective. 
Governance, 17(1), 1-28. 
114 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Mashaw, J. L. (2006). Accountability and institutional design: Some thoughts on the grammar of 
governance.  
McCord, A. (2008). The social protection function of short-term public works programmes in the 
context of chronic poverty. In Social Protection for the Poor and Poorest (pp. 160-180). 
Palgrave Macmillan, London. 
McCord, A. (2012). The politics of social protection: why are public works programmes so popular 
with governments and donors? 
McCord, A. (2013). Review of the literature on social protection shock responses and readiness. 
ODI Shockwatch, April. 
McGee, R. (2010). Synthesis report: Review of impact and effectiveness of transparency and 
accountability initiatives. 
McGee, R., & Kroesschell, C. (2013). Local accountabilities in fragile contexts: experiences 
from Nepal, Bangladesh, and Mozambique. IDS Working Papers, 2013(422), 1-41. 
McNeil, M., & Malena, C. (Eds.). (2010). Demanding good governance: Lessons from social 
accountability initiatives in Africa. World Bank Publications. 
McNeil, M., & Malena, C. (Eds.). (2010). Demanding good governance: Lessons from social 
accountability initiatives in Africa. World Bank Publications. 
McNeil, M., & Mumvuma, T. (2006). Demanding good governance–A Stocktaking of Social 
Accountability Initiatives by Civil Society in Anglophone Africa. 
 
115 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
McWhirter, E. H. (1991). Empowerment in counseling. Journal of Counseling & Development, 
69, 222–227. 
Mechanisms for Social Protection Programmes Final Report. Oxford, UK: Oxford Policy  
Mechkova, V., Lührmann, A., & Lindberg, S. (2017). The Accountability Sequence: From De-
jure to De-facto Constraints on Governments. 
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. 
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. 
 Mosedale, S. (2003). Towards a framework for assessing empowerment. New Directions in 
Impact Assessment for Development: Methods and Practice Manchester, UK, 24-25. 
Mosedale, S. (2005). Assessing women’s empowerment: Towards a conceptual framework. 
Journal of International Development, 17, 243–257. 
Mosse, D. (2001). 'People's knowledge', participation and patronage: Operations and 
representations in rural development. 
Mott MacDonald, (2014). Spot Checks and Beneficiary Feedback, National Cash Transfer  
Myers, M. D., & Avison, D. (Eds.). (2002). Qualitative research in information systems: a 
reader. Sage. 
Najam, A. (1996). “NGO Accountability: A Conceptual Framework.” Development. 
Narayan, D., & Shah, T. (2000). Connecting the Local to the Global: Voices of the Poor. In 
Workshop on Local to Global Connectivity for Voices of the Poor, World Bank, 
Washington, DC (11-13). 
116 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Narayan-Parker, D. (Ed.). (2005). measuring empowerment: cross-disciplinary perspectives. 
World Bank Publications. 
Narayan-Parker, D., & Petesch, P. L. (Eds.). (2002). From many lands (Vol. 3). World Bank 
Publications. 
Neuman, W. L. (2014). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches: 
Pearson New International Edition. Pearson Education Limited. 
Niño‐Zarazúa, M., Barrientos, A., Hulme, D., & Hickey, S. (2010). Social protection in sub-
Saharan Africa: Will the green shoots blossom? 
Norton, A., Conway, T., & Foster, M. (2001). Social protection concepts and approaches: 
Implications for policy and practice in international development. London: Overseas 
Development Institute. 
Novikova, I. (2007) Stocktaking of Social Accountability Initiatives in Europe and Central Asia, 
ECSSD/WBI/SDV, Washington, DC: World Bank. 
O’Dwyer, B. (2007). The Nature of NGO Accountability: Motives, Mechanisms, and Practice, in 
Unerman, J., Babington, J. and O‟Dwyer, B. (eds), Sustainability Accounting and 
Accountability (Abingdon: Routledge). 
O'Donnell, G. A. (1999). Horizontal accountability in new democracies. Journal of 
democracy, 9(3), 112-126.  
O'Dwyer, B., & Unerman, J. (2010). Enhancing the role of accountability in promoting the rights 
of beneficiaries of development NGOs. Accounting and Business Research, 40(5), 451-
471. 
