An analysis of the Namibian government's position on NEPAD's peer review mechanism (APRM) select="/dri:document/dri:meta/dri:pageMeta/dri:metadata[@element='title']/node()"/>

DSpace Repository

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisor en_US
dc.contributor.advisor en_US
dc.contributor.advisor en_US Nambala, Sylvanus en_US 2014-02-07T14:07:54Z 2014-02-07T14:07:54Z 2006 en_US
dc.description.abstract en_US
dc.description.abstract The study investigates the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD). Although the initiative is quite new, many contributions have been made and many articles written about it. NEPAD is the latest initiative aimed at improving economic growth and development in Africa. It is a programme of the African Union (AU) and all member states of the AU are automatically members of the NEPAD programme. The other earlier initiatives such as the Lagos Plan of Action (1980), amongst others, failed to address the many problems faced by the continent of Africa en_US
dc.description.abstract The NEPAD programme looks promising and has the potential to turn the situation around. However, issues such as lack of consultation, exclusion of civil society organizations, and marketing the programme first outside of the continent, pose a political threat to NEPAD. At the heart of NEPAD is the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) aimed at improving, among others, standard of governance among the African states. Surprisingly, all African member states that are also AU member states have subscribed to NEPAD, but not to the APRM. In terms of analysis, this does not augur very well for the countries to be part of the NEPAD programme and at the same time condone the program's brainchild, which is the APRM en_US
dc.description.abstract The APRM is a voluntary mechanism acceded to by African countries as a self-monitoring instrument. By acceding to the APRM, a country makes a commitment to be reviewed by other member states in areas of governance and other related areas. The APRM gauges whether a particular African country's performance in the domain of governance is within stipulated principles of NEPAD. The APRM emphasises the need for African countries to share experience, reinforce successful and best practices, identify deficiencies and assess the need for capacity building en_US
dc.description.abstract Although the Government of Namibia has accepted NEPAD, it has not acceded to the APRM. The stance of the government of the Republic of Namibia is explored in depth in the thesis. Many African countries accepted NEPAD, but do not accede to the APRM. They see the APRM as an attempt by the West to dictate development efforts in Africa and to prescribe who should benefit from NEPAD. Factors, such as the mechanism's voluntary nature, non-sanction measures, the time frame for signing up, the issue of sovereignty, contribution fees of US$ 100 000, amongst others, continue to pose a threat to the universal acceptance of APRM. So far only twenty-four out of fifty - three member states of the AU have joined the APRM. The expected results of the first countries under review - Rwanda, Ghana, Kenya and Mauritius - will be a starting point of either deterring other member states from or encouraging them to sign up for the APRM as some countries have adopted a "wait and see attitude". en_US
dc.format.extent xii, 129 leaves en_US
dc.language.iso eng en_US
dc.subject Economics en_US
dc.title An analysis of the Namibian government's position on NEPAD's peer review mechanism (APRM) en_US
dc.type Thesis en_US
dc.identifier.isis F004-20060710 en_US Windhoek en_US Namibia en_US University of Namibia en_US Thesis (Master of Public Administration) en_US
dc.masterFileNumber 3110 en_US

Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record