Transparency Initiative (EITI)

87
to what degree EITI processes on national or local level
actually contribute to, for instance, reduction of societal
tensions or improved investment climate. Those stakeholders
that produce an unprecedented level of data
raise the prospects of the EITI achieving and measuring
higher level results. This is already pursued by the EI-
TI in improving the use of disclosed data cross-project,
cross-company and cross-country, the capacity building
and network building with stakeholders to understand,
interpret and communicate the data for the right
target groups.
8. 15 years of evolving norms, but stable tripartite governance
model: The EITI itself has been operating and
growing for almost 15 years, which is an indication for
relevance. What the EITI requires from implementing
countries has been evolving over time. The norms
of the Standard, for example, were introduced very recently
in 2013, have already been altered twice, in 2015
and 2016, and will likely be modified again at the 2019
members’ meeting. It is unlikely that one set of norms
will remain the same for five or more years, and as such
it is difficult to show tangible effects in the macro data.
Post-2013 data will trickle down slowly into data sets
of stakeholders and third parties, and the full set of EI-
TI countries has yet to produce Reports under the 2013
Standard. As of now, the time lag could be up to three
years until 2019/2020 – if not more – to receive more
meaningful results from a macro-data analysis. However,
a leap in the expansion of the scope of reporting
such as that from the 2011 Rules to the 2013 Standard
is unlikely to happen again any time soon. Thus, related
to the 2013 Standard a theory of change, results model,
variables and indicators can be defined, measured and
evaluated over time. Apart from the evolving norms,
the tripartite governance model has been stable and can
be subjected to evaluations more easily.
EFFECTIVENESS
9. No log frame for M&E: There is a notable absence of an
overall strategic approach based on a theory of change
with a log frame that can be monitored and which
could have been the backbone for evaluating the effectiveness
and impact of the EITI.
10. Three types of objectives to be differentiated: Any assessment
of the criteria of effectiveness depends upon
the objective. A broad picture can be taken which
ranges from high effectiveness concerning the institutional
objectives (e.g. becoming a global brand, offering
a Standard for assessing a country’s compliance)
and organizational objectives (e.g. setting up a governance
structure with a recognized Board and Secretariat,
ensure civil society participation in multi-stakeholder
groups in defective democracies or autocracies); to a
much more blurred or less substantiated level of effectiveness
when it comes to actual developmental objectives
(sustainable development and the results areas of
this study).
11. High effectiveness regarding the EITI process steps:
If effectiveness is to be judged merely in relation to
EITI process steps of institutional and organizational
objectives, and if implementation in zero countries
is taken as a baseline and covering the majority of
resource-driven countries worldwide as a target value,
evolving from zero to 50 plus countries within a decade
is highly effective. This contribution is significant and
should not be lost sight of as it relates to developmental
objectives: the EITI is able to contribute to debates
on the governance of extractive industries in many
countries where such debates were not possible a
decade ago. As seen by key stakeholders and the EITI
International Secretariat, publishing data is necessary,
but not sufficient. EITI implementation is considered
most effective when it promotes and informs dialogue
between government, industry and civil society, and
encourages informed debate about the reforms that are
needed to ensure that the extractive industries support
national development priorities.
12. Strong cooperation and process orientation: A key characteristic
of the EITI is the demand-driven and flexible
approach that allows it to operate and adjust according
to the needs of the respective implementing country.
This includes the Initiative’s strong cooperation- and
process orientation in order to document the country’s
extractives sector regulatory and fiscal regime and governance
processes, and the readiness to adapt implementation,
when windows of opportunity for change
emerge. With this comes a twofold challenge:
• In free, democratic and industrialized countries with
accountable institutions (e.g. current EITI countries
that are members of the G7, EU or OECD) there are
mainly foreign policy motivations for domestic