REG): Sharing Knowledge on Community-Driven Development in Asia and the Pacific (Financed by the Republic of Korea E-Asia and Knowledge Partnership Fund)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Technical Assistance Consultant’s Report Project Number: 44151 April 2013 RETA 7543 (REG): Sharing Knowledge on Community-Driven Development in Asia and the Pacific (Financed by the Republic of Korea e-Asia and Knowledge Partnership Fund) Prepared by Raul P. Gonzales For Asian Development Bank This consultant’s report does not necessarily reflect the views of ADB or the Government concerned, and ADB and the Government cannot be held liable for its contents. (For project preparatory technical assistance: All the views expressed herein may not be incorporated into the proposed project’s design. ABBREVIATIONS ADB – Asian Development Bank BKM – badan keswadayaan masyarakat (community self-help organization) CBO community-based organization CDD – community-driven development CEAC – community empowerment activity cycle DMC – developing member country DSWD – Department of Social Welfare and Development FGD – focus group discussion KALAHI- – Kapit-Bisig Laban sa Kahirapan – Comprehensive and CIDDS Integrated Delivery of Social Services LGED – Local Government Engineering Department LGOP – Leading Group Office of Poverty Alleviation and Development (of the State Council) LGU – local government unit MDC – municipal development council MDF – municipal development forum MIBF Municipal Inter-barangay (intervillage) Forum NGO – non-government organization NUSSP – Neighborhood Upgrading and Shelter Sector Project O&M – operations and maintenance PMO – project management office PNPM – Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Mandiri Mandiri Perdesaan (National Program for Community Empowerment) PRC – People’s Republic of China PSA – participatory situation analysis RP4D – Rencana Pembangunan Pengembangan Perumahan dan Pemukiman di Daerah (Regional Development Plan for Housing and Settlement) SU – Saemaul Undong TLCC – town-level coordination committee UGIAP – Urban Governance Improvement Action Program UGIIP – Urban Governance and Infrastructure Improvement Project VGM – village general meeting WLCC – ward-level coordination committee GLOSSARY barangay – village Makamasang – People’s Response Tugon NOTE In this report, "$" refers to US dollars. 2 CONTENTS Page I. BACKGROUND 1 II. QUALITY AND SUSTAINABILITY OF SUBPROJECT INFRASTRUCTURE 3 III. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION 7 IV. THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 14 V. CDD IMPACTS ON GOVERNANCE 17 VI. SUMMING UP 23 VII. DESCRIPTION OF CDD PROJECTS STUDIED 26 A. Neighborhood Upgrading and Shelter Sector Project (Indonesia) 26 B. Saemaul Undong Movement (Korea) 27 C. Community-Driven Development Pilot (People’s Republic of China) 28 D. Urban Governance and Infrastructure Improvement Project (Bangladesh) 29 E. KALAHI-CIDSS Project (Philippines) 31 I. BACKGROUND 1. Introduced in the mid-90s, community-driven development (CDD) has gained recognition as an effective approach for addressing poverty, improving governance, and promoting inclusion. To date, CDD projects have been implemented in more than 100 countries, including countries in Asia and the Pacific. 2. The World Bank’s 2003 Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper Sourcebook describes CDD as an approach that gives community groups control over planning decisions and investment resources for local development projects. Similarly, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) has adopted the following five elements as the essential features of CDD: community focus, participatory planning and design, community control of resources, community involvement in implementation, and community-based participatory monitoring and evaluation to ensure downward accountability to the community. 3. Since 2001, ADB has financed more than 93 projects with CDD characteristics throughout Asia and the Pacific. A 2006 ADB study1 cited the high potential for scaling up CDD projects, but cautioned against adoption of cookie-cutter approaches that disregard local contexts. The study also stressed the importance of partnerships among practitioners and institutions on CDD design and implementation, through networks, joint learning events, staff exchange programs and joint missions, and joint research. 4. ADB’s RETA-7543: Sharing Knowledge on CDD in Asia and the Pacific seeks to build capacity of developing member countries (DMCs) to scale up CDD operations through (i) research and documentation of lessons learned on selected themes; (ii) a CDD knowledge and learning hub to share and disseminate information among practitioners, DMCs, and development partners; and (iii) helping to establish and strengthen informal and formal CDD networks within ADB and between ADB and external agencies to support CDD practitioners. 