Foreword One of the main roles of the UN Development Programme (UNDP) is to provide knowledge, policy advice, advocacy guidance and technical support in the field of democratic governance. As part of UNDP, the Bureau for Development Policy, through the Democratic Governance Group, is focused on strengthening linkages among international democratic governance principles, related global discussions, and UNDP operational activities at the national and local levels.
The current efforts of UNDP are oriented around supporting the most effective public institutions and ownership at all levels, and assisting the design and implementation of policies and programmes that can contribute to sustainable human development, the achievement of the Millennium Devel- opment Goals (MDGs) and the reduction of inequality. The success of these actions depends largely on the quality of national and local governance.
Local governance is the first pillar of this publication. It comprises the systems of values, policies and institutions at the local level by which a society organizes collective decision-making and action re- lated to political, economic, socio-cultural and environmental affairs, through the interaction of local public institutions, civil society and the private sector. Good local governance includes respect for human rights, inclusive participation, administrative and bureaucratic capacity and efficiency, and accountable and responsive governing institutions.
The second pillar of this publication, decentralization, is a political as well as a technical process. Effective decentralization brings decision-making closer to citizens, and can yield programmes and services that better address local needs and demands. I am glad to present this publication, Local Governance and Decentralization: Programme Experiences and Views from the Field, which results from widespread participation in a UNDP network discussion entitled “Towards a Local Governance and Development Agenda: Lessons and Challenges.” More than 150 UNDP local governance practitioners, together with colleagues from the UN Capital Development Fund (UNCDF), United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG), the UN Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT), and experts from other international organizations and research institutes, took part in this global discussion at the end of 2007. It broke previous records for participation for UNDP e-discus- sions, and it made possible the production of this publication, which offers the opportunity to think about the relationships, experiences and challenges in local governance and decentralization that are relevant to our work.
Local Governance and Decentralization: Programme Experiences and Views from the Field aims to sum- marize and disseminate this interesting e-discussion, and to link people, knowledge products and projects related to these relevant topics, from the local to the global area and vice versa. I hope that it will be useful to a broad audience. Its views, approaches and strategies should contribute to current debates, and lead to more effective support from UNDP, UNCDF and UN-HABITAT in helping societ- ies attain high-quality local governance. Good local governance must be the main vehicle to reach social inclusion, the reduction of inequality and sustainable human development at the local level.
Olav Kjorven Assistant Secretary-General and Director, Bureau for Development Policy, UNDP Acknowledgements
This publication would not have been possible without the willingness of individuals participating in the 2007 UNDP network discussion, “Towards a Local Governance and Development Agenda: Les- sons and Challenges,” to present often detailed responses to questions posed by the moderators (see list of contributors on page iii).
The discussion moderators played essential roles, namely, Rafael Tuts, Chief of the Training and Ca- pacity Building Branch at UN-HABITAT; Emilia Saiz, Director of Statutory Issues and Institutional Rela- tions at UCLG; Mr. Kadmiel Wekwete, Director of Local Development at UNCDF; Lenni Montiel, Senior Policy Advisor in the Democratic Governance Group at UNDP; and Monjurul Kabir, Knowledge Net- work Facilitator for Democratic Governance at UNDP. Their contributions are appreciated.
This document has benefited also from comments and suggestions of many other colleagues. Spe- cial acknowledgements go to: Antonio Pelaez Tortosa at the University of Warwick in the United Kingdom; Christian Hainzl at UNDP Bosnia and Herzegovina; Diego Antoni at UNDP Mexico; Flo- rian Steinberg at the Asian Development Bank; Freddy Justiniano, Beat Rohr, Juan Manuel Salazar and Clara Inés Luna at the UNDP Sub-regional Resource Facility in Panama; Hachemi Bahloul at the UNDP Regional Bureau for Europe and the CIS; Joachim Hoettcke at the African Development Bank; Joachim Nahem with the UNDP Democratic Governance Group and Oslo Governance Centre; Jo- nas Rabinovitch at the UN Department for Economic and Social Affairs; Nadine Bushell at the UNDP Sub-regional Resource Facility for the Caribbean; Paul Schuttenbelt at Urban Solutions; and Serdar Bayriev at the UNDP Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery. ii
In transforming the 400-plus pages of the network discussion into a more concise publication, Lenni Montiel served as publication manager and advisor. Gretchen Luchsinger wrote the text under his guidance; Cynthia Spence produced the graphic design. Aleida Ferreyra and Pablo Gago coordinated production. Contributors to the E-Discussion
UNDP Headquarters, Regional Offices, Emelyne Bahanda, UNDP Congo-Brazzaville Specialized Centres Ernesto Bautista, UNDP Pacific Centre Zena Ali-Ahmad, Sub-regional Resource Facility for the Arab States Allassoum Bedoum, UNDP Chad Joseph Annan, Bureau for Development Policy Trevor Benn, UNDP Guyana Kwame Asubonteng, Johannesburg Regional Centre Joachim Bonin, UNDP Tanzania Hachemi Bahloul, Bratislava Regional Center Helga-Bara Bragadottir, UNDP Fiji Neus Bernabeu, Regional Bureau for Latin America and the Caribbean Emmanuel Buendia, UNDP Philippines Nadine Bushell, Sub-regional Resource Facility for the Caribbean Bill Chanza, UNDP/UNCDF Malawi Maleye Diop, Johannesburg Regional Centre Durafshan Chowdhury, UNDP/UNCDF Bangladesh Sonia Duran, Sub-regional Resource Facility, Panama Mathieu Ciowela, UNDP Djibouti Daniel Esser, Bureau for Development Policy Lealem Berhanu Dinku, UNDP Sudan Nicoletta Feruglio, Bratislava Regional Centre Herdade dos Santos, UNDP Timor-Leste Mona Haidar, Sub-regional Resource Facility for the Arab States Samia El Nager, UNDP Sudan Arun Kashyap, Bureau for Development