almanac on security sector oversight in the Western Balkans

SSR Index – Measuring to Advance Democratisation
Therefore, the benchmarks for assessing progress in SSR in the above described methodology
were chosen in accordance with the oversight role of civil society and to
reflect the key challenges of SSR in countries transitioning to democracy. An important
consequence of this is that our measurements greatly depended upon publically
available data.
12 . Measurement as an advocacy tool
A motive of our methodological approach is to increase its public advocacy potential
by creating transparent benchmarks and solid empirical evidence that highlights specific
areas for improving democratic governance of the security sector. The guiding
principle here is the claim that ‘what gets measured, gets managed’ (Pollitt, 2000,
p.121). The assumption behind this well-known performance management aphorism
is that by measuring performance it becomes evident what should be done to improve
or maintain quality. While this is not always true and all indicators can be perverted,
designing our holistic framework for analysis has considerably helped participating
CSOs to develop their understandings of security sector governance and to diagnose
key issues in their respective countries. Measuring helped provide more comprehensive
insight into key problems in regional security sector governance and assisted with
developing policy recommendations in each of the participating countries.
The second assumption behind the aphorism quoted above has also proven true; that
is, measurement draws the attention of those whose performance is measured. 232 By
promoting the results of this study we want to attract the attention of the governments
studied and each country’s public to the achievements and weaknesses of democratic
control and accountability of security sectors. Using our Index, we hope to use
empirical evidence as a starting point for a more rational debate about accountability
in Western Balkan security governance. The results could be used to inspire further
debate about the accountability of current policy-makers for SSR progress setbacks
or delays.
Our empirical evidence should also help reduce the politicisation and securitisation
of SSR discussions in the region. This is of great importance, as SSR belongs to the
domain of high politics (Hoffmann, 1966, pp. 892-908) i.e., a public policy which is of
particular importance for the sovereignty of a state and the protection of its citizens’
national identity. These issues are difficult to place under public scrutiny as they more
easily trigger emotions, prejudices, beliefs and ideology-laden arguments, compared
to so-called ‘low politics’ (e.g. health, education etc). This is particularly important
for Western Balkan states in a post-conflict setting where security issues are still pre-
232 At the time this paper was written, only BCSP and KCSS had presented the results of their research
to those whose work they have evaluated. BCSP launched findings from the first cycle of research in a
series of events and during a media campaign promoting the Yearbook of SSR in Serbia. In the second
cycle of research, BCSP had group consultations (focus groups) with those whose work was evaluated.
KCSS presented a separate publication with results for Kosovo based on research done within this
project, which garnered much attention.
261
Almanac on Security Sector Oversight in the Western Balkans