Survey results Responses to the survey offer a further valuable perspective. The results are shown in the graphic below. Figure 5: Citizens‘ prospects for social mobility and moving out of poverty 0.0% 10.4% 18.8% 25.0% 45.8% Very Poor Poor Neutral Good Very Good Source: Survey of key African governance stakeholders, November 2016 put a great deal of emphasis on education as a means of reducing inequality.352 It is noticeable that not a single respondent viewed the prospects for socio-economic mobility as ‗very good‘. The largest single response was that prospects were ‗neutral‘ (‗in our society, we have socio-economic cleavages and the disadvantages people inherit at birth are real, but there are opportunities for people to advance‘), and around a third felt that prospects for this were ‗poor‘ or ‗very poor‘. It is unclear how much these initiatives have improved the mobility prospects of Africa‘s poor in practice. The survey respondents‘ suggestions, unsurprisingly, focused heavily on education. Some called for policies that created employment without specifying what these should look like. In addition, there were a number of appeals to resolve governance problems, such as corruption in the administration of development programmes. Those who offered comments on the issue tended to cite unemployment and a lack of education as the key issues retarding mobility. Many countries have embarked on initiatives to address this issue. Policy in Lesotho attempts to support the most vulnerable groups in society.348 Burkina Faso sells necessities to poor people at ‗social‘ prices,349 and provides scholarships and support for university to poor candidates.350 Uganda provides equalisation grants to reduce the inequality between poorer and wealthier regions of the country.351 South Africa has established an extensive system of social grants to support its poorer citizens. Mauritius has 348 349 350 351 Durable and implementable solutions appear very hard to come by. The recommendations made in the CRRs are vague and at best conceptual, for example, calling for policies that deal with inequality and that foster broadbased development, but often without providing in detail what those policies should look like.353 What – or what more – can the APRM do about structural inequalities in access to opportunities Lesotho CRR, p. 183. Burkina Faso CRR, p. 311. Burkina Faso CRR, p. 493. Uganda CRR, p. 154. 352 353 64 Mauritius CRR, p. 144. Zambia CRR, p.249; Mozambique, p. CRR, p. 156.