117 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Okechukwu, E. U., Gerald, N., & Eze, J. (2016). Women Empowerment: Panacea for Poverty 
Reduction and Economic Development in Nigeria. Journal of Policy and Development 
Studies, 289(3519), 1-11. 
Olken, B. A. (2007). Monitoring corruption: evidence from a field experiment in Indonesia. 
Journal of Political Economy, 115(2), 200-249. 
O'Meally, S. C. (2013). Mapping context for social accountability: A resource paper. 
O'Meally, S. C. (2013). Mapping context for social accountability: A resource paper. 
Orlikowski, W. J., & Baroudi, J. J. (1991). Studying information technology in organizations: 
Research approaches and assumptions. Information systems research, 2(1), 1-28. 
Pandey, P., Goyal, S., & Sundararaman, V. (2009). Community participation in public schools: 
impact of information campaigns in three Indian states. Education Economics, 17(3), 355-
375. 
Patton, M. Q. (1987). How to use qualitative methods in evaluation (4). Sage. 
Peisakhin, L., & Pinto, P. (2010). Is transparency an effective anti‐corruption strategy? Evidence 
from a field experiment in India. Regulation & Governance, 4(3), 261-280. 
Pelizzo, R., & Stapenhurst, F. (2013). Government accountability and legislative oversight (Vol. 
58). Routledge. 
Perkins, D. D., & Zimmerman, M. A. (1995). Empowerment theory, research, and application. 
American journal of community psychology, 23(5), 569-579. 
Peruzzotti, E., & Smulovitz, C. (2003). Societal and horizontal controls: two cases of a fruitful 
relationship. Democratic Accountability in Latin America, 309-331. 
Peruzzotti, E., & Smulovitz, C. (2006). Social accountability. Enforcing the rule of law: Social 
accountability in the new Latin American democracies, 3-33. 
118 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Ranganathan, M. (2008). The Governance Brief: Grievance Redressal Processes in Urban 
Service Delivery: How Effective Are They? (Issue 17-2008). 
Rappaport, J. (1987). Terms of empowerment/exemplars of prevention: Toward a theory for 
community psychology. American journal of community psychology, 15(2), 121-148. 
Rather, T. A., & Bhat, M. A. (2017). Measuring Women’s Empowerment and Poverty Reduction: 
Experiences of Hanji Women in Kashmir. Sociological Bulletin, 66(2), 191-211. 
Ravindra, A. (2004). An assessment of the impact of Bangalore citizen report cards on the 
performance of public agencies. Evaluation Capacity Development Working Paper, 12. 
Reinikka, R., & Svensson, J. (2004). Local capture: evidence from a central government transfer 
program in Uganda. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119(2), 679-705. 
Reinikka, R., & Svensson, J. (2004). The power of information: Evidence from a newspaper 
campaign to reduce capture (Vol. 3239). World Bank Publications. 
Reis, E. P., & Moore, M. (2005). Elite perceptions of poverty and inequality. Zed Books. 
Report. Washington DC: World Bank. 
Riger, S. (1993). What’s wrong with empowerment? American Journal of Community Psychology, 
21, 279–292. 
Ringold, D., Holla, A., Koziol, M., & Srinivasan, S. (2011). Citizens and service delivery: 
assessing the use of social accountability approaches in human development sectors. 
World Bank Publications. 
Robeyns, I. (2003). Sen's capability approach and gender inequality: selecting relevant 
capabilities. Feminist economics, 9(2-3), 61-92. 
Rose, S., Spinks, N., & Canhoto, A. I. (2014). Management research: Applying the principles. 
Routledge. 
119 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Rubio, G. M. (2011). Measuring governance and service delivery in safety net programs. 
Samson, M., Lee, U., Ndlebe, A., MacQuene, K., van Niekerk, I., & Gandhi, V. (2011). Final 
Report: The Social and Economic Impact of South Africa’s Social Security System (37). 
Cape Town, South Africa: Economic Policy Research Institute. 
Samuels, F., Jones, N. & A. Malachowska (2013). Holding Cash Transfers to Account: Beneficiary 
and community perspectives. London. 
