of them; their regularity; their attendance rate and composition; the extent to which their recommendations are then acted on by governments; as well as perceptions of satisfaction with these mechanisms by the affected community. Information on the availability of effective, appropriate and accessible avenues of redress through administrative and judicial remedies is also important to collect, in accordance with the principle of accountability for cases where policies are not implemented, do not work properly or do not achieve their objectives. This element of the step could draw on tools such as perceptions surveys, some of the most wellknown and regular of which include the World Values Survey, Afrobarometer, Eurobarometre, and Latinobarometro, for example. The international NGO, Transparency International, has developed a Corruption Perceptions Index. These indices broadly profile people’s ability to engage in their country’s governance structures. However, where possible, a richer analysis would look specifically at whether the communities affected by particular policies or programs and relevant civil society organizations: (a) actively participated in their design and implementation, and (b) had avenues at their disposal (either sectorspecific or general) to seek remedies for any violations of the right(s) under review. Primary data might need to be collected to fully analyze participation and accountability channels in a particular context, for example, through a survey of involved civil society actors. Assessing Policy Efforts in the ‘Rights or Privileges?’ Project For this step we first observed to what extent the national framework was incorporating the content of international obligations and found that the legal and policy commitments formulated by successive governments in the sphere of food, health and education had generally (with some exceptions) been framed in exemplary terms. However, the reality in practice was very different. A selected range of critical policy interventions in each area (such as the provision of emergency obstetric care to prevent maternal death, or school meal programs to address both educational attendance and malnutrition) were assessed against the criteria of availability, accessibility, acceptability and quality, using a number of quantitative indicators and methods. These were found to be grossly inadequate in all three areas, largely due to inadequate coverage, inequitable distribution and underfunding. In relation to maternal health, for example, statistical mapping showed that in the regions where maternal mortality rates were highest emergency obstetric services were least available. Qualitative data from structured interviews revealed that high transport costs and culturally inadequate birthing practices were major obstacles preventing poor women in rural areas accessing the reproductive and sexual health services they needed. Community interviews also revealed that mechanisms for participation and accountability were seen as existing only on paper. The analysis in this step combines quantitative and qualitative indicators and uses a variety of tools and techniques to identify the legal commitments of the state to fulfilling the right(s) under review and to judge the adequacy of policies that have been put in place to give effect to these commitments. In reviewing public policies, the objective is to determine the extent to which they have translated into goods and services on the ground that meet the AAAAQ criteria and through a process that complies with the principles of participation, transparency and accountability. This analysis is incomplete however without explaining why there are disparities between the policies on paper and the delivery of goods and services in practice. Assessing compliance with the obligation to fulfill economic, social and cultural rights 21