This page explains how AfricaInfoBase (AIB) researches, verifies and develops articles and videos about Africa. Our research method uses three levels of evidence: published information, interviews and field visits, and Freedom of Information (FOI) or other Access to Information requests.
AIB starts with what is already known, identifies what is missing and, where appropriate, seeks additional evidence directly from people, places, governments and institutions. Our methodology also covers how we verify information, distinguish evidence from interpretation, protect sources, correct errors, provide a right of reply and make supporting evidence available where appropriate.
Our principle is straightforward: find the evidence, test it, explain it clearly and show why it matters.
This research model is being introduced progressively across new AIB investigations. As investigations using this approach are published, we will link to relevant examples so readers can see how the methodology works in practice.
Published information is our first level of evidence
Most AIB investigations begin with information that is already publicly available. This can include government statistics, legislation, academic research, international organisation reports, court and regulatory records, company disclosures, civil society research, reputable journalism and public databases.
Before submitting an FOI or Access to Information request, we first establish what has already been published and identify the specific information that remains unavailable.
We also compare sources rather than automatically relying on a single document. Different organisations may measure the same issue differently, use different definitions, cover different periods or reach different interpretations. Understanding those differences is part of responsible research.
Published information therefore provides the starting point for an investigation, but it does not always provide the complete answer.
Interviews and field visits connect evidence with people's experiences
The second level of AIB research involves speaking directly with people and, where practical, visiting places connected with the subject being investigated.
Official statistics can show how much money was allocated to a programme, how many people participated or what an institution says was achieved. They cannot always explain whether a service worked properly, why some people could not access it or how a policy affected everyday life.
AIB may therefore interview residents, workers, businesses, researchers, professionals, public officials, civil society organisations and people directly affected by an issue.
Field visits can provide another layer of understanding. A project described as completed in an official report may still present serious difficulties for users. A border procedure described as efficient may involve substantial delays and costs for traders. A development programme may report thousands of beneficiaries while some communities describe barriers to participation.
These experiences do not automatically override official statistics. Instead, they help us test published evidence and understand what the figures mean in practice.
For example, a national increase in trade may appear positive while businesses at particular borders continue to experience high transport costs and delays. Large remittance flows may demonstrate the economic importance of money sent home while saying little about what families lose through fees and exchange-rate differences.
AIB therefore asks not only what the numbers are, but what they mean for people.
FOI and Access to Information help us investigate what is missing
The third level is used when relevant information appears to be held by an institution but has not been published.
In the UK, the Freedom of Information Act 2000 provides a general right to request recorded information from public authorities covered by the Act, subject to exemptions and other provisions. Public authorities normally have up to 20 working days to respond (Freedom of Information Act 2000; Information Commissioner's Office, 2026).
Outside the UK, different countries and institutions operate under different rules.
The African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights adopted the Model Law on Access to Information for Africa in 2013. The Model Law is not legislation that automatically applies across Africa. It provides detailed guidance that states can adapt when developing or improving their national access-to-information laws (African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, 2013).
International organisations can also operate their own systems. The World Bank's Access to Information Policy allows members of the public to request information in the Bank's possession unless it falls within specified exceptions. The policy also provides an appeal process for certain refusals (World Bank Group, 2026a).
The African Development Bank's Disclosure and Access to Information Policy was adopted by its Boards of Directors in May 2012 and became effective in February 2013. The policy is based on openness and disclosure, while allowing defined categories of information to remain protected (African Development Bank Group, 2012).
AIB therefore uses the appropriate mechanism for the organisation concerned rather than describing every international information request as an FOI request.
We first establish what is public, then investigate the gap
A useful information request starts with a clearly identified gap.
UK visa statistics provide a good example. The Home Office already publishes detailed data on entry-clearance visa applications and decisions by nationality and visa type. Its Immigration system statistics data tables include detailed datasets for the year ending June 2026 (Home Office, 2026).
There would therefore be little value in submitting an FOI request simply to obtain information that the Home Office already publishes.
AIB would instead establish what those datasets cannot answer and determine whether additional records could help. Depending on the question, this might involve seeking more detailed information about administrative processes, recorded reasons or another clearly defined issue that is not available in the published statistics.
Remittances provide another example. The World Bank publishes Remittance Prices Worldwide, which provides information on the cost of sending and receiving relatively small amounts of money internationally. The dataset currently covers 377 country corridors, involving 48 remittance-sending countries and 111 receiving countries (World Bank Group, 2026b).