Policy Khalif Farah, UNDP Somalia Terry Kiragu, Bureau for Development Policy Ernest Fausther, UNDP Lesotho Olav Kjorven, Bureau for Development Policy Bayramgul Garabaeva, UNDP Turkmenistan Bernardo Kliksberg, Regional Bureau for Latin America and the Caribbean Shirin Gul, UNDP Pakistan Henrik Fredborg Larsen, Regional Centre, Bangkok Chencho Gyalmo, UNDP/UNCDF Bhutan Oksana Leshchenko, Regional Bureau for Europe and the CIS Christian Hainzl, UNDP Bosnia and Herzegovina Deodat Maharaj, Sub-regional Resource Facility for the Caribbean Rania Hedeya, UNDP Egypt iii Siphosami Malunga, Oslo Governance Centre Cristina Hernandez, UNDP Senegal Jockely Mbeye, Johannesburg Regional Centre Katharina Huebner, UNDP Cambodia Claudia Melim-Mcleod, Oslo Governance Centre Jean Kabahizi, UNDP Burundi Lenni Montiel, Bureau for Development Policy Rezaul Karim, UNDP Cambodia Joachim Nahem, Oslo Governance Centre Nicolas Kazadi, UNDP Guinea Christophe Nuttall, UNDP Switzerland Joanna Kazana, UNDP Ukraine Hafiz Pasha, Regional Bureau for Asia and the Pacific Karounga Keita, UNDP Democratic Republic of Congo Dejana Popic, Regional Centre, Bangkok Eloi Kouadio, UNDP Congo-Brazzaville Ernest Rwamucyo, Bureau for Development Policy Maribel Landau, UNDP Panama Timothy Scott, Human Development Report Office Benoit Larielle, UNDP/UNCDF Rwanda Jurgita Siugzdiniene, Bratislava Regional Center Charlotte Laurence, UNDP Guinea Momoudou Touray, Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery Sascha Le Large, UNDP Comoros Moises Venancio, Regional Bureau for Europe and the CIS Krenar Loshi, UNDP Kosovo Lara Yocarini, Bureau for Development Policy Paul Lundberg, UNDP Afghanistan Klodiana Marika, UNDP Albania UNDP Country Offices Cristina Martin, UNDP Mexico Fredrick Abeyratne, UNDP Sri Lanka Israel Jacob Massuanganhe, UNDP/UNCDF Mozambique Hassan Ali, UNDP Djibouti Daimu S. Mkwawa, UNDP/UNCDF Tanzania Masood Amer, UNDP Afghanistan Paula Mohamed, UNDP Barbados Diego Antoni, UNDP Mexico Subinay Nandy, UNDP China Alexander Avanessov, UNDP Armenia Eiko Narita, UNDP Fiji Isabel Aviles, UNDP Nicaragua Sharad Neupane, UNDP Nepal Other UN Agencies Eugene Nkubito, UNDP Rwanda Steve Glovinsky, UN Country Team India Tomislav Novovic, UNDP Serbia Serdar Bayriyev, UNFPA Turkmenistan Nargis Nurullokhoja, UNDP Tajikistan Stuart Gilman, UNODC (headquarters) Madeleine Oka-Balima, UNDP Côte d’Ivoire Shahmahmood Miakhel, UNAMA Afghanistan Harbi Omar, UNDP Djibouti Amitava Mukherjee, UNESCAP Eric Opoku, UNDP Ghana Berta Pesti, UNITAR Ram Krishna Pokharel, UNDP Nepal Jonas Rabinovitch, UNDESA Liliana Proskuryakova, UNDP Russia Joachim Theis, UNICEF East Asia and the Pacific Regional Office Alvaro Rodriguez, UNDP Pakistan Barbara Wolff, UNV (headquarters) Abdou-Salam Saadi, UNDP Comoros Farhan Sabih, UNDP Pakistan Other International Agencies Jaysingh Sah, UNDP Ukraine Robert Daughters, Inter-American Development Bank Narine Sahakyan, UNDP Armenia Pelle Persson, World Bank Oumar Sako, UNDP Central Africa Republic Carlos Santiso, African Development Bank Juan Manuel Salazar, UNDP Colombia Florian Steinberg, Asian Development Bank Alessia Scano, UNDP Russia Dominique Steverlynck, European Commission Leyla Sen, UNDP Turkey Ram Shankar, UNDP Maldives Research Institutes, NGOs, Consulting Firms Pradeep.Sharma, UNDP Timor-Leste Claudio Acioly, The Institute for Housing and Urban Studies (The Mahesh Shukla, UNDP Afghanistan Netherlands) Rafeeque Siddiqui, UNDP Nepal Janet Awimbo, Impact Alliance (Kenya) Richard Batley, University of Birmingham (United Kingdom) Michael Soko, UNDP Zambia iv Emmanuel Soubiran, UNDP/UNCDF Mauritania Enrique Cabrero Mendoza, CIDE (Mexico) Luigi N. Tessiore, UNDP Senegal Pierre Calame, IRG (France) Alfredo Texeira, UNDP Angola Ady P. Carrera Hernández, CIDE (Mexico) Somchai Ynesabai, UNDP Thailand Jörg Faust, German Development Institute Hou Xinan, UNDP China Juan Luis Gomez, Georgia State University (United States) Bert Helmsing, Institute of Social Studies (The Netherlands) UNCDF John Jackson, Capacity Building International (United Kingdom) Jenifer Bukokhe Wakhugu, UNCDF Uganda Jorge Martinez-Vazquez, Georgia State University (United States) Christian Fournier, UNCDF Senegal Alejandra Massolo, Women and Habitat Network of Latin America Trevor Kalinowsky, UNCDF Madagascar George Matovu, African Municipal Development Partnership (Zimbabwe) Aladeen Shawa, UNCDF Antonio J. Peláez Tortosa, University of Warwick (United Kingdom) Kadmiel Wekwete, UNCDF Thusitha Pilapitiya, Casals & Associates (Malawi) Michel Sauquet, IRG (France) UN-HABITAT Paul Schuttenbelt, Urban Solutions (The Netherlands) Alain Kanyinda Alvaro Ugarte Ubilla, INICAM (Peru) Sugumi Tanaka Nestor Vega Jimenez, FLACMA (Ecuador) Raf Tuts Marco Velasco, FLACMA (Ecuador) Martin Vielajus, IRG (France) Acronyms
AMICAALL: Alliance of Mayors’ Initiative for Community Action on AIDS at the Local Level CIDE: Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas FLACMA: Latin American Federation of Cities, Municipalities and Local Government Associations ILO: International Labour Organization INICAM: Instituto de Investigación y Capacitación Municipal IRG: Institute de recherché et débat sur la gouvernance IULA: International Union of Local Authorities MDGs: Millennium Development Goals NGO: Non-governmental organization OECD: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development OECD-DAC: OECD Development Assistance Committee SWAPS: sector-wide approaches UNAMA: UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan UCLG: United Cities and Local Governments UNCDF: UN Capital Development Fund UNDESA: UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs UNDP: UN Development Programme UNESCAP: UN Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific UNESCO: UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNFPA: UN Population Fund UN-HABITAT: UN Human Settlements Programme UNICEF: UN Children’s Fund UNIDO: UN Industrial Development Organization UNIFEM: UN Development Fund for Women UNITAR: UN Institute for Training and Research UNODC: UN Office on Drugs and Crime UNV: UN Volunteers USAID: US Agency for International Development Table of Contents
Foreword...... i Acknowledgements...... ii Contributors to the E-Discussion...... iii Acronyms...... v
Introduction...... 1 To Start: 15 Points for Quick Reference...... 3
Chapter 1: Basic Issues in Understanding Decentralization...... 5 What is decentralization?...... 5 Why are people talking about it?...... 6 The national context: factors to consider...... 7 Types of decentralization...... 9 Decentralization pitfalls and promises...... 11 What makes decentralization work?...... 13 Understanding the role of UNDP...... 15
