• Timing: One of the challenges of the network is how to involve its members when their countries are not being evaluated. The different phases or rounds of evaluation established by the follow-up mechanism could create a differentiation between the CSOs working in the assess- ments of their governments and the rest of the members of the network. In this sense, the challenge is to foster the rest of the members of the network to take a more active role even when they are not being evaluated. • Location: The geographic location of the members of
the network and National Chapters creates differences among them. In this sense, the network needs to make a constant effort to overcome or balance the differences between members of the network, according to their geographic location and the political relevance of the countries where the National Chapters are placed. For example, the TILAC network tried to balance the active role that the US chapter played due to its location near the OAS offices, the strategic importance of the chapter, and the overall US anti-corruption policy in the global agenda. For this purpose, it tried to incorporate the US chapter to the working group with other chapters, so that there was always consultation amongst them and avoid decisions being taken by only one chapter. • Local and regional politics: The IACC is a regional in-
strument that has implications at the local level, but the role that the countries play in the follow-up mechanism has implications in the development of activities within
the mechanism. This feedback between the countries per- formances and the activities that can be implemented in the mechanism, sets an important challenge for the mem- bers of the network: it is not only important to lobby for the full implementation of the IACC at the local level, but also to transform the experts into committed actors in the promotion of openness and effectiveness of the mecha- nism and the functioning of the Committee of Experts. • Lack of information & data: Both the official as well as
the civil society progress reports on the state of imple- mentation of the Convention highlight the lack of data and reliable information as an obstacle for assessing en- forcement of legislation introduced by the Convention. The generation of hard and reliable data is crucial to monitor progress and sustain or contest vague evalua- tions with objectively measured realities thereby push- ing governments to take stronger action.
The experience of the TILAC network shows that when interacting with transnational institutions or governmental bodies, the legitimacy of the network is a key factor. TILAC could get involved and become part of the IACC process as a legitimate actor within the OAS. This legitimacy derived from the commitment of CSOs to the goals of the network (instead of solely focusing on their own organisational ob- jectives) which helped for the network to be perceived as solid, with clear purposes and the endorsement of several CSOs in the region.
The findings, recommendations and research based on the evidence CSOs found at the local level where brought into the network and this contributed to a strong advocacy work that had many achievements.
As it was said before, networks usually facilitate the involvement of different actors with diverse positions in the discussion about concrete public issues. By acting as a bridge between actors from multiple sectors and different countries, networks can facilitate consensus building, col- laborative efforts, and the development of joint proposals and agreements.
Even though TILAC lobbied for a formal space for CSOs and other networks to participate in the IACC process, they Challenges: Nurturing participation and com-
were not successful in bringing in other actors that were not part of the TI movement. The TILAC network needs to make more efforts to include other relevant stakeholders as part of this regional process. By making this, the network could open the possibility of collaboration with other networks, bring in other actors with their own expertise and points of view and act as a bridge between voices and proposals of citizenship and the regional policy making process.
Conclusions
The experience of this network shows that the structure, strategies and activities of a network can be defined step by step according to the political context in the regional arena. One good example of that was the conversion of the Latin American network (TILAC) of Transparency International into the Americas Network. TILAC had the initiative to en- gage in the proper implementation of the IACC by promot- ing the convention ratification of member countries and providing recommendations for the design of the follow- up mechanism. While the regional Latin American network discovered an opportunity for regional action, the activities developed with Canada and US Chapters in this framework influenced the creation of TI in the Americas.
It is important to stress the impressive results of this network: it contributed to the ratification of the Conven- tion, helped in the design of the monitoring mechanism, provided assistance to National Chapters in the develop- ment of CSOs’ independent reports. It also secured spaces for CSO participation in the Follow-Up mechanism that set a precedent for other organisations in the Americas. These achievements were accomplished through the intensive work done by each of the members of the network and the strategic assistance of TI Secretariat. The possibility to have a back up support of a pre-existent structure could have influenced the raising of funds to sustain the network and National Chapters’ involvement.
These results were caused by a combination of factors: The network was able to develop an effective coordina- tion and organisation that made actions possible. As men- tioned by many participants, the regional coordination and the assistance of TI Secretariat in Berlin was an asset. The coordination was able to distribute roles and tasks to the CSOs participating in the network. It also carried out the systematisation of the collected information and research performed. This “supervision” role of the coordination of the network was beneficial for everyone participating. When a member needed protection or assistance due to po- litical threats or economic constrains, the possible solution was identified within the network, and other members with more expertise volunteering to help.
TILAC network was effective in understanding the im- portance of creating new spaces for civil society participa- tion within the complex and disorganised policy process. It was able to nurture political sensitivity and develop new channels of communication not only with local govern- ments –through CSOs members- but also with transnational governance structures.
Having funding secure for at least two years when be- ginning the network was another factor that helped reach excellent results. Actions were planned and were developed knowing that there were funds for every necessary activity, trip, and product. There was practically no improvisation. National Chapters, the Working group and the Coordination worked jointly to articulate every strategy for an effective intervention in each opportunity presented. Human and economic resources were committed from the beginning to secure an effective action and policy implementation.