Santos, S. M. (2001). Local Government and Human Rights: A Philippine Perspective on the 
Feasibility of their Interface in Policy and Practice. 
Schacter, M. (2005), “A framework for evaluating institutions of accountability”, in Shah, A. 
(Ed.), Fiscal Management, World Bank, Washington, DC, pp. 229-245.   
Schedler, A. (1999). Conceptualizing accountability. The self-restraining state: Power and 
accountability in new democracies, 13, 17. 
Schedler, A., Diamond, L. J., & Plattner, M. F. (1999). The self-restraining state: Power and 
accountability in new democracies. Boulder, Colo: Lynne Rienner Publishers.Sectors. 
Washington, DC: World Bank. 
Schjødt, R. (2017). Social Accountability in the Delivery of Social Protection. 
 
Sen, A. (1985). Well-being, agency, and freedom: The Dewey lectures 1984. The journal of 
philosophy, 82(4), 169-221. 
Sen, A. (1995). Gender inequality and theories of justice. Women, culture, and development: A 
study of human capabilities, 259-73. 
120 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom, 175. 
Sen, A. (2006). What do we want from a theory of justice? The Journal of philosophy, 103(5), 
215-238. 
Sen, A. K. (1999). Development as freedom (1st ed.). New York: Knopf. 
Shankar, S. (2010). Can social audits count? ASARC working paper. New Delhi.  
Sharp, K., Visram A., Bahety, G. and Kardan A. (2016). Child Development Grant  
Sirker, K., & Cosic, S. (2007). Empowering the Marginalized: Case Studies of Social 
Accountability Initiatives in Asia, World Bank, Washington, DC. 
Smith, G. and Watson, C. (2015). Assessment of Save the Children’s CSSP Approach in  
Smulovitz, C. and Peruzzotti, E. (2000), “Societal accountability in Latin America”, Journal of 
Democracy, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 147-158.  
Smulovitz, C. and Peruzzotti, E. (2003), “Societal and horizontal controls: two cases of a fruitful 
relationship”, in Mainwaring, S., and Welna, C. (Eds), Democratic Accountability in Latin 
America, Oxford University Press, Oxford, (309-331).   
Soucat, A., & Ncube, M. (2014). One billion people, one billion opportunities: Building human 
capital in Africa. Washington DC: African Development Bank. 
Sourcebook, S. A. (2005). Strengthening the Demand Side of Governance and Social 
Development. Social Development Department, World Bank. 
South Asia. Orpington, UK: Development Pathways. 
Subbarao, K., Del Ninno, C., Andrews, C., & Rodríguez-Alas, C. (2012). Public works as a safety 
net: design, evidence, and implementation. World Bank Publications. 
121 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Sue, D. W. (1978). Eliminating cultural oppression in counselling: Towards a general theory. 
Journal of Counselling Psychology, 25, 419–428. 
Sundet, G. (2004). Public Expenditure and Service Delivery Monitoring in Tanzania: Some 
international best practices and a discussion of present and planned Tanzanian initiatives. 
Dar-es-Salaam, USAID/Tanzania. 
System. Brighton, UK. 
Tagarirofa, J., & Chazovachii, B. (2013). Exploring the politics of local participation in rural 
development projects: small dams’ rehabilitation project in Zimbabwe. Russian Journal of 
Agricultural and Socio-Economic Sciences, 14(2): 321-323. 
The World Bank (2010). Implementation Completion and Results Report: Brazil Bolsa Família 
Washington DC. 
The World Bank (2011). Cash Transfer Programs: The Emerging Safety Net in Sub‐Saharan 
Africa. Africa Human Development Department, Social Protection. Washington DC.  
Thome K., Taylor J. E., Davis B. & Darko Osei R. (2013). Local Economy-wide Impact 
Evaluation (LEWIE) of Ghana’s Livelihood Empowerment against Poverty (LEAP) 
Program, Rome. 
Touchton, M., & Wampler, B. (2014). Improving social well-being through new democratic 
institutions. Comparative Political Studies, 47(10), 1442-1469. 
