Social mobility is not covered adequately in the CRRs, at least not directly. Yet plenty of information has been collected in the APRM process that helps to explain the continent‘s deficiencies in this regard. This is an important issue for Africa, and it deserves more clear and direct treatment. 1. It may be of value for the APRM to devote some thought to how to integrate this issue better into its work. It is not clear if additional standards exist which could guide enquiries and future action (and the Sustainable Development Goals might be a good place to start). 2. Additionally, the APRM may also wish to conduct research on matters relating to social mobility so as to develop a deeper understanding of the issue and help generate concrete proposals for policy decisions. As part of this, comparative analysis of social mobility experiences elsewhere in the world might be considered as a basis for lessons that Africa might learn. policy formulation to address shortcomings; consultative policy-making; peer learning, peer assistance and peer accountability. Thus far, the APRM has done well on the research side, but less than adequately on others. The full potential of the APRM as a platform for intra-African cooperation has not been fully exploited. The APRM has done a fine job of assembling information on the countries reviewed. It could improve on this by making a number of adjustments.  Many of the CRRs correctly identify the existence of problems, but fail to delve into the dynamics behind those problems. As has been noted, ‗intuitive‘ understandings are not always accurate guides to solutions. To mention just one example, in the fields of infrastructure provision, ‗resource constraints‘ tend to dominate public conversations, although they far from the only issue. The APRM could perform a great service by delving deeper in to the factors behind those problems and providing constructive critiques and alternative perspectives to what countries may be attempting.  Some of the issues discussed in the study – notably the question of resource mobilisation through resource rents – have been thinly dealt with by the APRM. They might be studied in greater depth.  Some of the material that could explain particular trends on the continent need not be gathered through a formal review. One thinks here of contracts dealing with extractive industries. These could be collated and analysed. It is essential that some nationallevel institutions continue to operate after the reviews have been completed, and that they maintain contact with the continental Secretariat. The goal would be an ongoing process of information collation and exchange.  The APRM Secretariat intends to set up a ‗knowledge hub‘. This would be a facility where the APRM‘s work can be archived and which researchers could access. This should be established and popularised among African governments, academic institutions and think tanks. Following the practices of prominent academics who donate their ‗private papers‘ to their institutions on retirement, perhaps field notes and personal reflections on CRMs by participating team members could be stored there too.  To the above ends, the APRM might cooperate with external researchers and with think tanks to enhance the work it is doing. One idea is to commission in-depth analyses of important cross-cutting issues to help inform national, regional and continental responses to them. Conclusion Need for an integrated perspective This study has presented each bottleneck as a separate, discrete analysis. It is important to note that, in reality, it is very difficult to separate the impact that each has from others. For this reason, the same or similar concepts arise in respect of multiple bottlenecks. A corollary of this is that the bottlenecks have a cumulative impact on Africa‘s development that exceeds the ‗sum of their parts‘. For example, the continent‘s infrastructure deficits have a strong bearing on the prospects of regional integration, on industrialisation, on the prospect of services (such as tourism but also others), etc. Issues of resource mobilisation and the efficacy of the civil service impact on the ability to roll out infrastructure and to provide the services that upgrade human capital. High-quality human capital, meanwhile, is a key enabler of an effective civil service. Weak states are a key element in the undermining of democracy and governance. In sum, these issues are so intertwined that only a comprehensive and integrated approach can deliver concrete and policy-relevant programmes of action. The APRM‘s potential to make further contribution If the APRM is to play a role in addressing these bottlenecks, it cannot continue with ‗business as usual‘. This is not to suggest that the APRM be completely overhauled; it already offers a sound methodology. The APRM was essentially a programme for achieving a number of interrelated goals: research, to establish a full understanding of the participating countries, and an evidence-rich foundation for future action; encouraging 65