Local Governance Mapping Is Carried out in the Framework of STAR 2 Project, Implemented by UNDP, with the Support of Italian, Sweedish and Swiss Government and USAID
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Local Governance Mapping Methological Note Local Governance Mapping is carried out in the framework of STAR 2 project, implemented by UNDP, with the support of Italian, Sweedish and Swiss Government and USAID Prepared by Institute for Development Research and Alternatives With the contribution of: Mithulina Chatterjee – International Expert on National Governance Mapping Vladimir Malkaj – Program Specialist, UNDP Edlira Muhedini – Project Manager STAR2, UNDP Anila Shehu - Project Coordinator STAR2, UNDP 1 Table of Contents 1. Analytical Framework for Local Governance Mapping ......................................................................... 5 1.1 Governance Dimensions ............................................................................................................... 5 1.1.1 Effectiveness and Efficiency .................................................................................................. 5 1.1.2 Transparency and Rule of Law .............................................................................................. 4 1.1.3 Accountability ....................................................................................................................... 4 1.1.4 Participation and Citizen Engagement .................................................................................. 5 1.2 Scoring approach .......................................................................................................................... 5 2. Research Methods .............................................................................................................................. 30 3. Desk Research ..................................................................................................................................... 31 4. Qualitative research ............................................................................................................................ 32 4.1 Municipality Focus Groups .......................................................................................................... 32 4.2 Semi-structured interviews ......................................................................................................... 32 4.3 Community Dialogues ................................................................................................................. 33 5. Quantitative Research......................................................................................................................... 37 5.1 Sampling ...................................................................................................................................... 37 5.1.1 STEP1 - Selection of the Primary Sampling Units ................................................................ 39 5.1.2 STEP 2 – Selection of the Household .................................................................................. 40 5.1.3 STEP3 - Selection of the respondent ................................................................................... 43 5.2 ELECTRONIC DATA COLLECTION ................................................................................................. 43 5.3 Lot 1 and Lot 2............................................................................................................................. 44 6. Work Calendar .................................................................................................................................... 30 ANNEX A. Moderation Guide for Municipality Focus Groups ..................................................................... 32 Sample Exercise ...................................................................................................................................... 44 ANNEX B. Semi-Structured Interview Guide ............................................................................................... 45 ANNEX C. Community Dialogue Moderation Guide ................................................................................... 52 ANNEX D. Citizen Report Card Questionnaire ............................................................................................ 64 ANNEX E. Sample Calculation and Distribution for each Cluster ................................................................ 76 2 1. Analytical Framework for Local Governance Mapping For the purpose of this assignment an Analytical Framework of Local Governance has been developed. This framework is based on the methodology and structure of Local Governance Barometer (LGB) adopted within the context of Albania local government development. The model of Local Governance Barometer (LGB) includes a set of localized governance indicators that are used by the various stakeholders’ groups to score performance on governance measures at the local level. This method emphasizes awareness raising and constructive dialogue around governance and presents an overview of governance strength and weaknesses. The Analytical Framework based on LGB ensures representation of actors from both government (key local government staff) and non-government actors (citizens and CSOs). It concentrates more on the ‘interactive’ dimensions of governance, aiming to offer a mapping for each municipality. The focus will be given to the following four dimensions: Effectiveness and Efficiency, Transparency and Rule of Law, Accountability Participation and Citizen Engagement. Since gender as well as vulnerable social groups perspectives are critical for the quality of the mapping exercise, within the four dimensions an important consideration has been given to Equity in access to resources, opportunities and decision-making processes for all citizens etc. The instruments used for this approach will collect data from several sources: a) Desk Research (DR), b) Citizen Report Card (CRC) Survey, c) Municipal Official Focus Groups (MFG) and d) Community Dialogues (CD). 1.1 Governance Dimensions 1.1.1 Effectiveness and Efficiency Effectiveness implies the development/ financial planning and coordination capacity of local self- government to respond to citizens’ priorities in delivery of services and economic development. Local self- government produces and delivers quality services to people making best use of public resources in meeting its stated development objectives. Efficiency means cost effective use of limited financial and 3 human resources without waste, delays or misuse (corruption). Effectiveness means that limited resources contributes maximum to municipal development objectives and priorities while efficiency means that this limited resources are used the right manner. This dimension will include several criteria such as the: vision and planning of local administration (if the latter have gone through a participatory and inclusive process), financial management (planning and management of local financial resources), informed decision making (based on reliable and updated information), coordination and cooperation (the municipality interactions with central government, donors, and other municipalities) and the level of satisfaction toward services (quality and accessibility of public service delivery) 1.1.2 Transparency and Rule of Law Transparency ensures that local self-government’s action, decisions and decision-making processes are made public and open for examination/questioning by the people who are directly affected by those decisions. It is associated with unfettered access to timely and reliable information on decisions and performance. Rule of Law includes the “terms of reference” of the social contract whereby citizens live together and are governed by the public authority. Rule of law prevails when terms of the social contract are respected by citizens and the government, where such terms are applied either through voluntary cooperation or legal procedures and institutions, and when violations of the terms of the contract are punished. For the needs of this framework this dimension is represented by the following criteria: transparency (if public service delivery performance and resources planning and utilization are available and accessible for citizens), rule of law regarding the Institutional Legal Framework at local level (whether or not a relevant legal framework exists and if it’s effective) and incidence of corruption (existence of anti-corruption policies, corruption perception level, corruption experience level). 1.1.3 Accountability Accountability is defined as the ability of the municipality to justify and report its actions to citizens, council and address citizens’ complaints. Local self-government is able to show and explain and be held 4 accountable for its decisions based on agreed targets and objectives to the public at large. It is associated with the idea of answerability. The accountability dimension is composed by the following criteria: checks and balances (whether or not are there institutions, which have control, supervision, and sanction power on the local administration), recourse (if there are in place various mechanisms for complaints and citizens’ input and if they are effective) and government responsiveness (level of municipal responsiveness to field inquiries and complaint) 1.1.4 Participation and Citizen Engagement Active participation of all citizens (inclusion of different groups) and civil society in local development planning for the appropriate allocation of resources in local government interventions. This involves the active, free and meaningful involvement of men, women and other groups from the