Beyond Perception: Politics of Monitoring and Evaluation in African Anti-Corruption Programmes

Background: Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of anti-corruption programmes across Africa faces persistent challenges related to perception-driven assessments, weak multi-stakeholder engagement, and inadequate inter-agency collaboration. Despite significant investments in anti-corruption architecture, measuring actual programme effectiveness remains problematic, with evaluation integrity compromised by political economy dynamics. Objectives: This study critically examined the perceived political and institutional factors that undermined M&E integrity in anti-corruption programmes across five African countries – Kenya, Nigeria, Malawi, Tanzania, and Liberia – and proposed a framework for strengthening Afrocentric, participatory M&E systems. Method: The study employed a qualitative documentary analysis and literature review, synthesising evidence from peer-reviewed journals, institutional reports, and policy documents. Key informant perspectives (n = 20) were drawn from existing qualitative studies. Thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke's [5] framework guided data interpretation. Results: Findings revealed that M&E systems were deeply entangled with political structures, where data manipulation, strategic underfunding, and weak stakeholder engagement systematically undermined evaluation integrity. Perceived political interference manifested through procedural obstruction, executive influence on case selection, and fragmented institutional mandates. Civil society participation remained nominal across all five countries, constrained by financial limitations and inadequate awareness of M&E roles. Conclusion: The study demonstrated that technical M&E reforms alone were insufficient without addressing underlying political economy dynamics. It proposed the Participatory Afrocentric M&E Framework as a pathway for strengthening anti-corruption programme evaluation. Contribution: This research advanced understanding of how perceived political interference systematically distorted M&E in anti-corruption contexts and provided actionable recommendations for enhancing evaluation independence, stakeholder engagement, and contextual relevance in African settings.

monitoring and evaluation, anti-corruption, perceived political interference, Afrocentric evaluation, stakeholder engagement

