Lessons

The project did not sufficiently take into account that many targeted beneficiaries had little education and exposure to ideas beyond their culture, religion, or location. Although most of the radio shows explained basic democratic issues fairly comprehensively, specialized language or reference terms limited audience impact to persons who may have had some knowledge already or perhaps an existing deep interest on democracy.

Staff departures once the project in Afghanistan ended drained away some of the capacity developed through the project cycle. Mistakes or gaps were not corrected in the review step and gave evidence of poor organizational arrangements. Research materials of low quality were approved and therefore shaped all shows and debates, leading to suboptimal performance by moderators and participants, which reduced the efficiency and impact of the democratic debates in Afghanistan. The grantee had no internal control or assessment mechanisms to measure progress or impact on desired social change. Although the project used emails and phone calls from the audience, including suggestions for show material, these were not analyzed or incorporated into review of the program's effectiveness with respect to organizational or project objectives.

Afghan media airs debates every week and a significant part of the evaluation stakeholders were not familiar with this particular project. Some of those who know the grantee by name report they find their programmess unappealing compared to other options.

 

The media coverage of the project helped remind stakeholders of the importance of maintaining peace in order to hold free, peaceful and reassuring elections. Media coverage on the concerns of citizens regarding security issues and on whether or not their aspirations and hopes regarding the electoral programmes would be taken into account, allowed the grantee to bring grassroots populations closer to political decision makers in Burundi and reinforce its strategy for advocacy.

The grantee’s political neutrality created an image favourable towards sustainable peace in Burundi and has allowed the organization to position itself as a known and respected mediator in potential conflicts.

The logic of intervention of this project did not fully take into account the rift that exists between the centre and the periphery in Burundi: between the governing and the elected community and collines representatives, who for the main part merely execute power. The project intervention logic overestimated the level of impetus that could come from community leaders. The theory according to which the grassroots population would become more dynamic if only they knew their leaders better was overly optimistic, especially when considering the level of education that these populations have and the traumatic war experiences that are still very present within these communities.

In view of the time and the human resources which were allocated to this project, it would have been important for the grantee to adjust the number of planned activities and to focus on a coherent, qualitative process, within which the activities would have complemented one another. Similarly the activities should have been implemented in such a way to establish a clearer relationship between national and local level.

The project would have benefitted from making use of knowledge gained during the training and research activities. This could have encouraged all actors to use the research and knowledge acquired as reference material in order to develop party practices at the Burundian national level. This could have reinforced declarations made by political party leaders before and after elections, and to give a sense of responsibility to grassroots communities with regard to the importance of their role when it comes to applying the acquired knowledge.

The project was closely linked to the 2010 electoral challenges in Burundi to encourage women to vote and to stand for election. The election process, with a mandatory quota of 30% female representatives within institutions, was an important lever to generate collective awareness among all these leaders and shapers of opinion. This project also went beyond the elections by suggesting the creation of a National Forum for dialogue, allowing women leaders to overcome political differences and to exchange ideas on priorities to be implemented in order to improve the living conditions of Burundian women.

The grantee was unaware of the impact the political parties have on the alleged independence of candidates, representatives and leaders in the administration. The evaluation revealed that the true impact of women leaders within the political parties relied mainly on co-operation and loyalty to leading figures.