child rights and governance roundtable

UNICEFInnocenti Research Centre

Report and Conclusions

CHILD RIGHTS AND GOVERNANCECHILD RIGHTS AND GOVERNANCEROUNDTABLEROUNDTABLE

CHILD RIGHTS AND GOVERNANCEROUNDTABLE

REPORT AND CONCLUSIONS

London, 26-27 April 2011

Layout: Bernard Chazine, Siena, Italy

Front cover photo: © Stuart Freedman / Panos

© United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), 2011September 2011

Co-organizers

UNICEF

UNICEF's work in the area of child rights and governance spans a broad spectrum of interventions, rangingfrom influencing governance reform processes that strengthen child sensitive institutions and better deliverservices for children, to providing children, girls and boys, and those that work to promote their interests, withopportunities to have a voice in decision-making, influence the political and economic levers of power, andhold their leadership accountable for the achievement of child-focused outcomes.

Current work on child rights and governance includes the following areas:1) Investing in children, looking at national budget allocation and expenditure, and analysing the extent to

which those contribute to the realization of child rights.2) Child rights governance situation analysis, which examines legislation, government capacity, and national

processes such as planning, poverty reduction and decentralization, through the lens of children's rightsand the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

3) Putting children onto the governance agenda of development cooperation actors by influencing donorpractice within the governance sector with the objective of making it more responsive to child rightsconcerns and to channelling greater funding towards children.

4) Conducting and supporting research in the area of national institutional capacities for child rights from theperspective of public sector reform and the overall framework of the General Measures of Implementationof child rights as laid out by the Committee on the Rights of the Child.

Save the Children

Save the Children is a global and independent organization whose mission is to inspire breakthroughs in theway the world treats children, and to achieve immediate and lasting change in their lives. The Child RightsGovernance Global Initiative (CRGI) is one of six thematic focus areas of SCI strategy 2010-2015. Work on ChildRights Governance aims to build societies that fulfil children’s rights. It is about establishing and strengtheningthe infrastructure necessary for states to effectively implement the UNCRC and other child rights obligationsand it is about supporting a vibrant civil society pushing children up the political agenda and holding states toaccount for what they have or haven’t done to realize children’s rights. It has two main components:

1) Ensuring responsive government performance, transparency of decision-making and robust accountabilitymechanisms for the realization of children’s rights.

2) Supporting an active and well organized civil society in support of children’s rights as an importantcounterpart and counterbalance to governmental action.

A main focus over the next four years will be on investment in children. Twenty years after the ratification ofthe UNCRC, children’s rights are still not children’s realities in many countries. Governments and theinternational community’s commitments through their endorsement of treaties and Constitutions are nice butempty promises unless translated into budgetary allocations, effectively backed by public investment. CRGIwill focus on this topic and advocate different audiences (donors, governments, parliamentarians, citizens etc.)based on four arguments for which we will collect evidence.

OECD

The mission of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) is to promote policiesthat will improve the economic and social well-being of people around the world. The Organisation provides asetting where governments can compare policy experiences, seek answers to common problems, identifygood practice and work to co-ordinate domestic and international policies.

For 50 years, the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) has grouped the world's main donors, definingand monitoring global standards in key areas of development. It assists its members and the expanded donorcommunity in delivering on their commitments while engaging in global efforts to make aid work better.Increasingly, the DAC looks beyond the traditional aid arena to address pressing development challenges– such as climate change, conflict and fragility, corruption and more open and fair trade – and works to ensurethat every available source of development finance is leveraged to deliver concrete development results.

The DAC GOVNET is the only forum for development agencies and partner countries that focuses exclusively onimproving governance. Its Human Rights Task Team is the international network on human rights within bilateraland multilateral development agencies. It is working to enhance understanding and consensus on why and howdonors should work more strategically and coherently on the integration of human rights and development.

iii

iv

CONTENTS

I. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

II. Child rights and governance: Towards a conceptual framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Governance: Definitions and principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Why is governance relevant to children’s rights? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Why are children’s rights relevant to governance? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Child-friendly governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

III. Tools for implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

The General Measures of Implementation of the CRC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

A child rights approach to the governance framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Child-friendly local governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

IV. Main actors in child rights and governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Parliament . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Judiciary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Independent Human Rights Institutions (Ombudspersons) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Civil society . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Children . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Media . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Private sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Donors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

V. Assessment and evaluation tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Measuring the child-friendliness of governance: The ACPF Child-friendliness Index . 15

Child sensitive governance assessment tool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

VI. Key questions and challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Accountability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Recognizing and building on children’s agency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Specialization vs. mainstreaming of children’s issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Integrated rights-based policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Entry points for change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

VII. Next steps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Bibliographical resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

List of participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Co-hosted by UNICEF, Save the Children andthe OECD, a roundtable on child rightsand governance was held in London on 26-27 April 2011. The objective was to reflect onthe linkages between governance and childrights and initiate a dialogue between bothconstituencies. It brought together actors fromthe governance sector and child rights experts,with a mix of representatives fromgovernments, international organizations, civilsociety and a member of the Committee on theRights of the Child.1

The need for a reflection on child rights andgovernance originated in the realization thatchildren’s rights could not be advancedsignificantly without close consideration of thegovernance systems in which they areimplemented. Implementation of theConvention on the Rights of the Child is highlydependent upon the way traditions,mechanisms, processes and institutions,through which authority is exercised, operatefor common good – not only for children butfor all. Conversely, governance can only becomprehensive if it takes into account thehuman rights of all, including children.

Good governance has been progressivelyrecognized as central to development work bya wide array of actors, namely governments(including donors), development agencies,global and regional organizations, academics,and civil society organizations. Various studies

have evidenced that good governance bringsboth an intrinsic and an instrumental value to awide range of development outcomes,including poverty eradication, the reduction ofinequities, economic growth and broader socialobjectives. The Millennium Declarationexplicitly affirms the value of governance todevelopment and human rights realization.

Over the last decade, donors in particular haveincreasingly focused their attention on goodgovernance as a means of achieving sustainableand equitable development progress andensuring greater aid effectiveness. The ParisDeclaration (2005) makes good governancecentral to aid effectiveness while the AccraAgenda for Action (2008) lists human rights asone of its core principles.2

However, the governance and children’s rightsnarratives have thus far remained on separatepaths. On the one hand, children havegenerally been invisible in governance efforts.Documents and programmes focusing onstrengthening governance, such as UNdocuments at the national level, seldom makethe link with children’s issues.3 On the otherhand, child rights documents rarely if at allrefer to governance as such.

A review of the two areas neverthelesssuggests that they can significantly benefitfrom each other. Consideration of theirsynergies is all the more timely as we

1

I. INTRODUCTION

NOTES

1 See Annex - List of participants.2 Accra Agenda for Action (2008), para. 13c.3 See Save The Children, Children and Good Governance,

Policy Brief, 2010: “Children are invisible in the informationDFID draws on to understand local context, including thenew Country Governance Analysis. UNDP offers noguidance on addressing the rights and needs of children inits user guides on governance assessments. The OECD

approach the 10 year review of A World Fit ForChildren4 in 2012 and we prepare for theMillennium Development Goals assessmentand next steps in 2015.