Chapter 2: Aspects of Local Governance: Mapping the Terrain...... 17 What does local governance mean?...... 18 Why is local governance important?...... 19 Who’s involved?...... 19 Common local governance challenges...... 20 The special needs of conflict countries...... 26 A spotlight on fiscal issues...... 27 Urban and rural contexts...... 30
Chapter 3: Programming: Principles, Strategies, Experiences...... 32 Making an initial assessment: What’s happened? What’s needed?...... 33 A caution: hindrances to implementation and sustainability...... 35 Where to work: some entry points...... 36 Perspectives on capacity development...... 38 Country experiences...... 40 The national political arena...... 41 o Ongoing advocacy deepens policy dialogue and political interest...... 42 o Fostering buy-in from line ministry personnel...... 42 o A natural disaster and multiparty politics prompt policy evolution...... 42 o New territorial imbalances foster reconsideration of unitary systems...... 43 On the local level...... 43 o Pilots and long-term support achieve institutional change...... 44 o Planning for the poorest communities ...... 44 o An area-based approach runs into limitations of scale...... 45 o Experimenting with grass-roots community development to respond to emerging issues ..... 45 o Laying a foundation for peace through development and dialogue...... 46 Chapter 4. Making Links...... 47 Links between the local and national levels...... 47 Connecting to other public reforms or processes...... 51 Working on crosscutting issues...... 53 o Human rights...... 53 o Access to justice...... 56 o The MDGs...... 56 o Gender equality...... 57 o Human diversity...... 58 o Post-conflict recovery...... 59 o Environmental issues and climate change...... 61 o Anti-corruption initiatives...... 61 o HIV and AIDS...... 62
Chapter 5. Expanding the Circle of Partners...... 63 Adopting a strategy...... 63 Working as a UN team...... 64 Donor coordination...... 65 Sub-national, national and regional partnerships...... 67 Communities of practice...... 71
Chapter 6. What Skills Does a Country Team Need?...... 72 Political capacities...... 72 Technical competencies...... 73 Coordination skills...... 73
Chapter 7. Monitoring and Evaluation...... 74 Basic definitions...... 74 Indicators and measurement...... 75
Additional Resources...... 77
References...... 78
Boxes 1.1 Basic Decentralization Terms...... 6 1.2 Two Reference Points...... 7 1.3 Effective Decentralization: An Ideal Scenario...... 9 1.4 Poverty and Decentralization: How Strong Are the Connections?...... 11 1.5 Assessing the Depth of Political Will—Some Questions to Ask...... 13 1.6 Don’t Rush…...... 16 1.7 Lessons Learned from a Past Evaluation...... 16 2.1 What Is Local?...... 17 2.2 Growing Interest in Local Economic Development...... 18 2.3 Local Governance Traditions: Strong and Weak...... 21 3.1 Taking an Open Systems Approach...... 33 3.2 What Donors Are Doing...... 36 3.3 Working with Local Government Associations...... 37 3.4 General Guidelines to Support Local Governance Capacities...... 39 3.5 Champions for Local Governance...... 41 4.1 Delving into Disparities...... 59 4.2 Tools for Transparency...... 62 5.1 Partnership Principles from the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness...... 64 5.2 The Value of Civil Society and the Private Sector, Carefully Defined...... 68 5.3 Reaching Out to Traditional Authorities...... 69 7.1 An Open Systems Approach to Monitoring and Evaluation...... 75
Snapshots 1.1 Madagascar’s Strong Political Will, Mixed Record on Implementation...... 10 1.2 For the Arab States, a Governance Gap = a Development Gap...... 14 1.3 Close Analysis, Realism and Flexibility...... 15 2.1 The Issues at Stake: Four Local Governance Scenarios...... 25 2.2 Latin America’s Fiscal Decentralization Shortfalls...... 29 3.1 Intensive Dialogue Shapes a Forward-Looking Programme in Turkmenistan...... 34 3.2 Fostering Supply and Demand in Pakistan...... 35 4.1 A Pragmatic Approach in Bosnia and Herzegovina...... 54 4.2 Local Governance as Crucial for Managing Refugees...... 60 5.1 Regular Working Groups Table Common Concerns...... 65
Viewpoints 2.1 Choosing Assistance Strategies with Care...... 20 2.2 A Greater Focus on Participation Through Representation...... 23 2.3 Rethinking Democracy...... 24 2.4 Why Local Governance and Decentralization Can Help Solve Conflict...... 27 4.1 Bridging Local and National Planning...... 49 4.2 Extending the Economic Benefits of Trade...... 52 5.1 Contradictions in the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness...... 66 5.2 Non-State Service Providers—Filling the Gaps?...... 70 Introduction
UNDP hosts electronic network discussions that serve as virtual global policy forums for de- velopment practitioners and researchers to share ideas and experiences. Their contributions showcase the diversities and commonalities in today’s world, as a step towards deepening knowledge of solutions to development challenges. This format may be particularly valuable for the twin arenas of local governance and decentralization, which are large and complex, and where diversity can be only as far as the next municipality. The combination of multiple perspectives vividly illustrates that avoiding prescriptive or generalized strategies and paying careful attention to context are essential elements of effective international support.
he richness of current work on local governance and decentralization was on full dis- play during a two-month network discussion that took place at the end of 2007—the T source of much of this publication. The discussion, entitled “Towards a Local Gover- nance and Development Agenda: Lessons and Challenges,” broke previous records for partici- pation for UNDP e-discussions, with over 153 submissions arriving from dozens of countries in all regions of the world.
Participants used a two-part series of questions to explore how to improve international sup- port to national and local governments aiming for more effective local governance and sus- tainable local development. They included staff from multilateral and bilateral organizations, comprising a cross-section of UN agencies and the major development banks; as well as academic researchers and representatives of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) from northern and southern countries.
