Skip Navigation

South Africa

  • Member Since 2011
  • Action Plan 5

ON THE PAGE

Current Action Plan

2024-2026

Action Plan 5

  • Number of Commitments: 2
  • Policy Area Focus: Not specified

South Africa’s fifth action plan takes a citizen-centric approach to government data transparency. The two commitments seek to expand open budget data and establish a framework for open data principals at the national and municipal levels. The action plan was developed collaboratively between government and civil society, with an aim to revive the OGP process in South Africa. (More)

Contact

Point of Contact

Patrick Sokhela Chief Director, International Relations, Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA) [email protected]

Commitments

Resources

  1. South Africa Action Plan Review 2024-2026

    2025, IRM Report, Web page

  2. South Africa Action Plan Review 2024-2026 – For Public Comment

    2025, Report Comments, Web page

  3. South Africa – Procedural Review Resolution by C&S Subcommittee (May 2024)

    2024, Letter, Web page

  4. South Africa – Resolution Regarding Participation Status (April 2024)

    2024, Letter, Web page

  5. South Africa – Contrary to Process and Status Letter – March 2024

    2024, Letter, Web page

  6. South Africa Action Plan 2024-2026 (June)

    2024, Action Plan, Web page

  7. South Africa – Under Review Letter (August 2023)

    2023, Letter, Web page

  8. South Africa Results Report 2020-2022

    2023, IRM Report, Web page

  9. South Africa Results Report 2020-2022 – For Public Comment

    2023, Report Comments, Web page

  10. South Africa – Contrary to Process Letter (March 2023)

    2023, Letter, Web page

  11. South Africa Co-Creation Brief 2022

    2022, IRM Report, Web page

  12. South Africa Action Plan Review 2020-2022

    2021, IRM Report, Web page

  13. South Africa Action Plan Review 2020-2022 – For Public Comment

    2021, Report Comments, Web page

  14. Makhanda – Letter of Support

    2021, Letter, Web page

  15. South Africa Action Plan 2020-2022

    2021, Action Plan, Web page

  16. South Africa – Under Review Letter – February 2020

    2020, Letter, Web page

  17. South Africa End-of-Term Report 2016-2018

    2019, IRM Report, Web page

  18. South Africa End-of-Term Report 2016-2018 – For Public Comment

    2019, Report Comments, Web page

  19. South Africa – Notification of Late Action Plan (Cohort Shift) – January 2019

    2019, Letter, Web page

  20. South Africa – Government Cohort Shift Request Letter (August 2018)

    2018, Letter, Web page

  21. South Africa Mid-Term Report 2016-2018

    2018, IRM Report, Web page

  22. South Africa 2017 Late SAR Letter – February 2018

    2018, Letter, Web page

  23. South Africa Mid-Term Report 2016-2018 – For Public Comment

    2018, Report Comments, Web page

  24. South Africa End of Term Report 2013-2015

    2016, IRM Report, Web page

  25. South Africa Mid-term Self-Assessment Report 2015

    2016, Self Assessment, Web page

  26. South Africa’s Third National Action Plan 2016-2018

    2016, Action Plan, Web page

  27. Connecting the Dots: The Coordination Challenge for OGP in South Africa

    2016, Research Product, Web page

  28. South Africa Mid-Term IRM Report 2013-2014

    2015, IRM Report, Web page

  29. South Africa Action Plan 2013-2014

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  30. South Africa IRM Report 2011-2013

    2015, IRM Report, Web page

  31. South Africa – First National Action Plan – 2012-13

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  32. Improving Government – Civil Society Interactions within OGP

    2015, Research Product, Web page

  33. Building open data capacity through e-skills acquisition

    2015, Resource, Web page

Historical Data

The data below represents historical data for this member’s commitments. It does not reflect current work.

Commitment Performance

The following variables answer the question “Did this commitment open government?“, and focus on how government practices have changed as a result of the commitment’s implementation.