Discussions therefore revolved around onecentral question: What is good governance forthe realization of children’s rights? They aimed tooutline the framework for understanding the

Development Assistance Committee’s series onGovernance, Taxation and Accountability does not makereference to children at all. And there is no evidence thatthe World Bank’s widely used World Governance Indicatorstake into account the status of children’s rights in theassessed countries.”

4 Outcome document of the UN Special Session on Childrenheld in 2002.

intersections between these spheres, identifypriority areas and main issues, and develop anagenda for future research, advocacy and action.

The following report synthesizes the mainreflections and conclusions. As the firstroundtable held on this topic, ideas expressedneed to be understood as starting points andinvitations for further analysis and action.

2 Child Rights and Governance Roundtable - Report and Conclusions

1) Governance: Definitions

and principles

Governance is a multifaceted concept thatfocuses on the interactions between thegovernment in its various forms and thepeople. Exact definitions vary depending onthe organization.5 According to UNDP,“governance can be seen as the exercise ofeconomic, political and administrativeauthority to manage a country’s affairs at alllevels. It comprises the mechanisms, processesand institutions, through which citizens andgroups articulate their interests, exercise theirlegal rights, meet their obligations and mediatetheir differences.”6 The World Bank definesgovernance as “the traditions and institutionsby which authority in a country is exercised forthe common good. This includes (i) the processby which those in authority are selected,monitored and replaced, (ii) the capacity of thegovernment to effectively manage its resourcesand implement sound policies, and (iii) therespect of citizens and the state for theinstitutions that govern economic and socialinteractions among them.”7

A common element of all definitions is thatgovernance is broader than government andstate actors. It also encompasses the functionof private and social actors in the definitionand implementation of societal goals andpublic policies.8

Governance rests on a series of principleswhich may vary but generally include:transparency, responsibility, accountability,participation and responsiveness to the needsof the people.9 These elements also underpinthe development of a framework on thelinkages between governance and child rights.

2) Why is governance relevantto children’s rights?

Responsiveness and transparency –

All policy issues defined through governance

affect children

Children are affected by any action of the State,including when not directed at them.Agricultural, environmental and land policies forexample have significant impacts on children’slivelihoods and enjoyment of their rights.10

Areas which are traditionally within thegovernance realm are therefore of criticalrelevance to children. Issues as diverse as theimpact of taxation on the household income,the effect of corruption on the accessibility andquality of social services, privatization of somesectors like water, and business practicesincluding respect for the well-being ofcommunities and family life, are all coreelements of governance with majorconsequences for the realization ofchildren’s rights.

3

II. CHILD RIGHTS AND GOVERNANCE:TOWARDS A CONCEPTUALFRAMEWORK

Empirical studies have established a strongcorrelation between low infant mortality rateand low corruption.11 They have also evidenceda link between a strong legal framework andchild survival.12

Good governance for children therefore impliesscanning every action of the State, whether ornot directly related to children, through a childrights lens.

Responsibility – Governance embraces the

multiplicity of duty-bearers and emphasizes

the importance of systems for the realization

of children’s rights

Governance highlights the importance of themultiplicity of actors in society and theirrespective responsibility in reaching societalgoals. It further emphasizes the significance ofpolicy coherence and effective coordinationmechanisms among various policy and publicaction areas. Similarly, the realization ofchildren’s rights implies a holistic approach topolicy-making and relies on multiple duty-bearers. Both frameworks therefore underlinethe necessity of properly functioning systems,where the role of each actor in the chain isfulfilled effectively.

This approach has been widely recognized inthe context of child protection systems, whichfocus on formal and informal protectivemechanisms, ranging from laws to institutions,social norms and attitudes, as well as the

responsibility of all actors to protect childrenfrom harm. Notably, General Comment No. 13of the Committee on the Rights of the Child onthe right of the child to freedom from all formsof violence recommends the development ofcomprehensive national coordinatingframeworks for the protection of children fromviolence, including prevention measures.13

The governance framework coupled with achild rights approach can provide valuableinsights for policy-making and in all areas ofrelevance to children’s rights.

Accountability – Governance is a promising

avenue to address the implementation

challenge of children’s rights

Participants agreed that one significantchallenge in the fulfilment of children’s rightshas been the difficulty of actually implementinglaws and policies. While significant progresshas been made in the adoption of legislationfor the implementation of the CRC, many lawsremain scarcely enforced due to lack ofeffective institutions, services and adequateresources, combined with an absence ofpolitical will and efficient leadership.

Governance examines the underlyingdynamics of State effectiveness. It analyseshow the distribution of power within societyfosters or impairs sound policy decisions andadministrative practices. It further focuses onthe importance of management practices for


© S

hih

o F

uka

da

/ Pan

os

concrete outcomes. By penetrating beyond thefaçade of institutions traditionally consideredwithin the child rights context, governanceprovides a promising approach to overcomethe implementation challenge for theConvention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)that would benefit from further examination.

3) Why are children’s rights

relevant to governance?

Efficiency and effectiveness – Children’s rights

give a raison d’être to governance

Governance provides an enabling environmentfor the realization of human rights. It constitutesthe process by which the sense of direction ofsociety is defined.14 The existence of a societalgoal is critical to give governance a purpose.Human rights, as recognized in the coreinternational human rights treaties, provide ashared set of values and an accepted normativeframework.15 Participants emphasized that theirrespect and fulfilment represent a legalobligation for States parties.

While often invisible in policy-making, childrenare a fundamental group in society, both innumber and in significance. The realization ofchildren’s rights and the centrality of children insociety should therefore constitute a majorobjective for governance efforts. Consequently,it was found that children’s rights represent astandard against which the quality ofgovernance can be assessed. Respect for the

four guiding principles of the CRC in particularcould be a litmus test for good governance.

Equity – Children’s rights ensure

that governance is comprehensive

Good governance, respectful of human rights,is necessarily universal, non-discriminatoryand equitable. Participants identified a numberof implications of this requirement forchildren’s rights.

Governance will remain incomplete if itbypasses children, who often represent a thirdto a half of developing countries’ populationand usually about a quarter of the populationin high income countries. The child populationand its specific needs and rights shouldtherefore be fully taken into account ingovernance efforts.

Furthermore, for equitable and inclusiveoutcomes of governance, human rightsprinciples need to be at the core of thedevelopment process.16 Attention to children’srights helps governance efforts to focus on themost marginalized and excluded, as well asidentify and address the root causes ofdiscrimination. It also helps draw particularattention to the specific experiences and issueschildren face.

Inclusion and participation – Children’s rights

guide governance processes

Good governance is by nature participatory, inthat it aims to link more closely the governingand the governed. The demand-side of

5II. Child rights and governance: Towards a conceptual framework

THE FOUR GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF THE CRC AND GOVERNANCE

Non-discrimination. Requires that public policies aimed at children cover all rights for all girls,boys and adolescents in a country, along their life cycle as children. Calls for governance systemsthat address inequities and other causes of exclusion.

Best interests of the child. Implies a horizontal view of all policies putting the child at the centre.Requires that all the resources available today need to be used in a progressive way that ensuresthe best resource distribution for children in all spheres. Entails governance where children areclearly visible.

Right to life, survival and development. Requires monitoring the outcome of policies,programmes and services. What matters is not merely the quantity and quality of services butproven results, such as lowering infant mortality.