The discussion was hosted by UNDP’s Bureau for Development Policy, in collaboration with col- leagues from UNCDF, UN-HABITAT and UCLG. The spirit of partnership that prevailed fostered the exchange of perspectives and a renewed sense of how different parties can work together towards reducing some of the fragmentation that has characterized international support for lo- cal governance and decentralization, in line with the 2005 Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness and other recent international development commitments.
In order to consolidate and continue sharing the knowledge that emerged from the network discussion, this publication brings together some highlights with current research from other sources. UNDP’s own resources have been tapped, along with those offered by other organi- zations with significant experience in this field.
A huge amount has been written about local governance and decentralization. This publica- tion makes no claims to present new research, but it does offer a one-stop overview of the major issues at stake. By incorporating the findings of the network discussion, it has been tailored to the general programming requirements of UNDP and some other international development partners. It may be particularly valuable for programme staff who are new to the organization, have transferred into a new country programme, are returning to local gov- ernance and decentralization programming after time away, or work in other programme areas connected to governance. Structured for easy access to key pieces of information, it should serve as a reference guide to basic terms and concepts, and point towards strategic connections and overall directions for programmatic analysis. n brief, Chapters 1 and 2 outline aspects of decentraliza- international support has a role particularly in expanding tion and local governance, respectively, recognizing that capacities, sharing knowledge, piloting new methods and I these are distinct concepts. Connections between them systems, cultivating partnerships, fostering leadership, depend on the national context. Chapter 3 presents princi- and opening neutral space for national and local debates ples and entry points for programming, illustrated by country that build consensus on future directions. examples from the network discussion. Chapter 4 considers links among levels of government, public reform processes The primary focus of this publication is local governance, and crosscutting issues. A discussion of different partnership an area that has not always received adequate support in modes follows in Chapter 5, while Chapter 6 briefly lists some international development. This may be due in part to a of the skills that may be required for teams working on lo- longstanding emphasis on national level decentralization cal governance and decentralization programmes. Chapter 7 policies, with the implicit assumption that these lead to ef- highlights approaches to monitoring and evaluation. fective local politics, planning, service delivery and so on. It is also frequently assumed that building national gover- Woven throughout the text are informational boxes, along nance and capacities will be a panacea for local challenges. with “snapshots” detailing regional or country scenarios Experiences suggest that these notions are not automati- and “viewpoints” presenting thoughtful individual per- cally valid, however, often because localities do not have spectives from the network discussion. While some past the capacities and resources they require. At the same research on local governance and decentralization has time, even programmes focused mainly on local gover- been criticized as too anecdotal, this publication presents nance need to recognize national dimensions, especially country examples in part to illustrate the process of think- the potential impacts of policy shifts related to decentral- ing behind effective programmes. Namely, this involves ization or other public reform movements. understanding what can be a diverse, constantly chang- ing and interconnected array of variables. These call for Another deliberate choice made here is to stress the pri- flexible and creative support strategies that can adapt to macy of local governments in the broader arena of pro- risks, and grasp synergies and emerging opportunities. moting local development. Civil society and the private Programmes can integrate international knowledge, and sector are included in the definition of local governance, should be joined to the overall objectives of poverty re- given their contributions to service provision, local eco- duction and human development, but entry points must nomic viability, accountability and the extension of demo- be found within countries and localities themselves. cratic debate. But local governments are best positioned to offer participatory mechanisms open to all members of Today, the vast majority of governments—up to 80 percent a community. They can manage different interests, chan- by some estimates—are undergoing one or more forms of nel public funding, foster balanced development, provide political, administrative and/or fiscal decentralization. Un- policy inputs, and serve as critical links to national govern- derstanding of the potential value of local governance as ments. Without them, national governance as a whole will a mechanism for participation and effective development falter. Prospects for sustainable human development that planning continues to grow. As the network discussion reaches a broad cross-section of society will dim. clearly revealed, however, these very broad global pat- terns should not mask hugely disparate perceptions of Local government capacities can admittedly be weak, of- their usefulness or patterns of implementation. ten much more so than those on the national level. The fol- lowing chapters draw attention to some of the ways that Political, administrative and fiscal structures arise from na- UNDP and other international development partners can tional history and tradition, and are sustained by current contribute towards helping localities develop their abili- thinking and patterns of behaviour. Even with committed ties so that they can realize their essential roles in both national or local leadership and support, engagement governance and development. can be complex and politically sensitive, and as much a process of advocacy as technical advice. The network dis- cussion repeatedly chronicled how progress may not be linear or immediate, but it can evolve over time. Strategic To Start: 15 Points for Quick Reference
This publication, as a basic introduction to the issues faced by UNDP programme officers working on decentraliza- tion and local governance, elaborates on a number of issues and perspectives. For initial and ongoing reference, key points include:
