INFLUENCE OF SOCIAL AUDIT AND COMMUNITY SCORECARD MECHANISMS OF CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATIONS ON GOVERNANCE IN KENYA
Abstract
This research sought to investigate the Influence of social audit and community scorecard mechanisms of civil society organizations on governance in Kenya. A review of both empirical and theoretical literature examined how the social accountability mechanisms that civil society organisations utilise contributed to enhancing governance in Kenya. Specifically, the study looked at the influences of social audit and community scorecard on governance and the moderating effect of government regulations. Using cross-sectional survey research design, the study targeted 80 civil society organisations who were involved in social accountability initiatives across the country. The study employed purposive sampling to pick the sample while data was collected using a questionnaires. Quantitative data was analysed using inferential statistics using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) while the analysis of qualitative data was done using content analysis. The researcher used multiple regression analysis. It was established that community scorecard and social audit had significant influence on governance in Kenya. It was further established that government regulations moderated the relationship between social accountability mechanisms used by the civil organizations and governance in Kenya. This study recommended that civil society should utilize appropriate social accountability mechanisms and tools in enhancing good governance in Kenya. Further study could also focus on the impact of social audit and community scorecard mechanisms on specific service delivery areas such as health, education or social services and determine which social accountability mechanisms could also give more information on its contribution to accountability.
Key words: Social Audit, Community Score Card, Government Regulations, Governance, Civil Society Organisations
CITATION: Ido, A. M., Waiganjo, E. W., & Mukulu, E. (2019). Influence of social audit and community scorecard mechanisms of civil society organizations on governance in Kenya. The Strategic Journal of Business & Change Management, 6 (2), 40 – 54.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Adam, S., & Kriesi, H. (2007).The Network Approach. In P. Sabatier (ed). Theories of the policy process 2nd ed., Cambridge, MA: Westview Press.
Adabala, S., Matsunaga, A., Tsugawa, M., Figueiredo, R., & Fortes, J. A. (2004, April). Single sign-on in in-vigo: Role-based access via delegation mechanisms using short-lived user identities. In 18th International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium, 2004. Proceedings. (p. 22). IEEE.
Ahmad, R. (2008). Governance, Social Accountability and the Civil Society, JOAAG, 3(1), 10-21.
Atkinson, M. M., & Coleman, W. D. (1989). Strong states and weak states: sectoral policy networks in advanced capitalist economies, British Journal of Political Science, 19(1), 47- 67.
Dowling, J., & Pfeffer, J. (1975).Organizational Legitimacy. Social Values and Organisation Behaviour.Pacific Sociological Review. 18(1), 122 -136.
Elahi, M., & Dehdashti, M. (2011, January). Classification of researches and evolving a consolidating typology of management studies. In Annual Conference on Innovations in Business & Management (pp. 26-27).
Geir, S. (2011). Civil society and accountability. Development in Practice – DAS, KPMG East Africa.
Hilson, A.E. (2004). Resource enclavity and corporate social responsibility in Sub-saharan Africa: The case of oil production in Ghana.Unpublished PhD Dissertation. Aston University, UK.
Institute of Economic Affairs. (2014). Handbook on County Planning, Budgeting and Social Accountability. Nairobi: Institute of Economic Affairs.
Lez, R. (2006). Reflecting on corporate legitimacy. Critical Perspective on Accounting.17, 23 - 335. London: London Metropolitan University.
Magness, V. (2006). Strategic positive, financial performance, and environmental disclosure. An empirical test of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal.19 (4), 540 – 563.
Mugenda, O., & Mugenda, A. (2003).Research Methods: Quantitative and QualitativeApproaches. Nairobi: Acts Press.
Mulgan, R. (2000). ‘Accountability’: An Ever-Expanding Concept? Discussion Paper 78 (3), 555–573. Canberra: Australian National University.
Mulgan, R. & John, U. (2000). Accountability and Governance. Technical Report Discussion Paper no.71. Canberra: Australian National University.
Muriu, A. (2013). Decentralization, Citizen Participation and Local Public Service Delivery. A study on the nature and influence of citizen participation in decentralized service delivery in Kenya.Unpublished Dissertation. Postdam, Germany: University of Potsdam.
Newman, W.L. (1997). Social research methods. Qualitative and quantitative approaches (3rded.) Boston: Allyn & Bacon
Puddington, A., & Piano A. (2009). Freedom in the world 2009: the annual survey of political rights & civil liberties, New York Freedom House; Lanham.
Simiyu, R., Joseph, N., & Francis, I. (2014).The Effects of devolved funding on socio-economic welfare of Kenyans: A case of Constituency Development Fund in Kimilili, Kenya. European Journal of Accounting Auditing and Finance Research. 2(7), 31-51.
Suchman, M.C. (1995). Managing legitimacy. Strategic and Institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review.20 (3), 571 – 610.
Tidemand, P., Olsen, H. B. & Sola, N. (2008). Local Level Service Delivery, Decentralisation and Governance: A Comparative Study of Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania Education, Health and Agriculture Sectors. Tokyo: Japan International Cooperation Agency.
Thindwa, J. (2006). Entry Points for Civil Society to Influence Budget Processes. PowerPoint
presentation during the training/workshop on Budget Analysis and Tanzania’s Participatory Public Expenditure Review (PPER) conducted by the Research on Poverty Alleviation and the World Bank Institute. 20–23 January.
The World Bank (2005).The Community Score Card Process in Gambia, Social Development Note, Participation and Civic Engagement, No. 100, March2005.
Villiers, D.C., & Staden, V. (2006). Can less environmental disclosure have a legitimizing effect? Evidence from Africa. Accounting, Organisation and Society, 31(8), 763 – 781.
Wanyande, P. (2010). Characterising the Kenyan Civil Society. Civil Society and Governance in Kenya since 2002: Between Transition & Crisis. Nairobi: African Research Resource Foundation.
World Bank.(2006). Global Monitoring Report. Strengthening Mutual Accountability Aid. Trade and Governance.Washington: World Bank.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.61426/sjbcm.v6i2.1098
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
PAST ISSUES:
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.