Right to be heard. Calls for systematically consulting children in matters that affect them; thisrequires creating appropriate spaces and providing an environment where all actors are able tolisten to children’s views. An essential aspect of the demand-side of governance strengthening.

See Marta Mauras, “Public Policies and Child Rights: Entering the Third Decade of the Convention on the Rights of theChild”, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Jan. 2011.

NOTES

5 On definition issues, see Committee of Experts on PublicAdministration, Public Governance for Results: Aconceptual and operational framework, paper prepared byLuis Aguilar Villanueva, 18 Jan. 2011, E/C.16/2011/12.

6 UNDP, Governance for sustainable human development, AUNDP policy document, United Nations DevelopmentProgramme, Jan. 1997.

7 Available at http://go.worldbank.org/MKOGR258V08 Op. cit. note 5. 9 Commission on Human Rights, ‘The role of good

governance in the promotion of human rights’, Resolution2000/64 of 26 Apr. 2000, para. 1.

10 Enakshi Ganguly Thukral, “Children and Governance:Concept and Practice”, in Enakshi Ganguly Thukral, EveryRight for Every Child: Governance and Accountability,Routledge, New Delhi 2011, p. 36; HAQ Centre for ChildRights, Still Out of Focus: Status of India’s Children 2008,New Delhi, 2009, p. 32.

governance implies empowering rights’holders to claim their rights and hold thegovernment accountable for its actions. Whilethey do not vote, there are many ways in whichchildren can and do contribute to decisionsaffecting their lives.

By recognizing children as subjects of rights,the CRC paves the way for inclusivegovernance processes in which children havea say. Having their views heard is not only aright for children. It also promotes policiesand practices that are adequate to addresschild rights. A child rights approach togovernance therefore offers guidance torecognize, nurture and build on children’scapacities as social agents whose voices caninform governance processes.

11 Daniel Kaufmann, “Human Rights and Governance:The Empirical Challenge”, a paper prepared for aconference co-sponsored by the Ethical GlobalizationInitiative and the NYU Center for Human Rights and GlobalJustice, revised draft, Dec. 2004.

12 Save The Children, Why law matters for children’s survival,Policy brief, 2010.

13 CRC Committee General Comment No. 13 (2011), The rightof the child to freedom from all forms of violence,CRC/C/GC/13.

14 Op. cit. note 5, para. 10.15 OECD, DAC Action-oriented policy paper on human rights

and development, Organization for Economic Cooperationand Development, Feb. 2007 [DCD/DAC(2007)15/FINAL].

16 Ibid.17 Enakshi Ganguly Thukral, “Children and Governance:

Concept and Practice”, in Enakshi Ganguly Thukral, EveryRight for Every Child: Governance and Accountability,Routledge, New Delhi 2011, p. 7.

4) Child-friendly governance

Overall, children and governance impliesdeveloping an understanding of, andengagement with, systems of governance torealize children’s rights. Children in governancerequires building partnerships with childrenthemselves, giving them the opportunity toparticipate in governance and recognising thatchildren are agents of change. It is important toensure that their presence is not simpletokenism or a time-bound project.17

Bearing in mind this overarching conceptualframework, the tools used to implementchildren’s rights and advance governance weredeemed to present significant potential formutual enrichment.


1) The General Measures of

Implementation of the CRC

While the CRC does not explicitly refer togovernance and the Committee on the Rightsof the Child rarely mentions this concept, theConvention lays the ground for the integrationof governance concerns in its implementation.18

Article 4 of the CRC provides for States Parties’obligation to “undertake all appropriatelegislative, administrative, and other measuresfor the implementation of the rights recognizedin the … Convention. With regard to economic,social and cultural rights, States Parties shallundertake such measures to the maximumextent of their available resources and, whereneeded, within the framework of internationalco-operation.”

With a view to providing further guidance onthe implications of this provision, theCommittee on the Rights of the Child hasadopted General Comment No. 5 on theGeneral Measures of Implementation. As such,participants agreed that the General Commentessentially represents a governance agenda forthe implementation of the Convention.

It covers a vast spectrum of state action, fromlegislation, adoption of a national strategy,budgetary allocations especially formarginalized and disadvantaged groups ofchildren, the establishment of coordinating and

monitoring bodies both governmental andindependent, comprehensive data collection,awareness-raising and training of professionalsworking with children to the development andimplementation of appropriate policies,services and programmes, includingdecentralization, privatization and cooperationwith civil society.19 It has represented a criticalinstrument over the years for furthering theimplementation of the Convention.

General Comment No. 5 however reveals someshortcomings. For example, it was pointed outthat the GC is framed with a top-down planningapproach and does not incorporate a holistic orsystemic view of policy based on human rightsand equitable financing.

The Committee acknowledged the difficulty ofthe task and in 2007 held a Day of GeneralDiscussion on the specific question of investingin children in order to explore the subjectfurther.20 Since this discussion, the Committee’sconcluding observations andrecommendations to States Parties’ reportshave begun to reflect expanded knowledge,new practices, and updated technologies onbudget management aimed at realizingchildren’s rights. One conclusion of theroundtable was therefore that applied morebroadly, the governance framework couldvaluably inform future discussions.

7

III. TOOLS FOR IMPLEMENTATION

2) A child rights approach to

the governance framework

The governance framework contains a numberof specific areas that are instrumental to thepromotion of human rights.21 A number ofthese areas would merit further exploration, asthey exemplify the added value of thegovernance framework in advancing therealization of children’s rights. They include:

• Institution-building. Building clearinstitutional arrangements can helplegitimize social objectives, streamline theallocation of power and resources withinsociety, and help strengthen accountability.In order to ensure that child rights issuesand concerns are firmly embedded at alllevels, there is a need to establishinstitutions and structures that hold the bestinterests of the child as a priority, strengthentheir capacity to formulate strategies anddeliver for children, institutionalisechildren’s engagement in policy-making,delivery and monitoring, and set upaccountability mechanisms.

• Service delivery. From a child rightsperspective, services need to be child-centred, inclusive in terms of access,affordability, cultural appropriateness andacceptability. They should have built-inmechanisms for child participation and forpublic accountability.

• Rule of law. Child rights should permeaterule of law initiatives, covering civil,political, economic, social and culturalrights, including comprehensive legislativereform to implement the Convention, justicefor children, and legislation regardingdisarmament, demobilization andreintegration (DDR) of children associatedwith armed forces and groups.

• Anti-corruption. Corruption erodes thecapacity of state institutions to provideservices and protect child rights. Studiesconducted by Transparency International oncorruption in the health and educationsectors point to the significant effect ofcorruption on the enjoyment of the right tohealth and education.22 Governanceprinciples such as accountability,transparency and participation help shapeanti-corruption measures.

These areas cover mainly the supply side ofgovernance from the State perspective. Theywould benefit from being complemented withthe exploration of additional elements, includingthe perspective of rights holders, as well as non-State actors thus involving civil society and thecorporate sector. They would also need to betaken as a whole in the context of policy-making, formulating comprehensive andintegrated social policies. Nevertheless, theyindicate the potential for areas traditionallywithin the governance context to be fruitfullyexamined from a child rights perspective with aview to strengthening both the governance andthe child rights frameworks.