1. Programmes may be geared towards specific 6. Local governments are central to local governance, local governance and decentralization outcomes, even where capacities require concerted but the overarching objectives remain poverty strengthening. Civil society and the private sector reduction and inclusive development. Not all have important roles, including filling gaps in times programmes have made this connection; it may of crisis, but they cannot replace government need to be deliberately underscored in initial functions and responsibilities over the longer term. analysis, implementation and evaluation. 7. Decentralization is not a panacea, although it 2. The starting point for local governance and has been treated as such in some development decentralization work is always the careful strategies. It unfolds at different rates, and may be consideration of local and national specificities, more advanced in some aspects, such as a legal since these determine entry points for support. framework, than others, such as fiscal transfers Political traditions, development models, cultural to local authorities. Without appropriate local conventions, and rural and urban particularities are governance capacities and resources, decentral- some of the issues to take on board. ization can lead to negative outcomes, including imbalances in local political power and shortfalls in 3. Local and national ownership is a guiding principle, services. fostering buy-in, coordination, and appropriate responses to local and national priorities. 8. Local governance and decentralization evolve in a constantly shifting political and social context. 4. Local governance and decentralization, while Holistic methods of analysis—such as the open requiring technical support, are primarily political systems approach—can yield a sense of how many processes. Underestimating their political nature different elements interact and affect each other. can undercut programme effectiveness. This approach entails prioritizing political analysis; 5. The concepts of local governance and decen- drawing connections across different aspects of tralization, at times used interchangeably, are local governance and decentralization, as well as to related but different concepts. Decentraliza- related political and public reform processes; and tion is primarily a national political, legislative, encouraging coordinated action by development administrative and fiscal process. Local governance partners. covers a full spectrum of local political and human 9. There are many entry points to support local development decisions at the local level, and governance and decentralization, including involves actors such as local government officials, different levels of government and crosscutting traditional authorities, civil society and the private issues such as human rights and gender equality. sector. Local governance can be affected by Although the larger picture should be kept in decentralization processes—for example, if local mind, working on one aspect of local governance governments are expected to provide services and decentralization does not necessarily require formerly offered through national institutions. including or excluding others—this determination should be driven by the national and/or local context. 10. The development of national and local capacities is 13. Partnership and coordination among national key to successful and sustainable local governance and international actors is particularly important and decentralization. There are numerous capacity for local governance and decentralization gaps in these areas; they require moving beyond programmes. The scale of the issues at stake can conventional training approaches. Capacity be large, and complicated by the fragmentation development strategies should incorporate a that has resulted from many different past broad understanding of how different capacities interventions and strategies, sometimes even interact to support or constrain each other; the within a single municipality. balance between capacity development supply 14. Multidisciplinary teams can be best placed to and demand; connections to policy shifts; implement local governance and decentral- variations in political and technical capacities; ization programmes that cut across different and the mix of capacities that extends across aspects of development, governance and public different levels of government, civil society and administration. These should draw on local and the private sector, as well as in their relationships international expertise, and encompass political, with each other. Interventions may require, but technical and coordination skills. are not limited to, organizational development, knowledge transfer, skills development and 15. Monitoring and evaluation, while guided by attitude change. UNDP corporate policy, should acknowledge the complexity of local governance and decentraliza- 11. Decentralization is always a long-term process. tion programmes, even if they do not capture Progress towards effective local governance will all aspects of them. Clear results may not be take time. Programme strategies and expectations measurable in the short term. Indicators should for results need to be framed accordingly. be chosen with the diversity of local and national 12. UNDP contributes relatively few resources to the realities in mind, with attention to principles such decentralization and local governance arenas, but as flexibility, participation and ownership. Local it does offer a multilateral, neutral platform for indicators should not simply duplicate national convening different stakeholders and considering indicators, although they may trace links between multiple perspectives on what can be politically local and national processes. charged issues. It is well placed to facilitate South-South knowledge exchanges through its experiences in countries facing a range of development situations. 1 B asic I Basic Issues in Understanding ssues
in U 1Decentralization nderstanding
UNDP’s democratic governance work includes a strong focus on local governance and decentralization. Many UNDP country programmes design strategies to help develop D
sub-national capacities for policy formulation, service delivery and resource manage- ecentrali ment; increase citizen participation and community empowerment; and reduce the forms of exclusion that prevent women, the poor and other groups from fully partici- z pating in local development. UNDP may also assist national efforts to improve the envi- ation ronment for local governance, including through support for decentralization policies, depending on national priorities and contexts.