Key

No IRM data

Pending IRM Review

Download
Major
Outstanding
Starred Commitments
Action Plan 1
Action Plan 2
0
0
0
Action Plan 3
1
0
0
Action Plan 4
0
0
0

Global

Most per action plan
4
7

Regional

Most per action plan
0
3

How to Get More Starred Commitments

Starred commitments in OGP are one of the ways the IRM designates promising reforms. The graph below shows where the major areas for improvement in action plan design and implementation should take place based on past action plans.

Key

Stars (Global average 7%)

Focus on implementation

Focus on design

Pending IRM review

No IRM data

Focus on design

Focus on objectives and impact (ambition/potential impact)

Focus on relevance to open government

Focus on verifiability

Download
Action Plan 1

Public Participation

This table shows: 1) the level of public influence during the development and implementation of OGP action plans, 2) whether consultations were open to any member of the public or only to those invited; and 3) whether a forum existed that met regularly.

Key

Participation was closed

Participation was open to any interested party

No IRM data

Forum

Pending IRM review

Definitions

Collaborate: Iterative dialogue and public helped set agenda

 

Involve: Government gave feedback on public inputs

 

Consult: Public gave input

 

Inform: Government provided public with information on plan

Download
Collaborate
Involve
Consult
Inform
No Consultation

Development

Action Plan 1
Action Plan 2
Action Plan 3
Action Plan 4
Collaborate
Involve
Consult
Inform
No Consultation

Implementation

Action Plan 1
Action Plan 2
Action Plan 3
Action Plan 4

OGP Global Report Data

The data below is drawn from the 2019 OGP Global Report. You can view and learn more about the report here.

Selected Dimensions of Open Government

This section captures how each OGP member can play a leadership role, based on IRM-based findings and third-party scores. This list does not cover all of open government and OGP members are not required to take any action.

Action implications

These are recommendations on the role that each OGP member might play in each policy area. The recommendations are derived from a combination of the IRM-based findings and third-party scores.

IRM-based findings

Reflect the performance of commitments in a particular policy area, as assessed by the IRM.

 

(NC) No Commitments
(CA) Commitment(s) in the policy area.
(IR) IRM-Reviewed: At least one IRM-assessed commitment.
(C) Was Complete: At least one commitment was substantially or fully completed.
(A) Was Ambitious: At least one commitment with moderate or transformative potential impact.
(ER) Showed Early Results: At least one commitment opened government in a “Major” or “Outstanding” way.

Third-party scores

Reflect “real-world” performance, i.e., performance outside of the OGP framework. Scores are comprised of various indicators collected by respected organizations.

Download

Anti-Corruption

Beneficial Ownership
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.00 Sources
Open Contracting
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.76 Sources

Civic Space

Freedom of Assembly
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.59 Sources
Freedom of Association
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.36 Sources
Defending Journalists and Activists
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.19 Sources

Open Policy Making

Participation in Lawmaking
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.39 Sources
Regulatory Governance
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.20 Sources

Access to Information

Right to Information
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.63 Sources
Open Data (Water / Sanitation)
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.00 Sources
Open Data (Health)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.40 Sources
Open Data (Education)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.70 Sources

Fiscal Openness

Transparency
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.44 Sources
Participation
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
0.76 Sources
Oversight
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.24 Sources

Recent Posts

South Africa 1 – Credit – Vulekamali
South Africa

Open Money, Open Government

Through the Treasury, the South African government has invested in opening up budget information at the national and provincial levels. This has seen South Africa becoming a global leader in the Open Budget Survey.

blue-ish12
Spain · Côte d’Ivoire · South Africa · Estonia · Czech Republic

Paving the Way for Strong Implementation: Introducing the IRM’s First Action Plan Reviews

In recent years, we’ve been working to answer the community’s call for a bolder and more engaging IRM through the IRM Refresh. Now, we’re excited to share the first of a series of new products – the Action Plan Review. 

Show More
Open Government Partnership