3) Child-friendly localgovernance

The local level, especially the municipal level,is particularly relevant for children’s rights.By enhancing transparency and engagement ofthe people, proximity allows for more directaccountability of those in power for theconcrete results of their action. It furtherprovides the opportunity for children toinfluence policy decisions affecting theirimmediate environment.

Making sound decisions requires up to dateinformation on the status of children andadolescents, their needs, requirements, and thelevel of compliance or non-compliance withtheir rights. In order to ensure that activities,investments and the decisions made arestrategic and sustainable, they must be basedon a long-term view of children and adolescentsat the local level. This long-term vision providesa frame of reference for designing plans,programmes, projects and short, medium andlong-term budgets at that level.

Consequently, roundtable participantsemphasized that acting in local contextsrepresents an important and necessary steptowards integrating child rights andgovernance. Child-friendly local governance isa strategic framework, which aims to realizeand mainstream the rights of children intothe local government system, structure,policies and processes.

A concrete outcome of this approach has beenthe development of the Child Friendly CityInitiative (CFCI), which aims to assist any city tobecome more child-friendly in all aspects of


governance, environment and services. TheCFCI is a worldwide movement advocating forthe fulfilment of children's rights in cities andcommunities. It is meant to work through bothlocal governments and the organs of civilsociety. It calls for improvements in the degreeto which children’s rights are reflected inpolicies, laws, programmes and budgets andthe extent to which children are active agentsin their communities with their voices andopinions taken into consideration in decisionmaking processes. UNICEF launched the CFCIin 1996 at the II UN Conference on HumanSettlements (Habitat II), when for the first timechild well-being was identified as ’the ultimateindicator of a healthy habitat, a democraticsociety and good governance’.23

The CFC Initiative promotes an approach tolocal development that is based on the CRC.The approach, articulated around nine buildingblocks defined by the CFC Framework ofAction,24 involves the simultaneousengagement of citizens and of government andnon-government agencies in improvinggovernance for children at the municipal level.It promotes: (1) broad awareness of children'srights, (2) critical assessment of livingconditions and actions undertaken for children,(3) an integrated cross-sectoral approach to thedevelopment, implementation and evaluationof policies, laws, and budgets affectingchildren, and (4) enhanced participation ofchildren, parents and caregivers in decisionsaffecting children.

Child-friendly local governance retains the coreelements of good governance. More precisely,it supports government accountability bystrengthening child participation in localgovernance, creating an enabling environmentfor positive thinking and understanding amongadults of child rights issues, and supporting thedevelopment and implementation of childfocused plans and programmes at the locallevel. Child-friendly local governance enhancesthe capacity of local bodies and serviceproviders to improve service delivery forchildren. It also fosters responsiveness byenabling a better understanding andcoordination of actions between centralgovernment, local governments and rural andurban communities.

Developing child-friendly local governanceinvolves a number of steps, from thesensitization of local government staff, to project

planning, community mobilization,establishment of relevant structures, andmonitoring, review and evaluation. Subject toconformity with relevant standards, thesuccessful process ends with a declaration thata district, village or municipality is child friendly.

Experiences of child-friendly local governancehave proved very successful. In Nepal, theprocess has been led by the government as anational strategy and provided for the allocationof specific grants to local authorities engaging inthe process. One condition is the mandatoryallocation of 10 per cent of the total grant forprogrammes that directly benefit the mostdisadvantaged children and 10 per cent fordisadvantaged women. The recently approved“National Framework on Child Friendly LocalGovernance (CFLG)” includes provision for amandatory allocation of 15 per cent of the totalcapital investment funds to the children’s sector.

In Nicaragua, “Friends of children” municipalgovernments have multiplied across thecountry, now including three-quarters of allmunicipalities (117 of 153). This has resulted inthe adoption of municipal children’s policies andthe inclusion of children’s projects in municipalplans and budgets. The average municipalinvestment in children rose from 8.5 per cent in2001-2004 to 14.5 per cent in 2005-2008.25

Lessons learnt from these and similarexperiences suggest that for child-friendly localgovernance efforts to be successful, theprocess must be owned and implemented bythe Government. Another positive aspect is theability of the framework to bring togethermunicipal governments with differingideological tendencies around child rights. Yet,because municipal policies are usually in forceover long periods of time, they may extendbeyond the term in office of the governmentunder which they were approved. It is thereforeimportant to lobby political parties to include acommitment to child-friendly local governancein their election manifestos.

Another valuable dimension lies in the fact thatthe municipal level is a particularly fertileground for multi-stakeholder collaboration andnetworking, as well as inclusive, systemicapproaches. A wide range of actors fromdifferent sectors, such as social protection,health, education, security, and civil societyamong others can be brought together in ajoint effort more easily than at national level.

9Tools for implementation

NOTES

18 Overall on this issue, see Marta Mauras, “Public Policies andChild Rights: Entering the Third Decade of the Convention onthe Rights of the Child”, The Annals of the AmericanAcademy of Political and Social Science, Jan. 2011.

19 CRC Committee General Comment No. 5 (2003), GeneralMeasures of Implementation, CRC/GC/2003/5.

20 CRC Committee Day of General Discussion on “Resourcesfor the rights of the child – responsibility of states”,21 Sept. 2007, Recommendations.

21 OHCHR, Good Governance Practices for the Protection ofHuman Rights, United Nations, New York and Geneva,2007.

22 Bettina Meier and Michael Griffin (eds.), Stealing theFuture: Corruption in the Classroom – Ten Real WorldExperiences, Transparency International, Berlin, 2005;Transparency International, Global Corruption Report 2006

Finally, child-friendly local governance presentssignificant opportunities for South-Southcooperation and exchange of experiencesacross countries and regions. For example, thesuccess of the movement has led to thecreation of a Central American Learning Circle

– Corruption and Health, Transparency International,Berlin, 2006.

23 http://www.childfriendlycities.org/en/overview/the-cfc-initiative, accessed 2 April 2011.

24 The building blocks include: child participation, childfriendly legislation, a comprehensive strategy on childrights, a child rights coordinating mechanism, assessmentof policy impact, allocation of resources for children, aregular state of the children’s report, awareness raising andan independent voice for children. UNICEF, ‘Building aChild Friendly City: A Framework of Action’, UNICEF IRC,Florence, 2004.

25 Save the Children en Nicaragua, La inversión municipal enniñez y adolescencia : periodo 2005-2008 Nicaragua, Savethe Children en Nicaragua, Red de Gobiernos Municipales,Managua, 2010, p. 22.

on Children’s Rights and Local Developmentinvolving 200 municipal governments fromCentral America. Similarly, the Child FriendlyCity Initiative features a Secretariat, whichdevelops guidance tools and facilitates theexchange of good practices.


1) Government

The government is the primary duty-bearer forthe obligations the State has subscribed to byratifying human rights treaties. Implementationof the CRC requires adequate mechanisms tosupport prioritization of children’s issues andensure sound, coherent measures acrossgovernmental action.

Discussions highlighted that one challenge isthe status of ministries of social affairs, whichare often in charge of coordinating theimplementation of the CRC but lack bothauthority vis-à-vis line ministries, in particularthe ministry of finance, and the resources toeffectively perform their coordinatory role. Arelated set of issues concerns the difficulty ofmaintaining a holistic approach to children’sissues in policy-making, in contrast with anapproach by sector, where health andeducation often prevail. In addition,government effectiveness is highly dependentupon its ability to create and maintaincapacities for dealing with children’s rights, inparticular among its staff.