1. African Union. (2023). The cost of corruption in Africa. African Union Commission, Addis Ababa. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Barasa, P. (2010). Factors affecting upholding of accountability in county government projects in Narok County, Kenya. Unpublished thesis, University of Nairobi, Nairobi. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bayley, D.H. (1966). The effects of corruption in a developing nation. The Western Political Quarterly, 19(4), 719–732. https://doi.org/10.1177/106591296601900403 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bowen, G.A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Bwire, J.M. (2015). Participation of civil society organisations in monitoring and evaluation of Tanzania's National Anti-Corruption Strategy and Action Plan II. Journal of Public Administration and Governance, 5(2), 112–128. https://doi.org/10.5296/jpag.v5i2.7834 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Caiden, G.E., & Dwivedi, O.P. (Eds.). (2004). Where corruption lives. Kumarian Press, Boulder, CO. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Chambers, R. (1997). Whose reality counts? Putting the first last. Intermediate Technology Publications, London. https://doi.org/10.3362/9781780440484 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Charron, N. (2016). Do corruption measures have a perception problem? Assessing the relationship between experiences and perceptions of corruption among citizens and experts. European Political Science Review, 8(1), 147–171. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773914000447 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Chêne, M. (2010). Anti-corruption agencies: Key elements for setting up an anti-corruption agency. U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre, Bergen. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Creswell, J.W., & Poth, C.N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. De Speville, B. (2010). A policy framework for the containment of corruption: The role of the Independent Commission Against Corruption. In P. Larmour & N. Wolanin (Eds.), Corruption and anti-corruption (pp. 408–430). ANU Press, Canberra. https://doi.org/10.22459/CA.2010 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Dike, V.E. (2005). Combating corruption in Nigeria: The role of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission. The Journal of Financial Crime, 12(2), 153–165. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. https://doi.org/10.1108/13590790510592104 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Doig, A., Watt, D., & Williams, R. (2005). Measuring 'success' in five African anti-corruption commissions. U4 Issue 5, U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre, Bergen. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. EU & UNDP. (2024). Strengthening governance through results-based M&E: The Gambia certification programme report. European Union and United Nations Development Programme, Banjul. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 80–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690600500107 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Heilbrunn, J.R. (2004). Anti-corruption commissions: Panacea or real medicine to fight corruption? World Bank Institute, Washington, DC. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Heywood, P. (2015). Measuring corruption: A critical analysis of existing approaches. Routledge, London. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315736457 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Hope, K.R. (2012). The political economy of corruption in Africa. In K.R. Hope (Ed.), The political economy of development and underdevelopment in Africa (pp. 113–136). Adonis & Abbey Publishers, London. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Jain, A.K. (2001). Corruption: A review. Journal of Economic Surveys, 15(1), 71–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6419.00133 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Johnston, M. (2014). Syndromes of corruption: Wealth, power, and democracy (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139175357 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Mastruzzi, M. (2011). The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Methodology and analytical issues. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 3(2), 220–246. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. https://doi.org/10.1017/S187640451120004X [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Klitgaard, R. (1988). Controlling corruption. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA. https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520344860 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Kpundeh, S.J. (2004). Curbing corruption in Liberia: A review of the establishment and performance of the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission. Journal of Modern African Studies, 42(3), 341–365. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022278X04000198 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Langseth, P., Stapenhurst, R., & Pope, J. (1997). National integrity systems: Assessing corruption and reform. World Bank Institute, Washington, DC. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Masetu, T., & Awere, R. (2026). Political interference and institutional autonomy in African anti-corruption agencies: A comparative study of Malawi, Nigeria and Kenya. African Journal of Governance and Development, 15(1), 45–72. https://doi.org/10.5539/ajgd.v15n1p45 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Morkel, R., & Sibanda, M. (2022). Participatory governance and co-production in African M&E systems: Pathways toward downward accountability. African Evaluation Journal, 10(1), a612. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. https://doi.org/10.4102/aej.v10i1.612 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Mungiu-Pippidi, A. (2015). The quest for good governance: How societies develop control of corruption. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316166741 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Mutsikiwa, E., & Mazongonda, S.S. (2025). Reflections on building an Afrocentric monitoring and evaluation system. African Evaluation Journal, 13(1), a832. https://doi.org/10.4102/aej.v13i1.832 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Njoh, A.J. (2002). The political economy of urban corruption in Africa. Cities, 19(6), 409–420. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0264-2751(02)00086-0 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Olken, B.A. (2009). Corruption perceptions vs. corruption reality. Journal of Public Economics, 93(7–8), 950–964. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2009.03.010 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Oyugi, D. (2024). Assessing the monitoring and evaluation system of Haki Africa: Challenges and opportunities. International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation, 11(3), 234–249. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2024.1103018 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Patton, M.Q. (2011). Developmental evaluation: Applying complexity concepts to enhance innovation and use. Guilford Press, New York. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Persson, A., Rothstein, B., & Teorell, J. (2013). Why anticorruption reforms fail – systemic corruption as a collective action problem. Governance, 26(3), 449–471. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.2012.01604.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Quah, J.S.T. (2011). Anti-corruption agencies in Asia: Patterns of success and failure. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4355-37-7 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Rose-Ackerman, S. (1999). Corruption and government: Causes, consequences, and reform. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803765 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Rothstein, B. (2011). The quality of government: Corruption, social trust, and inequality in international perspective. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226730066.001.0001 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Sampford, C., Shacklock, A., Connors, K., & Galtung, F. (2006). Measuring corruption. Ashgate Publishing, Aldershot. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Svensson, J. (2005). Eight questions about corruption. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(3), 19–42. https://doi.org/10.1257/089533005774357860 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Transparency International. (2023). Corruption Perceptions Index 2023. Transparency International, Berlin. https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2023 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. UNDP. (2023). Supporting results-based monitoring and evaluation in Liberia: A joint UNDP-LACC assessment. United Nations Development Programme, Monrovia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Weiss, C.H. (1993). Where politics and evaluation research meet. Evaluation Practice, 14(1), 93–109. https://doi.org/10.1177/109821409301400109 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Whitton, J., & Farrington, J. (2000). Citizen participation in monitoring and evaluation: An overview. In J. Farrington & J. Whitton (Eds.), Participation and the rural development process (pp. 1–22). Overseas Development Institute, London. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]