The methodology of the Rwanda Governance Scorecard (RGS) seeks to combine advanced research methods in global governance with those used in the RGS. The latter uses global and contextualized indicators and relies on a wealth of new local data, including scientifically sound Rwandan citizen and expert perception surveys, as well as hard data from Rwandan institutions.
The indicators used in this publication originate from diverse sources, including national and international which allow the RGS to combine the best in international governance research methods with own methods.
The RGS has the unique advantage of utilizing a wide range of new, Rwanda-specific data sources. RGB researchers verify hard data collected from relevant institutions to ensure their quality and validity.
3.2. Sources of data
The RGS 2016 uses three types of data namely, primary data, secondary data and expert surveys.
Measuring good governance requires assessing progress against targets. With this in mind, RGB researchers collected and consolidated data from different public institutions (Ministries, Government Commission and Agencies), Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) and Private Sector Organizations.
The data collected in this category consist mainly of reports and other administrative information collected from the aforementioned institutions.
3.3. Perception surveys
To root the RGS firmly in the realities of the Rwandan people, data collected from various perception surveys and other institutions were utilized. These include but are not limited to the Citizen Report Card 2015, the National Reconciliation Barometer 2015, the Civil Society Development Barometer 2015, the Rwanda Media Barometer 2016, Service Delivery Assessment in Central Government 2015, and Rwanda Bribery Index 2015.
Assessing governance holistically requires going beyond quantitative data and citizen satisfaction surveys. National experts (from Academia, think tanks and CSOs) with wide experience on issues of governance were also consulted to provide qualitative analysis.
RGS also utilizes expert surveys to enrich their findings in the governance landscape.
These expert surveys were conducted in collaboration with CSO organizations, particularly Transparency International-Rwanda (TI-Rwanda). Individual experts were selected on the basis of their expertise, objectivity, independence and in confidence.
Some international indexes consulted in developing and consolidating RGS indicators include; World Wide governance indicators; Global integrity index and Mo Ibrahim governance index.
3.4. Ranking System
The ranking of the indicators, sub-indicators and variables are derived from respective scores. The Color-coded ranking system is broken down as in the table on the right.
The ranking bar has been raised up for the RGS 2016 compared to the previous publications. Color ranking are attributed to the performance of indicators as follows:
Green starts from 80% and above; Yellow from 60% to 79.9%; Amber from 40% to 59.9% and Red from 0 to 39.9. The change is explained by the increasing of the expectation of indicators’ performance.
||Rank (in colors)
|75 - 100
||80 - 100
|50 - 79.9
||60 - 79.9
|25 - 49.9
||40 - 59.9
|0 - 24.9
||0 - 39.9
Rwanda Governance Board (RGB) was formed from the merging of Rwanda Governance Advisory Council (RGAC) and the National Decentralization Implementation Secretariat (NDIS). In due course, other services have been moved to RGB from different government ministries.
These include the department in charge of registration of FBO’s, NGO’s transferred from the Ministry of Local Government, the department in charge of issuing of legal personality to CSO’s transferred from Ministry of Justice and the department of Media development, advocacy and reforms which was transferred from the former Ministry of Information.
The Rwanda Governance Board (RGB) is a public agency with legal personality, administrative and financial autonomy, established by law No 41/2011 of 30/09/2011. It is managed in accordance with Organic law No 06/2009 of 21st December 2009 establishing general provisions governing public institutions functioning and administration.