2) Parliament

National parliaments have four main functions:law-making, oversight, budgeting andrepresentation. These functions are central togood governance. Parliaments therefore have a

critical role to play in promoting goodgovernance for children. To that end, they haveincreasingly established parliamentarycommittees specializing in children’s issues.One issue however lies in the ability ofparliaments to adopt comprehensive legalframeworks for children’s rights covering allaspects of the CRC and supplemented byspecific laws in relevant areas.

Their ability to effectively fulfil this role ishowever highly dependent uponparliamentarians’ knowledge and capacities inthis area. It also necessitates the will, acrossthe political spectrum, to make children’s rightsa priority, hence the importance of workingwith political parties. Strengthening thecapacities of national parliaments can furtherbenefit from interactions amongparliamentarians at regional and global levelthrough existing networks.

3) Judiciary

The judiciary is a critical actor for theaccountability of governments and the abilityof rights’ holders to claim their rights, whichrole was found to encompass a number ofdimensions. Legal mobilization, understood asinvoking legal norms to seek redress, ishowever highly dependent upon powerstructures, including trust in formal justicemechanisms and the informational capabilities

11

IV. MAIN ACTORS IN CHILD RIGHTSAND GOVERNANCE

of affected communities. Yet, for judges to takeon rights issues and encourage rights basedclaims, they need to be adequately trained andsensitized. While such challenges need to beaddressed at the national level, internationallegal systems and complaint mechanisms canprovide an additional avenue for seekingremedy for rights violations. One significantsuccess in CRC implementation in Ethiopiafor example was when a court quoted the CRCfor first time, thus ensuring the justiciabilityof its provisions.

In the area of juvenile justice, more efforts andcreativity are needed to ensure positive reformof the judicial sector. This includes theestablishment of an effective specialized justicesystem for children in line with internationalstandards comprising adequately trainedjudges and staff. An important element here isthat children are not only victims and witnessesbut also possible litigants.

While it may seem technical, judicial review inthe area of human rights has significantpolitical implications, as it results in changes inthe distribution of power in society andpolitical accountability. For this reason,strategic litigation, as an instrument forclaiming rights for both individuals andgroups, has been highly politically sensitive.It should be remembered however thatmobilization for human rights is broader thanmobilization for judicial claims only.

4) Independent Human RightsInstitutions(Ombudspersons)

As monitoring mechanisms and facilitators ofprocesses, independent human rightsinstitutions for children were identified ascentral to the child rights and governancedebate, in four areas in particular. Theirindependence, as guaranteed by theirlegislative mandate and adequate resources, iscritical to their ability to monitor, voice theirconcerns and enjoy public trust. They take aholistic approach to children’s issues, byanalysing policies comprehensively, promotingsocial change, focusing on marginalizedchildren, and bridging all actors, public andprivate, around children’s issues. They developstrategies for their accessibility to children, andpromote child participation in their own work

and within the broader society. They mostfrequently have a complaint mechanism, whichoffers remedies to specific child rightsviolations. Often though, independent humanrights institutions lack the specialization inchildren’s rights required to effectively fulfilthese functions with respect to the CRC. Theobligation on the State to establish and provideadequate resources for these institutions is acritical priority in governance.

5) Civil society

The role of civil society was highlighted asdecisive in articulating people’s views,promoting children’s issues including childparticipation, monitoring the government andother actors’ actions, and translating the debatefrom children’s needs to children’s rights. Inmany cases, they also directly provide servicesto the people. In many parts of the worldhowever, civil society organizations facesignificant challenges in fulfilling their role, oftendue to tighter national laws, which preventorganizations from dealing with human rightsand governance when it is not explicitly in theirmandate. Another difficulty is the fact that civilsociety organizations are highly dependentupon donors and their focus tends to reflect thedonors’ agenda. Finally, observations from thefield suggest that organizations concentratingon child and youth issues often do not havestrong independent standing vis-à-visgovernment agencies and are oftendisconnected from government decision-makingprocesses. One underlying reason is the lack ofadequate human resources, including qualifiedstaff to deal with children’s rights.

6) Children

Child-friendly governance implies children’sactive participation. Civil society organizationsas well as ombudspersons can providechannels to promote and convey children’svoices. Importantly, governance at the locallevel offers significant opportunities forchildren’s direct engagement in policy-making.The degree of children’s participation ingovernance often relies on the recognition byall actors in society of children as activecitizens and agents for change. Participantsreckoned that this requires constantawareness-raising.


NOTES

26 Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights:Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect andRemedy” Framework, Report of the Special Representativeof the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights andtransnational corporations and other business enterprises,John Ruggie, A/HRC/17/31, 21 March 2011, endorsed by

7) Media

Discussions emphasized that the media dependon freedom of expression and are determinantin providing information, transparency andaccountability necessary for good governance.It contributes to shaping attitudes and opinionand plays a significant role in awareness-raising and in educating the public on childrights issues.

8) Private sector

The private sector’s role in child rights andgovernance was identified as both critical andmany-fold. In all cases it has a responsibility torespect human rights. Furthermore, corporateentities should establish or participate ingrievance mechanisms, either State-based ornon-State-based, to address and remediatepossible harm and human rights abusesresulting from their action.26 In the context ofprivatization, the private sector often managesthe delivery of goods and services that areessential to the realization of children’s rights,such as water for example. The private sectoris also an important element of thecommunity. The economic role of businesses,

Human Rights Council Resolution 17/4 adopted on16 June 2011.

27 For more information, see Save the Children, UNICEF andThe Global Compact, Executive summary of mapping oflinks between business and children’s rights, Children’sRights and Business Principles Initiative, 21 April 2011.

as well as the way they treat their employeesfor instance is determinant for healthy, thrivingcommunities. Finally, the private sectorrepresents a significant power, which shouldparticipate in defining and nurturing the socialcontract. This includes among others,corporate social responsibility, contribution tosociety through taxes, and rejection ofcorruption.27

9) Donors

Donors have increasingly incorporatedgovernance concerns into their work as across-cutting issue that needs to be integratedat all levels and into all thematic issues.Concerns for aid coherence and effectivenesshave led to the mainstreaming of children’sissues within donor agendas and thecorresponding decrease of support to childspecific programmes. The tendency is now toincorporate children’s rights issues into broaderagendas aimed at supporting human rights anddevelopment, with a focus on the MDGs. Thissuggests that rather than stand-alone issues,questions related to child rights andgovernance may be valuably included intoexisting programmes, policies and tools.

13Main actors in child rights and governance

© E

du

ard

o M

arti

no

/ Pa

no

s

A plethora of governance assessment tools arecurrently used by various organizationsworking on governance issues. These feature awide range of methodologies, both qualitativeand quantitative. Many rely on publicperceptions gathered through surveys, such asthe Transparency International Survey oncorruption and the Latin American barometeron public trust towards public institutions.Others review government policies andcommitments, like the African Child PolicyForum child-friendliness index examined belowand the HAQ: Centre for Child Rights tools formonitoring state performance in India, whichinclude the monitoring of national andprovincial budget allocations to children,review of legislative activity of the State andmonitoring of the judiciary.28

With a view to assessing governance from achild rights perspective and making childrenvisible in governance efforts, participantsconcurred that child focused indicators areessential. Depending on the object of theassessment and the organization carrying itout, child specific indicators may either be usedto develop a specific index or could be includedin existing tools.