AIB begins with that evidence rather than recreating it. Further investigation could examine particular African corridors, compare published costs with customer experiences or investigate aspects of pricing that the existing data does not fully explain.
This approach makes FOI and Access to Information more useful. The information request is not automatically the beginning of the research; it is a tool for filling an identified evidence gap.
Our investigations focus on problems people actually encounter
AIB does not seek documents simply for the sake of accumulating information. The purpose is to answer questions that matter.
For example, high airfares between African countries could be investigated through published ticket prices, aviation taxes, airport charges and interviews with passengers, airlines, travel businesses and other affected groups. If significant elements of the cost remain unexplained, information requests may then help establish how particular public charges are calculated or used.
Development finance provides another example. Published records may show that a government or international institution approved a major programme and state how much funding was committed. Interviews and field research could examine what communities experienced. Further information requests might focus on expenditure, implementation, contracts or results that have not been publicly disclosed.
The same method can be applied to infrastructure, climate finance, natural resources, trade, migration, visas, education, investment, public spending and other issues affecting African countries and communities.
The central questions remain simple: What is already known? What does the available evidence show? What are people experiencing? What important information is still missing?
We explain technical information in plain English
Government departments, financial institutions and international organisations often communicate using specialist or bureaucratic terminology.
AIB explains that information in accessible language without changing its meaning.
For example, if a technical report describes passenger fiscal charges as an important component of aviation pricing, we may explain that part of the amount passengers pay for a flight consists of government taxes and airport charges rather than the airline's basic fare.
Similarly, if an institution says its policy is based on a presumption of disclosure subject to exceptions, we can explain that information is generally available unless the organisation's rules provide a recognised reason for keeping particular information confidential.
Plain English should make information easier to understand, not remove important qualifications, context or uncertainty.
We distinguish evidence from interpretation
An official document is evidence, but it does not automatically provide the complete explanation of an issue.
Data can be incomplete. Different institutions may use different definitions. Some records may be legally withheld, and credible sources can sometimes reach different conclusions from the same underlying evidence.
AIB therefore distinguishes between what records show, what the institution responsible for them says they mean, what other evidence indicates and what remains uncertain.
Where credible evidence supports different interpretations, we explain those differences. Where important information cannot be established, we say so rather than filling the gap with speculation.
A refusal to disclose information will not automatically be presented as evidence of wrongdoing. Governments and institutions can have legitimate reasons for withholding information, including privacy, security and commercial confidentiality. We examine what was requested, what was withheld, the reason given and whether a review or appeal process exists.
Our reporting is referenced, verifiable and transparent
AIB aims to produce information that readers and viewers can verify for themselves.
Important factual claims are supported, where appropriate, by identifiable and reliable sources. We give priority to primary and authoritative evidence such as legislation, official statistics, government publications, recognised international institutions, academic research and original records.
Where secondary sources are used, we assess their credibility and, where practical, trace important claims back to their original source.
References are not included simply to make an article appear academic. They allow readers to examine where information came from, understand its original context and assess whether our explanation is supported by the evidence.
Where credible sources disagree, we identify the disagreement rather than present uncertain information as an established fact.
This approach is central to AIB's reliability. Readers can examine the evidence and assess the information rather than being expected simply to accept our conclusions.
Our reporting includes safeguards for fairness and trust
Research methods are only one part of trustworthy reporting. AIB also applies editorial safeguards to the way investigations are conducted and published.
- Right of reply: When an investigation makes significant claims concerning an identifiable government, institution, organisation, company or person, we will normally give the relevant party a reasonable opportunity to respond before publication where appropriate and practicable.
- Corrections: We will review credible reports of factual errors. Material errors will be corrected transparently rather than silently changing an important factual claim.
- Interview consent and safety: Interviewees will be informed about how their contribution is expected to be used. Where identifying someone could create a credible safety, security or other serious risk, AIB may protect that person's identity when anonymity is editorially justified.
- Source protection: Confidential sources and information capable of identifying them will be handled carefully, particularly when reporting from politically sensitive or high-risk environments.
- Editorial independence: Material funding, sponsorship or other relationships relevant to particular coverage will be disclosed where appropriate. Funders and sponsors will not determine AIB's editorial conclusions.
- Evidence before conclusion: Investigations will begin with questions and evidence rather than predetermined conclusions.
These standards will continue to develop as AIB's investigative work expands.