This handbook draws on the global network discussion on local governance and de- centralization hosted by UNDP in 2007. Given the prominence of the decentralization debate in development discussions for some years now, the book opens with an over- view of decentralization trends and principles that may provide insights into current thinking and experiences. Subsequent chapters move into a more detailed discussion of assistance for local governance and development. In working on local governance and decentralization, it is essential to keep in mind that decentralization is not a pana- cea for improving sub-national governance or reducing poverty, although it may under some circumstances contribute to these objectives.
What is decentralization? Decentralization is a political and technical process that is closely tied to national histo- ries, priorities and capacities. A general description of decentralization is that it involves shifting a combination of political, fiscal and administrative responsibilities from cen- tral to sub-national governments, and, at times, civil society and the private sector (see Box 1.1 for definitions of common terms). Decentralization is often described as part of democratic governance. It should enhance the roles that decentralized authorities play in local development, and be conceptualized in terms of its impacts on the capabilities, accountability and responsiveness of local governance.
Perceptions about and experiences with decentralization vary hugely around the world. A starting point for defining what decentralization means in a given national context involves understanding the diverse political, economic, social and cultural ele- ments that will determine its course. On one level, decentralization requires the techni- cal adjustment of laws, systems, institutions and national capacities; because of this, it has commonly been viewed as predominantly a technical exercise. But it is also a deeply political process that can touch the heart of a polity and society, particularly if it goes far enough to realign political privilege and power, and redistribute control over resources. 1 B
Box 1.1: Basic Decentralization Terms asic I Some common concepts and definitions are: Delegation: A slightly deeper form of It considers the location and distribution ssues
decentralization than deconcentration, this of, for example, public service providers, in
Devolution: Considered the most thorough U grants some forms of administrative control and makes links with resource allocations form of decentralization, this involves the nderstanding to local agents that are not necessarily accordingly. formal, usually legal transfer of powers part of the delegating authority. A limited from the central government to local Amalgamation or consolidation: In transfer of accountability takes place, representatives. They are then able to make countries with a growing number of although it remains primarily with the D decisions on an array of public issues and municipal units, one strategy has been to ecentrali central authority. gain access to resources to fund actions combine smaller local governments, on accordingly. The subsidiarity principle: This empha- the theory that they may be more viable in z sizes that public policy decisions should be terms of raising and managing revenues, ation Deconcentration: This occurs when the made as close to the relevant community as and providing services. central government creates local units possible, with consideration for efficiency in to implement programmes and services Fragmentation: This is the opposite of fiscal allocations and service delivery. funded by centrally assigned resources. amalgamation, involving localities splitting The units remain accountable to central Territorial planning: Planning with a into smaller units. authorities. territorial or spatial perspective can take place at local, regional or national levels.
Decentralization is often discussed more than imple- political and public administrative mechanisms. Some mented, for reasons ranging from the reluctance of authoritarian regimes used the appearance of decentral- elites to cede political power to concerns about the sta- ization reforms to extend de facto central control. bility of new states. Despite being advocated as a means to achieve better service delivery, lower poverty rates Over the past decade, decentralization has received re- and more participatory governance, decentralization newed emphasis as part of a broader process of politi- has a mixed track record that mirrors the world’s widely cal and economic reform. This has unfolded against the disparate political and development circumstances. Af- backdrop of maturing political systems and economic ter several decades of debate and experimentation, it gains for many nations, along with increasing concern is clear that decentralization may be part of answering about widening disparities within and across countries. the central question of how to reform or modernize a Diverse systems of governance have now witnessed state—or it may not. Deliberating this question must greater demands for broad-based political participation, be a nationally owned and adapted process, although it transparency and accountability, the effective and equi- can draw on the accumulated international expertise of table provision of public services, and the protection the UN and other development partners. of human rights. This has been coupled with growing recognition of the value of locally focused development efforts in reducing poverty, and achieving national de- Why are people talking about it? velopment objectives and the MDGs.