1) Measuring the child-

friendliness of governance:

The ACPF Index

The African Child Policy Forum has developed aset of indicators aimed at assessing the child-friendliness of African governments and rankingthem accordingly.29The Child-friendliness Indexseeks to support good governance for childrenby promoting governments’ accountability. Itdefines child-friendliness as making themaximum effort to respect, protect, and fulfilchildren’s rights. Three dimensions are identified:

• Legal and policy framework established

• Governments’ budgetary commitment

• The efforts governments make to ensurechild participation.

Indicators have been selected to include thefour guiding principles of the CRC and assessthe effort made to ensure equity by measuringthe visibility of orphans and vulnerable childrenin policies and budgets and taking into accountthe gender dimension. The objective in the longterm is to analyse trends over time and assessprogress made.

15

V. ASSESSMENT ANDEVALUATION TOOLS

NOTES

28 HAQ: Centre for Child Rights, Children in Globalising India:Challenging Our Conscience (2002); HAQ: Centre for ChildRights, Children in India (2005); HAQ: Centre for ChildRights, Still out of Focus: Status of Children in India (2008).Since 2003, the Indian Government has started conductinga child budget analysis through its Ministry of Women andChild Development and in 2007 introduced a specialsection on children in the Expenditure Statement made bythe Finance Minister when presenting the Finance Bill. Thisis an example of child-friendly governance measures bythe Government.

By comparing the Ibrahim governance index30

and the Child-friendliness Index, the studyfound that countries ranking high (or low) wereoften the same for both indexes. This suggeststhat the child-friendliness of governments issignificantly correlated with good governance.

Another important finding of the study is that itis politics - not economics - that matter. Inconcrete terms, the wealthiest countries are notnecessarily the most child-friendly. Thus, child-friendly governance is primarily about politicsthat value children, laws that protect them, andbudgets that provide for them.

The index could however be further refined.The concept of friendliness should expandbeyond laws and budgets to encompass socio-cultural and psychological parameters.Additional indicators on child participationwould be needed. Analysis of budgetaryallocations could be enhanced to assesswhether the allocated funds are spent onchildren and whether allocations take intoaccount distributional concerns, for examplebetween rural and urban communities and thepoor and the not-so-poor. Finally, onechallenge is the lack of current and comparabledata across countries.

Despite these limitations, the Child-friendlinessIndex serves as an objective framework tomonitor, score and rank governmentcompliance, as well as to identify areasrequiring more attention. It thereforerepresents an effective advocacy tool thatmany governments take seriously intoconsideration. The Index has great potential forbeing adapted and used in other parts of thedeveloping world.

29 For full report, see The African Report on Child Well-being2008, How child-friendly are African governments?,The African Child Policy Forum, Addis Ababa, 2008.

30 The Ibrahim governance index measures the delivery ofpublic goods and services to citizens by government andnon-state actors through a comprehensive collection ofqualitative and quantitative data that assess governance inAfrica http://www.moibrahimfoundation.org/en/section/the-ibrahim-index.

2) Child-sensitive governanceassessment tool

The overall purpose of this tool currently underdevelopment by UNICEF Headquarters is topresent an approach by which a child-sensitivelens can inform the principal elementscurrently reviewed by the main governanceassessment tools in use by donors. Theassessment tool aims in particular to:

• Support political dialogue between donorsand partner countries

• Monitor governance reform programmes

• Support all phases of governance projects

• Assist in understanding the governancesituation at the time of deciding aidallocations.

It was underlined that compiling a child-sensitive governance assessment tool presentsa number of challenges. Governance is anumbrella concept encompassing a wide arrayof understandings. Similarly, determiningindicators for the realization of children’s rightsis challenging and efforts in this respect are stillunderway. Hence measuring the impact ofgovernance on child rights is extremelycomplex. The elements it includes and theirrespective impact may be appreciateddifferently. Country ownership of the processof setting indicators is essential, but it mayaffect international comparability. Overall,reaching agreement on operational indicatorsis particularly intricate. This difficulty iscompounded by the complexity of establishingclear causal links between triggers and results.Finally, governance assessments are by naturea moving target, with indicators bound toevolve as the environment and conditions inwhich they are conducted change.

The tool covers a number of key categoriesrelated to governance. The following tablepresents a review of these categories as wellas a non-exhaustive list of questions theycould include.


POLITICAL GOVERNANCE, VOICE AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Aims to capture perceptions of the extent to which various constituents within a given countryare able to participate in government processes and decisions affecting their lives. This includesexamining the extent to which political and civil rights, as guaranteed under the InternationalCovenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), are enjoyed.

• Does the government have any particular problems in transposing into domestic law theConvention on the Rights of the Child. If so, why?

• Has there been a rigorous national review of legislation affecting children to ensure it respectsthe CRC?

• Is the definition of a child in all legal (formal and informal) instances defined as any individualunder the age of eighteen? If not, how is it defined, and how does this definition impact boysand girls differently?

• Are there barriers or constraints to girls and boys participating (equally) in decisions that affectthem (including for example in the planning and implementation of policies/legislation)? Howmight these be overcome?

• Have participatory processes, mechanisms and systems for children’s participation ingovernance been institutionalized at the national and local levels?

RULE OF LAW AND LEGAL AND JUDICIAL SYSTEMS

Includes an assessment of the type and quality of judicial systems, as well as the capacities ofthe police and the court system among others.

• Is there in existence a specialized juvenile justice system?• Is there a system in place guaranteeing regular independent inspection of places of detention

of children?• Is there a national plan in place for the prevention of child involvement in crime?• Does the legal system take into account children’s evolving capacities when determining the

burden of responsibility for a crime?• Do children have access to appropriate legal representation?• Has an independent oversight institution been established to examine how legal institutions

and practices affect children’s rights? Do they have sufficient budget and authority?

In addition, the following quantitative indicators should also be monitored as a way ofdetermining the performance of the judicial system and the treatment accorded within it tochildren in conflict with the law:

• Number of children arrested during a 12-month period per 100,000 child population• Number of children in detention per 100,000 child population• Time spent in detention by children prior to sentencing• Number of child deaths in detention during a 12-month period, per 1,000 detained• Percentage of children in detention not wholly separated from adults.

17V. Assessment and evaluation tools

CONTROL OF CORRUPTION

Assesses perceptions of the extent to which public power is exercised for private gain, and someof the specific effects this may have on children and the ability of the state to deliver against itsobligations under the CRC.

• Which forms of corruption are most prevalent and where do they stem from?

• Which children’s rights are being violated or not fulfilled as a result of corruption?

• How is corruption currently affecting access to services? How is affecting the quality ofthese services?

• What mechanisms are in place to control corruption? How effective are these mechanisms atthe local and national levels as well as at levels in between these?

• Do anti-corruption measures target areas where children’s rights are most, or are most likelyto be violated, such as education, health, and protection?

• Is information publicly available so that the public can hold local and national government toaccount? What mechanisms are available for doing this?

• How are children (and their communities) involved in identifying corruption and in decidingupon workable solutions?