5. Towards this end, RETA-7543 has documented the experience of the following five CDD projects – CDD Pilot Program (People’s Republic of China), Neighborhood Upgrading and Shelter Sector Project (Indonesia), Saemaul Undong Movement (Republic of Korea), KALAHI- CIDSS Project (Philippines) and Urban Governance and Infrastructure Improvement Project (Bangladesh) – to determine the extent that CDD has contributed to service delivery and governance in the beneficiary communities.2 6. Four major areas were studied, namely: (a) quality and sustainability of community subproject infrastructure; (b) responsiveness of subprojects to local community needs and expressed demand; (c) accountability of local leaders and the extent that residents were able to influence the behavior of the leaders, in particular, the experience of communities in dealing with attempts to misappropriate project funds; and (d) the extent that participation in the CDD Project helped build the capacity of the local governments, specifically, in institutionalizing participatory modes of service delivery and enhancing transparency and accountability in the use of local resources. 1 ADB. A Review of Community Driven Development and Its Application to the Asian Development Bank. Unpublished. 2 See appendix for brief descriptions of the five CDD projects 2 7. The five case reports are country-specific and have been published individually. This synthesis paper examines the major cross-cutting issues and lessons of the five studies to inform a broader audience on CDD theory and practice. 3 II. QUALITY AND SUSTAINABILITY OF SUBPROJECT INFRASTRUCTURE A. Finding 1. In general, the community subproject infrastructure delivered by the five CDD projects is of good quality and considered satisfactory by village residents. 8. In Indonesia, the research team observed that community infrastructure funded by the Neighborhood Upgrading and Shelter Sector Project (NUSSP) appeared to be in like-new condition or, at the minimum, lacking any serious damage even after five years from date of completion. The high quality of NUSSP-funded infrastructure was attributed to the following factors: (a) planning was carefully conducted, (b) construction activities were closely supervised by technical facilitators (who were themselves infrastructure experts), and (c) community members who undertook the construction activities perceived the output as being not only for them, but also for their offspring. The significant sense of ownership among village residents of NUSSP subprojects caused construction activities to be performed carefully and wholeheartedly, particularly for the subprojects that were self-implemented by community members. 9. The same quality of subproject infrastructure was also observed in the Kapit-Bisig Laban sa Kahirapan – Comprehensive and Integrated Delivery of Social Services (KALAHI-CIDSS) project in the Philippines. Key informants from the study villages mentioned the use of standard materials and the supervision and technical assistance of project staff and local government officials as the two most important factors that account for the high construction quality. Other contributory factors included: (i) appropriate and well-designed plans and cost estimates; (ii) dedicated and trained project managers and workers; (iii) strict compliance with construction standards; (iv) transparency and continuous monitoring (residents are kept informed of implementation progress); (v) a sense of accountability among those responsible for construction; and (vi) timely action on suspected anomalous transactions. B. Finding 2. Operations and maintenance (O&M) activities to maintain subproject infrastructure is uneven across the five country projects. 10. In Indonesia, the research team noted the absence of systematic scheduling of maintenance by the community self-help organizations (BKMs)3 in some of the study villages. In other villages, maintenance was performed using voluntary contributions from individual community members or funds from the village budget. Variations in the extent of community commitment for maintenance are considered to be closely related to the level of participation during the construction phase. Villages with minimal participation during construction tended to have lower ownership (and a lower sense of obligation towards maintenance) and vice versa. 11. Variation in maintenance practices was attributed to the tendency of BKMs, the village institutions utilized for NUSSP implementation, to function only when required by externally- initiated development initiatives and to lapse into dormancy when the required infrastructure works had been completed. This led the Indonesian research team to conclude that BKMs are not really community institutions as such but rather, agencies that exist at the insistence of external forces. As such, they are unsustainable since beneficiary communities will subsidize 3 badan keswadayaan masyarakat