The push for decentralization in developing countries be- ecentralization has also featured prominently gan in the 1950s, often in the form of institutional reform in discussions about making the state more programmes. Many were limited in their impacts. Local D efficient, including by reducing the size of the authorities were formed in some cases with no political central administration; the transformation from com- base or capacity to secure or manage resources. In newly mand to market economies; the need to manage con- independent countries, attention for many years went flicts stemming from ethnicity and/or geographical lo- towards the establishment and strengthening of central The national context: 1 B
Box 1.2: Two Reference Points asic factors to consider I Two important documents on includes provisions defining the scope Depending on the national context, de- ssues
decentralization and local governance of local self-government, along with
centralization advances in different ways in
issues are the European Charter of its legal and fiscal aspects. U and at varying speeds and degrees. Even nderstanding Local Self-Government and the UN within countries, different regions or lo- Guidelines on Decentralisation and the In 2007, UN-HABITAT’s Governing calities may face unique challenges or Strengthening of Local Authorities. Council approved a set of guidelines have diverse needs. Some countries may
that cover governance and democracy have explicit decentralization policies and D ecentrali The European Charter was issued by at the local level, powers and programmes; others do not, even as the the Council of Europe in 1985. Member responsibilities of local authorities, strengthening of local institutions is tak- states agreed that local authorities administrative relations between ing place. The following issues are relevant z ation are fundamental to democracy, and local authorities and other spheres to decentralization and can help in under- that citizens’ right to participate in of government, and the financial standing different national situations. public affairs can be most effectively resources and capacities of local exercised at the local level. The charter authorities. Existing structures of public administra- tion: In many developing countries, these bear the imprints of traditional systems of authority as well as former colonial pow- cation; the imperative of reaching all members of large ers. French-influenced systems tend to be highly central- populations; economic expansion and the potential of ized, with a balance between executive and legislative the private sector; and the challenges of responding to power. Those following the British model are generally rapid urbanization. Other push factors have been pres- less centralized and grounded in the legislative branch. sure from foreign aid donors and the diffusion of political Other influential traditions have arisen from the federal power taking place in some countries through the emer- system in the United States, including its relatively strong gence of multiparty political systems. executive branch. Northern European countries often stress the preeminence of local governments. Vestiges of oday it is clear that decentralization is not an easy, the Gandhian tradition in India have encouraged local au- formulaic or necessarily straightforward process. tonomy, while China’s history of central control continues To deliver on its potential, it must be more than T despite steps towards decentralized service provision. a reshuffling of administrative structures or a statement of political intent. A holistic reform agenda comprises A country’s past experiences with centralized or decen- elements such as participatory local governance, ac- tralized systems will likely influence perceptions of cur- countable and legitimate local government entities, a rent or future models, and shape political configurations well-formed definition of the value of local governance and rhetoric. in the overall national development process, the careful matching of responsibilities and revenues, a paradigm of Political will: The political dimensions of decentralization sustainable local economic development, and the kind make political will one of the most important determi- of spatial planning that can capture social and economic nants of its course and sustainability. Political will is influ- synergies between rural and urban areas (see Box 1.2 for enced by many, often interrelated incentives, especially two reference points). for decentralization as a complex and long-term process. See Box 1.5 for questions to indicate a general sense of One reason for interest in decentralization is that it is a prevailing tendencies. crosscutting process that can affect all the major social development sectors, along with poverty reduction goals, Laws and policies: These comprise general statutes, in- macroeconomic stability, infrastructure investments, and cluding in the constitution, that determine the political so on. The impacts can be positive or negative, however, apparatus and systems of public administration, as well as explored in the following pages. as those more specific to decentralization. For the latter, glect of central authorities, or in conflict situations where 1 B a national framework may be fully or partially in place to a central authority may not exist or may administer only asic I
guide the division of responsibilities and revenues, insti- part of a country. ssues tutional structures, accountability mechanisms, and so on. Common challenges, besides the absence of appro- The degree of decentralization: Decentralization process- in U priate laws and policies, include contradictions between es have been around for decades in some countries; in nderstanding different statutes, poor design and insufficient imple- others, they don’t exist. Other variations can be seen in mentation. the pursuit of the three levels of decentralization: politi- cal, administrative and fiscal (see the following section).
Local governance traditions and institutions: Local gov- These may or may not be well coordinated: A common D ecentrali ernance is explored in more detail in Chapter 2. In sum, if undesirable scenario is to decentralize administrative it encompasses the local traditions and institutions that responsibilities without full fiscal decentralization, for
moderate community affairs, providing services, dispute example. Differences between policy and practice mean z ation resolution, mechanisms for community participation, that an administrative model can appear to be decentral- and so on. These traditions and institutions may be for- ized on paper, while in fact it remains centrally operated. mal or informal, and traditional or modern. They should Local government structures may be established, but lack be assessed in terms of their current context and capaci- genuine local participation. ties, and their past history. See Box 2.3 for more on strong and weak traditions of local governance. Current capacities: The political, technical, institutional, administrative, financial and other capacities that affect Drivers of decentralization: Decentralization can be driven decentralization may vary across the national and sub- from the top, the bottom or both. Proponents can come national levels, as well as across regions and localities from the political system, existing government structures, within a country. Other capacity issues relate to civil so- civil society, the private sector, or other national or local ciety groups and the private sector. See Chapter 2 for a groups. Several participants in the UNDP network discus- more comprehensive treatment of these issues. sion emphasized the importance of having a “champion” for decentralization who has the political and/or techni- The stability of the state: States that are weak or threat- cal capacity to support the advancement of the process ened may exhibit centralizing tendencies as state au- (see Box 3.5). thorities attempt to reassert control. Destabilizing factors can comprise overly fractious politics, internal or exter- The reasons to pursue decentralization can range from a nal conflict, ethnic or regional tensions, natural disasters genuine commitment to local empowerment, to a cyni- and/or poor economic performance. cal manipulation of the process as a way to temporarily shore up donor or popular support. Issues such as quali- Population distribution: The distribution of rural and ur- fying for European Union accession may be in play for ban populations will influence public policy priorities, na- eastern and southeastern European countries. Political tional and local planning, and the structure of financing motivations in large part determine the extent of political flows. With strong links between rural and urban areas will, and consequently the suitability and sustainability of through migration and economic development, many decentralization processes. countries need development strategies that straddle both. Design, duress or default: Decentralization can be guided by deliberate political or legal commitments, or prompt- Countries that are large, populous and/or diverse have ed under duress, as central authorities seek ways to specific challenges in poverty reduction and service de- manage, for example, powerful calls for local or regional livery that may by nature mandate some level of decen- autonomy. A kind of decentralization by default takes tralization. place when centralized services and other forms of sup- port fail to reach localities and they end up fending for themselves. This can occur through the incapacity or ne- Types of decentralization Administrative decentralization transfers administra- 1 B tive decision-making, resources and responsibilities for asic ifferent aspects of decentralization are comple- I
select public services to sub-national levels. It can be part ssues mentary and interdependent. Some may be of civil service reform, and can be considered the most
more appropriate than others at various stages limited form of decentralization because it involves pub- in D U of a long-term decentralization process, with choices lic administrative systems functioning on behalf of the nderstanding driven by both technical and political rationales. As de- central government, rather than institutions controlled centralization evolves, transfers of power and respon- primarily by localities. sibility may need to be systematically renegotiated or reassessed (as food for thought, see Box 1.3 on an ideal Fiscal decentralization takes place through the realloca- D ecentrali scenario, and Snapshot 1.1 on one national scenario). tion of resources, including those within sector ministries, to sub-national governments. It can comprise both fiscal Decentralization takes three common forms. transfers, and the capacity of sub-national governments z ation empowered to raise and manage their own revenues. Lo- Political decentralization shifts political power and cal revenue sources can include: user charges for public authority to sub-national levels of government. The in- services; co-financing systems in which users provide gredients can include the separation by law of local and services or infrastructure through monetary or labour central authorities, the adaptation of public institutions contributions; property or sales taxes; intergovernmen- to local contexts, local elections and local autonomy in tal transfers of tax revenues from central to sub-national spending resources.