Tsai, L. L. (2007). Solidary groups, informal accountability, and local public goods provision in 
rural China. American Political Science Review, 101(2), 355-372. 
UNDP (2008). Human development report. 
122 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
United Nations Development Programme (2009). Voice and Accountability for Human 
Development: A UNDP Global Strategy to Strengthen Civil Society and Civic Engagement. 
NewYork.  
United Nations Development Programme (2010). Fostering Social Accountability: From 
Principle to Practice. Guidance Note. New York.  
Van Stolk, C., & Tesliuc, E. (2010). Toolkit on tackling error, fraud and corruption in social 
protection programs. Washington: The World Bank. 
Walker, D. W. (2009). Citizen-driven reform of local-level basic services: community-based 
performance monitoring. Development in Practice, 19(8), 1035-1051. 
Wellens, L., & Jegers, M. (2014). Beneficiary participation as an instrument of downward 
accountability: A multiple case study. European Management Journal, 32(6), 938-949. 
West Jr, K. P. (2007). Control and Accountability Mechanisms in Conditional Cash Transfer 
Programs: A Review of Programs in Latin America and the Caribbean. Washington, DC: 
World Bank. 
Wetterberg, A., Hertz, J., & Brinkerhoff, D. (2015). Social Accountability in Frontline Service 
Delivery: Citizen Empowerment and State Response in Four Indonesian Districts. 
Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International, International Development Group 
Working Paper Series, (2015-01). 
Woodhouse, A. (2002). Village corruption in Indonesia. Fighting corruption in the World Bank’s 
Kecamatan Development Program, World Bank, Indonesia. 
World Bank (2001). World Development Report 2000/2001: Attacking Poverty. 
123 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
World Bank (2004). World Development Report 2004: Making Services Work for Poor People. 
Washington D.C. 
World Bank (2014). Grievance Redress System in the Conditional Cash Transfer Program in the 
Philippines. Washington DC: World Bank. 
World Bank (2015a). Ethiopia, Enhancing Shared Prosperity through Equitable Services,  
World Bank. (2011). Resilience Equity and Opportunity: 2012-2022 Social Protection and Labour 
Strategy. Washington DC: World Bank. 
World Bank. 2003. World Development Report (2004): Making Services Work for Poor People. 
World Bank. © World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/5986 
World Bank2001b. “Empowering the Poor through Decentralization: Brazil Rural Poverty 
Alleviation Program.” Social Development Notes 51. Environmentally and Socially 
Sustainable Development Network, Washington, D.C.  
World Food Programme (2016). A survey on sustainable development intervention in the Nabdam 
District. 
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (4th Ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage. 
Zimmerman, M. A. (1990). Taking aim on empowerment research: On the distinction between 
individual and psychological conception. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18, 
169–177. 
Zimmerman, M. A. (1995). Psychological empowerment: Issues and illustrations. American 
journal of community psychology, 23(5), 581-599. 
 
124 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
APPENDICES 
APPENDIX A 
INTERVIEW GUIDE- FOR BENEFICIARIES 
Introduction 
My name is Aruk Loretta Aneniba, a student at the University of Ghana Business School. I am 
pursuing a Master of Philosophy in Public Administration Degree Programme and as part of the 
requirement for the fulfilment of the degree, I am carrying out a research work titled “Social 
accountability mechanism within the Ghana Social Opportunities Project (GSOP): A case study 
of the Kassena-Nankana West District and Nabdam District in the Upper East Region”. You have 
been selected to participate in this research because of your involvement/knowledge of the project. 
I would, therefore, be grateful if you provide me with information pertaining to this project based 
on your experience.  This study is purely an academic exercise and any information provided shall 
be treated with the highest level of confidentiality.  
Preamble 
This study seeks to investigate social accountability and the extent to which this has been factored 
into the Ghana Social Opportunities Project (GSOP) program. The study is designed to cover the 
following research questions 
ii. To what extent are social accountability mechanisms able to ensure accountability of service 
providers to beneficiaries under the GSOP program? 
iii. What are the contextual factors critical to social accountability under the GSOP program? 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
125 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Research objective Research question Interview questions 
1.To examine the 1. What social accountability 1. When were you enrolled in the GSOP 
extent to which mechanisms exist in the GSOP program? 
there exist social program? 2. How long have you been involved in the 
accountability program? 
mechanisms in the 3. In what capacity where you involved in 
GSOP program the GSOP program? 