GOVERNMENT EFFECTIVENESS

Captures perceptions of the quality of public services, the quality of the civil service and itsdegree of independence from political pressure, the quality of policy formulation andimplementation, and the credibility of the government's commitment to such policies.

• What is the capacity of government to mainstream children’s rights and integrate a child rightsperspective into their work, at local as well as national level?

• Do government staff demonstrate awareness of and sensitivity to children’s rights and childrights principles? Do they have the technical competencies to translate this sensitivityinto action?

• What support is provided for developing capacities within ministries (including policyformulation, improved legislation, promoting structures to give children a voice, budgetanalysis, child rights mainstreaming, training of staff, networks of professionals workingon children’s issues etc.)?

• How are considerations of the best interests of the child and other child rights principlesmanifested in current policy formulation procedures?

• Do service delivery and regulatory agencies across sectors include child rights indicators tomeasure results? Do they involve children in this process?

• Is there an analysis of how much budget is allocated (directly and indirectly) to children? Is thisbudget tracked to determine how it gets spent and whether this is the most efficient andeffective use of the budget?


SOCIAL GOVERNANCE AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC INDICATORS

Aims to capture some of the key socio-economic indicators relevant to children, where reliabledata exist.

• Are child-specific statistics available? Are they sufficiently disaggregated to see the differencebetween different groups within the country (e.g. by gender, age, ethnicity, disability, etc)?

• Is child rights promotion included in the set of indicators?In the area of health:• Infant mortality rates • Under 5 mortality• Maternal mortality • Immunization coverageIn the area of education:• Primary school enrolment and attendance• Out of school rate• Secondary school enrolment and attendance• Retention rate to grade 5, literacyIn the area of child protection:• Birth registration rate• Child disability: percentage of children who screen positive to at least one of the questions on

disability (MICS)• Percentage of children involved in child labour• Prevalence of child marriage• Prevalence of FGM/C

POLITICAL DIALOGUE AND QUALITY OF PARTNERSHIPS, INCLUDING PARTICIPATION, CIVIL SOCIETY

AND GOVERNANCE

• Are children involved in decisions about which factors are important for good governance, andthus which factors should be tracked over time?

• Have participatory processes, mechanisms and systems for children’s participation ingovernance been institutionalised at the national and local levels?

• Do children have the skills and competencies to take part in using participatory processes?• Is government fostering productive government-civil society cooperation, including the

funding of programmes, provision of support, standards setting and quality control?• Are all key government (including education, health, social welfare, planning and finance

ministries) and non-state (including children’s NGOs, parent-teacher associations, youthgroups, unions, etc.) stakeholders involved in decision-making at the policy level?

• Does the government have the necessary skills at the national and local levels to ensureeffective participatory governance, public communication and participatory practices?

19Assessment and evaluation tools

1) Accountability

Accountability is a central component ofgovernance, yet it is also probably the elementleast understood in governance efforts.Accountability can be defined as “the ability ofthe governed to hold to account those whogovern.”31 It includes both horizontal intra-stateaccountability and vertical state-citizenaccountability.32

The roundtable concluded that accountabilityfor the fulfilment of children’s rights faces adouble challenge. First, as in other policy areas,it is particularly difficult to establish clearcausalities between actions and outcomes.Because policy results stem from a number offactors, it is challenging to isolate respectivecontributions, and therefore attribute success.

Secondly, a critical condition for effectivenessis the empowerment of citizens to demandaccountability for the government to deliver.This aspect requires significant efforts, inparticular to empower the most marginalized insociety to claim their rights. It also implies theexistence of channels to ensure transparency inpublic – and private – action. For children, thelack of participation mechanisms and avenuesfor them to exercise their demands on thegovernment exacerbate this difficulty.

Accountability therefore needs to becomprehensively tackled, hence not onlyapplied to institutions but also to systems.

Here, a better understanding of accountabilitymechanisms in the context of children’s rightsis required.

2) Recognizing and building

on children’s agency

One fundamental challenge to the involvementof children in governance issues stressed byparticipants is the lack of recognition of theircapacity to inform and influence policyprocesses and the absence of channels andmechanisms for their participation. Recognizingchildren as subjects of rights impliesacknowledging that they are not only entitled tothe protection of their rights by adults, but areactual agents who can impact theirenvironment. In the context of governance, theconcept of children’s citizenship – understoodnot as a national/administrative fact, but in thepolitical sense – can be valuably used to capturethe concept of children’s agency in politicalprocesses. From this starting point, it wouldthen be necessary to further reflect on possibleentry points for children to be included ingovernance processes. Children’s involvementis seen to be particularly effective in varioussectors at the local level. Building on successfulexperiences, further research is needed toidentify additional avenues for, and highlight theinstrumental value of, children’s involvement.

21

VI. KEY QUESTIONSAND CHALLENGES

3) Specialization vs.mainstreaming of children’sissues

There have been significant evolutions inapproaches to children’s rights in aid strategies.At the global level, concerns for donorcoherence and aid effectiveness, the ParisDeclaration and the adoption of the MDGsamong other factors, have prompted efforts tomainstream all development issues.

Discussions at the meeting suggested that theimpact has been threefold. First, we havewitnessed a marginalization of sectoral issues,including reduced attention to child rights. As aresult, from a donor standpoint child rightsconcerns have been integrated into broadergovernance cooperation issues and few stand-alone projects are left, consequently dilutingtheir specificity. Secondly, it has generatedincreased specialization among donors, witheach donor country focusing on a specificissue. Consequently, if specialized child rightsactors, such as UNICEF, Save the Children andothers are active in a country, donor agenciesare likely to prefer other areas of work. Thirdly,mainstreaming has correspondingly side-linedduty-bearers working on specific issues at thecountry level. For example, line ministries havetended to overpower State secretariats dealingwith children’s rights.

Additional analysis of this phenomenon and itsconsequences would provide useful insightsfor child rights advocacy.

4) Integrated rights-basedpolicies

Participants acknowledged that there is asignificant challenge in ensuring holistic,integrated policies that are rights-based. Thisimplies recognizing that social policies are notmerely compensatory and imply instead a

NOTES

31 OECD-DAC, Improving support to domestic accountability,A Summary of the OECD-DAC Governance Network(GOVNET) Work-Stream, p. 1.

32 Ibid.

combination of economic, social, cultural andenvironmental policies aimed at buildingegalitarian societies. This requires increasedand more effective coordination among actors.It calls in particular for:

• Legislation designed and adopted through abottom-up approach to legislative reform,driven by public concerns and an increasingconsensus for the protection of children’srights linked to broader policy.

• Data and statistics for planning, monitoring,and evaluating policy and programmes,through the revision of child rightsindicators, strengthening of statisticalsystems including data disaggregation.Research with a view to ensuring evidence-based public action for children’s rights isrequired, with particular attention toemerging issues such as the environmentand migration, as well as constantassessment of gender dimensions.

• Participatory planning for social policy bytaking the opportunity of broad state reform,such as constitutional reform, to formulatecomprehensive policies and enforcechildren’s rights.

• Allocation of resources for children’s rights,by strengthening States’ capacities andwillingness to make children visible inbudgets and promoting dialogue with theCommittee with respect to equity financing.