We may publish the evidence behind our reporting
Where it is lawful, appropriate and responsible, AIB may publish or link to information requests, official responses, datasets, reports, correspondence, refusal notices, review decisions and other material supporting an investigation.
Full publication will not always be appropriate. Records can contain personal information, confidential material, copyrighted content or information that could place someone at risk.
Where supporting material cannot responsibly be published, we aim to explain the evidence used and any relevant limitations.
AIB investigations can follow evidence across borders
Many issues affecting Africa cannot be understood within the boundaries of one country.
A mining project may involve an African government, multinational companies, international lenders and investors in several jurisdictions. Migration policies can involve African and European governments, airlines and international organisations. Development funding may originate in one country, be administered through an institution elsewhere and eventually be implemented in an African community.
AIB research may therefore involve African governments and public bodies, the African Union and regional institutions, the African Development Bank, the World Bank Group, United Nations organisations, UK public authorities, regulators, companies, universities, development agencies and other relevant bodies.
The source follows the question rather than the investigation being limited to information from one type of organisation.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can anyone make a Freedom of Information request in the UK?
The Freedom of Information Act 2000 gives people a general right to request recorded information from public authorities covered by the Act. A requester does not normally need to explain why the information is wanted, although requests must meet applicable requirements and some information can lawfully be withheld.
Can you make a UK FOI request from outside the UK?
The Freedom of Information Act does not generally restrict requests to UK residents. People outside the UK can therefore request information from authorities covered by the Act, subject to the normal legal requirements.
How long does a UK FOI request take?
Most public authorities should respond promptly and normally within 20 working days. Different provisions can apply in particular circumstances, including where additional time is required to consider the public-interest test (Information Commissioner's Office, 2026).
Do African countries have Freedom of Information laws?
Access-to-information law varies between African countries. Some countries have national legislation, while others have different or more limited arrangements. The African Commission's Model Law on Access to Information for Africa provides guidance that states can use when developing national legislation, but it is not itself a single access-to-information law applying automatically across the continent (African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, 2013).
How do I request information from the World Bank?
The World Bank operates an Access to Information system that allows members of the public to search for published material and request information held by the Bank, subject to its policy and specified exceptions. Certain refusals can also be appealed (World Bank Group, 2026a).
Can information be requested from the African Development Bank?
Yes. The African Development Bank's Disclosure and Access to Information Policy provides a mechanism for accessing information concerning the Bank's activities, subject to the policy's rules and exceptions (African Development Bank Group, 2012).
Does AfricaInfoBase rely only on FOI requests?
No. AIB's research approach has three levels: published information, interviews and field visits, and FOI or other Access to Information requests. An investigation may use one, two or all three depending on the subject and the evidence required.
How does AfricaInfoBase make sure its information is reliable?
AIB prioritises authoritative sources, compares evidence, distinguishes established facts from interpretation and provides references where appropriate. Interviews, field observations and records obtained through information requests can provide additional evidence when published information does not answer the full question.
References
African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights (2013) Model Law on Access to Information for Africa 2013. African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights. Available at: https://achpr.au.int/en/special-mechanisms-reports/model-law-access-information-africa-2013 (Accessed: 23 September 2026).
African Development Bank Group (2012) Bank Group Policy on Disclosure and Access to Information. Tunis: African Development Bank Group. Available at: https://www.afdb.org/en/disclosure-and-access-to-information (Accessed: 23 September 2026).
Freedom of Information Act 2000, c. 36. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/36/contents (Accessed: 23 September 2026).
Home Office (2026) Immigration system statistics data tables. GOV.UK. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/immigration-system-statistics-data-tables (Accessed: 23 September 2026).
Information Commissioner's Office (2026) Timescales. ICO. Available at: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/foi/guide-to-managing-an-foi-request/timescales/ (Accessed: 23 September 2026).
World Bank Group (2026a) Access to Information. World Bank Group. Available at: https://www.worldbank.org/ext/en/access-to-information (Accessed: 23 September 2026).
World Bank Group (2026b) Remittance Prices Worldwide. World Bank Data Catalog. Available at: https://datacatalog.worldbank.org/search/dataset/0037898/remittance-prices-worldwide (Accessed: 23 September 2026).
Author: AfricaInfoBase Editorial Team
Disclaimer: AfricaInfoBase provides journalism, research and public-interest information. Freedom of Information and Access to Information laws, policies, exemptions and procedures vary between countries and institutions and may change. Nothing on this page constitutes legal advice.
Comments
Post a Comment