What explanation does the literature on the EITI give on national governments' decisions to sign up or not?
What explanations does the published and grey literature on the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) provide in relation to: national governments' decisions to sign up to the EITI, or not; and the non-compliance of existing signatories?
There is an abundant literature which documents the process of signing and complying with the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), as well as the benefits of doing so. However, with the exception of a detailed case study on Nigeria, few studies examine the political, economic and social factors that have led governments to sign and comply with the EITI. Expert comments confirm the lack of literature on key motivators but suggest factors that motivate signature and compliance with the EITI. Furthermore, from the existing literature it is possible to identify factors which may have contributed towards signature and compliance and factors which may have undermined support for the EITI.
The key contributory factors seem to have been reform-minded politicians; international and domestic kudos; gaining international support through multilateral programmes or debt restructuring; and national healing. The ability to build capacity and local ownership has been crucial for continued success. Supportive factors may have been an increasingly widespread recognition of the importance of regulating the extractive industries and of the importance of transparency as a positive value in itself and the degree to which implementation of the EITI left mainstream politics untouched.
Rao, S. Signature and Compliance with the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) (GSDRC Helpdesk Research Report). Governance and Social Development Resource Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK (2012) 10 pp.