4. What will you say about social 
accountability mechanisms in the Ghana 
social opportunities project? 
Probe For:   
1.Existence 
Supply or demand side 
Specifics 
Expectation 
    2.planning 
Beneficiary engagement 
3.Implementation 
Involvement 
Motivation 
Communication 
4.Evaluation 
Participatory 
2.To examine the 2. To what extent are these   2. What is your take on the effectiveness of 
extent to which mechanisms able to ensure social accountability mechanisms in 
the mechanisms accountability under the GSOP ensuring accountability under the GSOP? 
are able to ensure program?           Probe For:   
accountability 1.Effectiveness 
under the GSOP Irregularities issue 
program Satisfactory level 
Improved services 
recommendable 
2.Efficiency  
Duration to address issues 
Satisfactory response 
 3.Empowerment 
Confidence 
Likelihood for demand side 
Usage 
3. To assess the 3.  what contextual factors are 3. What can be said about contextual factors 
main contextual critical to social accountability that are critical to social accountability 
factors that are under the GSOP program? under the GSOP program? 
critical to social Probe For: 
accountability •Cultural  
under the GSOP. •Social 
•Educational 
•Political 
•Financial 
 
126 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
APPENDIX B 
 
INTERVIEW GUIDE- FOR OFFICIALS  
Introduction 
My name is Aruk Loretta Aneniba a student at the University of Ghana Business School. I am 
pursuing a Master of Philosophy in Public Administration Degree Programme and as part of the 
requirement for the fulfilment of the Degree, I am carrying out a research work titled “Social 
accountability mechanism within the Ghana Social Opportunities Project (GSOP): A case study 
of the Kassena-Nankana west district and Nabdam district in the Upper East Region”. You have 
been selected to participate in this research because of your involvement/knowledge of the project. 
I would, therefore, be grateful if you provide me with information pertaining to this project based 
on your experience. This study is purely an academic exercise and any information provided shall 
be treated with the highest level of confidentiality. 
Preamble 
This study seeks to investigate social accountability and the extent to which this has been factored 
into the Ghana Social Opportunities Project (GSOP) program. The study is designed to cover the 
following research questions 
i. What social accountability mechanism exists in the GSOP program? 
ii. To what extent are these mechanisms able to ensure accountability under the GSOP 
program? 
iii. What are the contextual factors critical to social accountability under the GSOP program? 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
127 
 
University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh
 
Research objectives Research questions Interview questions 
1. To examine the 1. What social accountability 1. When was the program implemented? 
extent to which there mechanisms exist in the GSOP How long has it been running now? 
exist social program? What are the core objectives of the 
accountability program? 
mechanisms in the What will you say about social 
GSOP program accountability mechanisms in the Ghana 
social opportunities project? 
Probe For:   
1.Existence 
 Demand-sided or supply-sided 
 Specific SAcc mechanism present 
 Objective of SAcc 
  2.Planning 
 Beneficiary engagement 
 Part the of the program outline 
3.Implementation 
 Beneficiary involvement 
 Communication 
 Channels availability 
 Presence of conditions 
2. To examine the 2. To what extent are these 2. What is your take on the effectiveness 
extent to which the mechanisms able to ensure of social accountability mechanisms in 
mechanisms are able accountability under the GSOP ensuring accountability under the GSOP? 
to ensure program?           Probe For:   
accountability under 1.empowerment 
the GSOP program  Increase in involvement 
 Likelihood for demand-side 
                         2.Effectiveness 
 Objectives achieved 
 Reduction in irregularities 
 Improved services 
 3.Efficiency 
•Duration to address issues 
•Satisfactory response 
3. To assess the main 3. What are the contextual 3. What can be said about contextual 
contextual factors factors critical to social factors that are critical to social 
that are critical to accountability under the GSOP accountability under the GSOP program? 
social accountability program?     Probe For: 
under the GSOP •Cultural  
•Social 
•Educational 
•Political 
•Financial 
 
128