5) Entry points for change

Overall, it was found that there is a need tofurther give shape to a concrete framework forchild rights and governance. While variouselements and processes give some indicationsfor possible features, a better understanding andglobal overview of governance systems forchildren would be necessary. It would help definestrategies towards better inclusion of children’srights in governance issues and vice-versa.


Deepen understanding of child rights and

governance through research

While the roundtable helped unpack a numberof issues, there is a need for better clarity ofconcepts related to child rights andgovernance. Proposals for conceptual researchincluded:

• Overview of major concepts in child rightsand governance, including:

- Linkages. A think piece providing anoverview of the linkages between childrights and governance, expanding oncore concepts in both spheres.

- General Measures of Implementation.A critical examination of CRC GeneralComment No. 5 from a governanceperspective.

- Fragile States.The contribution of theGeneral Measures of the CRC to buildingeffective states, in particular in thecontext of fragile states.

• Exploration of specific areas, including:

- Corruption and children. Examination ofthe possible disproportionate negativeimpact of corruption on children,especially from marginalized groups, whohave high reliance on public services.

- Public financial management forchildren. The link between taxation and

the realization of children’s rights, as wellas the way public resources, includingaid and fiscal resources, are usedeffectively to deliver for children. Oneaspect would be a review of the variousapproaches to stewardship and theireffect on children’s rights.

- Private sector. Its influence on therealization of children’s rights, building onefforts to draft principles for businesses torespect and support children's rights.

- Climate change. Research into the linksbetween governance, climate change,and children.

Build evidence on the practical importance of

incorporating child rights into governance and

identify entry points for change

• Undertake research linking goodgovernance to concrete human rights anddevelopment outcomes for children.

• Examine the linkages between child rights,governance and the achievement of theMDGs with a view to informing post-2015strategies.

• Provide a cost-benefit analysis of anincreased focus on child-friendlygovernance.

• Further bridge the gap between policy andpractice.

23

VII. NEXT STEPS

Refine assessment tools for child-friendly

governance

• Identify priority issues of relevance tochildren’s rights for inclusion in governanceassessment tools.

• Explore ways to expand the African ChildPolicy Forum Child-friendliness Index to allworld regions.

Foster interactions among actors in the child

rights, human rights and governance

constituencies

• Establish fora for interaction between childrights advocates, human rights advocatesand governance experts to recognize andbuild on the interdependence among theseareas, ensure better exchange ofknowledge, and enhance respective capacityto address critical issues.

• Ensure involvement of aid-receivingcountries. As further reflection is carried out,

the involvement of governments from aid-receiving countries will be critical to ensurerelevance and shared ownership ofoutcomes. In future meetings on this issueit is anticipated that participation beexpanded to additional actors.

• Ongoing networking among participants.While the roundtable was the first attempt atbringing together a number of actorsaround the issue of child rights andgovernance, it is anticipated that the groupwill continue to mobilize both in the contextof upcoming research, and as partners andsounding board. The network will also helpsupport the ensuing advocacy efforts topromote the issue in upcoming globalevents such as the 10-year review of a WorldFit For Children in 2012 and the review ofthe MDGs in 2015, as well as in additionalrelevant settings.


CRC Committee, General Comment No. 5, GeneralMeasures of Implementation (CRC/GC/2003/5)

CRC Committee, General Comment No. 2, The role ofindependent national human rights institutions inthe promotion and protection of the rights of thechild (CRC/GC/2002/2)

CRC Committee, Day of general discussion on“Resources for the rights of the child –responsibility of states”, 21 September 2007,Recommendations.

The Paris Declaration (2005) and Accra Agenda forAction (2008)

The African Report on Child Wellbeing 2008, Howchild-friendly are African governments?, TheAfrican Child Policy Forum, Addis Ababa, 2008.

The African Report on Child Wellbeing 2011,Budgeting for children, The African Child PolicyForum, Addis Ababa, 2010.

Daniel Kaufmann, “Human Rights and Governance:The Empirical Challenge”, A paper prepared for aconference co-sponsored by the EthicalGlobalization Initiative and the NYU Center forHuman Rights and Global Justice, revised draft,December 2004.

Marta Mauras, “Public Policies and Child Rights:Entering the Third Decade of the Convention onthe Rights of the Child”, The Annals of theAmerican Academy of Political and SocialScience, January 2011.

Bettina Meier and Michael Griffin (eds.), Stealing theFuture: Corruption in the Classroom – Ten RealWorld Experiences,Transparency International,Berlin, 2005.

OECD, DAC Action-Oriented policy paper on humanrights and development, Organization forEconomic Cooperation and Development,February 2007 [DCD/DAC(2007)15/FINAL].

OECD-DAC, Improving support to domesticaccountability, A Summary of the OECD-DACGovernance Network (GOVNET) Work-Stream.

OHCHR, Good Governance Practices for theProtection of Human Rights, United Nations, NewYork and Geneva, 2007.

Save The Children, Why law matters for children’ssurvival, Policy brief, 2010.

Save The Children, Children and good governance,Policy brief, 2010.

Save the Children, UNICEF and The Global Compact,Executive summary of Mapping of links betweenbusiness and Children’s rights, Children’s Rights& Business Principles Initiative, 21 April 2011.

Enakshi Ganguly Thukral, Every Right for EveryChild: Governance and Accountability, RoutledgeIndia, 2011.

Transparency International, Global CorruptionReport 2006 – Corruption and Health,Transparency International, Berlin, 2006.

Committee of Experts on Public Administration,Public governance for results: a conceptual andoperational framework, Paper prepared by LuisAguilar Villanueva, 18 January 2011,(E/C.16/2011/12).

UNDP, Governance for sustainable humandevelopment, A UNDP policy document, UnitedNations Development Programme, January 1997.

25

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL RESOURCES

Robyn Chomyshyn

Senior Policy Analyst, Human RightsCanadian International Development Agency

Stephanie de Chassy

Head of Social Policy and GovernanceOxfam GB

Pilar Domingo

Research FellowOverseas Development Institute (ODI)

Enakshi Ganguli

Co-Director HAQ: Centre for Child Rights

Jennifer Grant

Senior Global Programme and Policy ManagerChild Rights Governance Global InitiativeSave the Children International

Irene Khan

Trustee, Former Head of Amnesty InternationalSave the Children UK

Marta Mauras

Vice-ChairpersonCommittee on the Rights of the Child

Andrew Mawson

Chief, Child ProtectionUNICEF Innocenti Research Centre

David Mugawe

Executive DirectorAfrican Child Policy Forum

Rada Noeva

Programme and Planning ManagerUNICEF

Dan Seymour

Chief, Gender and RightsUNICEF

Vanessa Sedletzki

Child Rights SpecialistUNICEF Innocenti Research Centre

Tina Silbernagl

Head of the Sector Project "Implementation ofChildren and Youth Rights"German International Cooperation Agency (GIZ)

Lene Steffen

Director, Child Rights Governance GlobalInitiativeSave the Children International

Patrick Watt

Director of Development PolicySave the Children UK

Lisa Williams

Policy AnalystOECD, Development Assistance Committee,GOVNET

27

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

The findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and editors, and do not necessarilyreflect the policies or views of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF).

UNICEF Innocenti Research CentrePiazza SS. Annunziata, 1250122 Florence, ItalyTel: (+39) 055 20 330Fax: (+39) 055 2033 [email protected]© United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)September 2011