The EITI leverages a multi-stakeholder model in which government, civil society and business collaborate to improve the quality of resource governance in participating countries. Like other multi-stakeholder initiatives that aim to improve public governance through information disclosure and civic participation, this model relies on an assumption that civil society participation in the process improves EITI outcomes. This assumption is tested through comparative analysis of data from 63 EITI Validation processes. The results indicate that civil society participation has a small but statistically significant correlation with EITI outcomes related to the rules and comprehensiveness of information disclosure, quality assurance processes, public debate, and most clearly in regard to the reforms that follow from the recommendations in Validations. There are, however, important differences between civil society's contributions to different outcomes, and whether or not civil society participation takes place within the multi-stakeholder group (MSG). Notably, restrictions on MSG participation are found to have a strong moderating effect on civil society's contributions to EITI outcomes, but restrictions on national civic space do not. The results suggest that the discourse surrounding the EITI has been overly simplistic in how it has considered the role of civil society and civic space, and would benefit from more precise consideration of different types of civil society engagement with national EITI processes.

EITI利用多方利益相关者模型，在该模型中，政府，民间社会和企业进行协作，以提高参与国的资源治理质量。与其他旨在通过信息披露和公民参与来改善公共治理的多方利益相关者倡议一样，该模型也基于这样一种假设，即公民社会参与该过程可改善EITI成果。通过对来自63个EITI验证过程的数据进行比较分析来测试该假设。结果表明，公民社会的参与与EITI成果之间的联系很小，但在统计上具有显着意义，EITI的成果涉及信息披露的规则和全面性，质量保证流程，公众辩论，并且最明显的是根据审定中的建议进行的改革。但是，民间社会对不同成果的贡献与民间社会参与是否在多利益相关方团体（MSG）中发生之间存在重要差异。值得注意的是，发现限制味精参与对民间社会对EITI成果的贡献具有很强的调节作用，但对国家公民空间的限制却没有。结果表明，围绕EITI进行的讨论在考虑公民社会和公民空间的作用方面过于简单，并且会受益于对不同类型的公民社会参与国家EITI程序的更精确的考虑。以及民间社会的参与是否在多利益相关方团体（MSG）中进行。值得注意的是，发现限制味精参与对民间社会对EITI成果的贡献具有很强的调节作用，但对国家公民空间的限制却没有。结果表明，围绕EITI进行的讨论在考虑公民社会和公民空间的作用方面过于简单，并且会受益于对不同类型的公民社会参与国家EITI程序的更精确的考虑。以及民间社会的参与是否在多利益相关方团体（MSG）中进行。值得注意的是，发现限制味精参与对民间社会对EITI成果的贡献具有很强的调节作用，但对国家公民空间的限制却没有。结果表明，围绕EITI进行的讨论在考虑公民社会和公民空间的作用方面过于简单，并且会受益于对不同类型的公民社会参与国家EITI程序的更精确的考虑。