Box 1.3: Effective Decentralization: An Ideal Scenario
hile each country makes its own choices related to decentralization, it can be useful to reflect on what an “ideal” decentralization scenario could look like. Possible aspects include: W Overall —New community leadership is able to non-traditional service responsibilities, —The national government has shifted a emerge. such as assuring primary health care, basic significant measure of new authority to the —Local governments have the authority to education, public security, public utilities, local level and has clearly demonstrated design and use participatory mechanisms environmental protection and building the political will to decentralize. to receive community input. regulations.
—Reforms to the constitution or legal —Citizen access to government authorities Fiscal resources code have been enacted and are being and decision-making processes is legally —The central government is taking action implemented. protected through, for example, access to to ensure that the local system has access public documents. The political realm to the resources to match its functions, through intergovernmental transfers —Local officials are regularly elected, as Administration and/or local revenue-raising authority. required by law. —The central government has granted —Central government officials demonstrate —Elections are open and fair. local government clearly defined responsibilities that significantly concern increased concern for the development of —The political party system allows the communities and generate public interest locally generated revenue, for preventing participation of local citizen groups and in local affairs. inefficiencies or corruption, and for independents. finding alternative means, such as credit —Local governments are accorded functions —Local officials have the authority to pass markets, for local governments to secure of fundamentally local scope. laws or other legal norms on local affairs. financing. —Local governments take on a variety of Source: USAID 2000.
1 Madagascar’s Strong Political Will, Mixed Record on Implementation B asic I
In the UNDP network discussion, Trevor Kalinowsky tralization proponents, but at the same time this ssues from UNDCF Madagascar described shortfalls in a increased the central powers of the President.
climate of otherwise positive reforms: Only 20 percent of the population voted in the in U Snapshot 1.1 elections, mainly in the capital, underscoring the nderstanding ecentralization has been on the policy horizon fragility of democracy and limits of public engage- Din Madagascar for several decades, but mainly ment in this decision. Several presidential decrees as an expression of political intention. There were have followed that have created contradictions in no steps towards implementation or even well D the decentralization process, slowing progress and ecentrali articulated policy statements. making the issue a sensitive one.
In 2002, the arrival of a new President heralded z
A second challenge involves the weak capaci- ation a shift towards more concerted political will that ties of local governments. Many local leaders are manifested first in a policy statement on decen- poorly educated or even illiterate. Those with better tralization in 2005, followed closely by a 10-year training, often provided by international agencies, decentralization and deconcentration implemen- tend to move out of local government and into the tation plan. It emphasized decentralized levels of private sector. government, along with deconcentrated service delivery by central ministries. One innovation was The UN is well positioned to address these is- the idea to place special consultants in each minis- sues, which are being incorporated in the current try to coordinate service delivery with local policy programming framework. UNDP will continue to making. Another step was to elevate the Ministry support the ministry in implementing the national for Decentralization and Territorial Planning to a plan, while advocating for creating a permanent position directly under the President. system to routinely offer capacity development for 10 local officials. UNCDF is considering a programme On the surface, all of these developments seem to work on local government capacities related positive. But several challenges have arisen. First, to local economic development and land reform, a constitutional amendment eliminated provinces including through block grant financing. as a layer of government, seen as good by decen-
governments; and municipal borrowing. Own source rev- sponsibility for a specific sector or function. enues are essential for local autonomy. Spatial decentralization is the deliberate diffusion of Some other aspects of decentralization to consider may large, normally urban populations and activities, perhaps be the following. as part of a territorial planning exercise.
Divestment transfers public functions to voluntary, non- Finally, there are several ways of looking at the imple- governmental or private agencies. Transfer mechanisms mentation of decentralization policies. can run from temporary contracts to the full privatization of service provision. Asymmetric decentralization considers differences be- tween public service sectors and possibly also regions or Integrated decentralization refers to the transfer of municipalities. It may make sense to privatize water ser- tasks or authority to local “multipurpose” institutions that vices in an urban setting, but not in rural communities, coordinate activities within a given area. for example. Some regions may have a greater capacity to raise and manage local revenues than others. This ap- Sectoral decentralization describes the transfer of re- proach can, however, run into a political problem if there is a strong demand to treat all sub-national units equally. Decentralization pitfalls and promises 1 B asic he evidence for or against decentralization is
Policy synchronization or sequencing refers to balanc- I ssues ing the different types of decentralization to achieve max- frequently inconclusive. The economist Remy
Prud’homme (1994) refers to decentralization imum benefits. This includes looking at timing—some in
T U as a potent medicine that if taken in the right doses for policies may need to be enacted before others—and nderstanding implementation capacities. Mistakes are typically made the right diseases can heal, but if taken improperly can in this process when there is a mismatch in the degree cause harm. of decentralization of different but interrelated functions. Certain notions about decentralization have circulated This can occur, for example, when the central government D that need to be considered with care. One common as- ecentrali decentralizes a service, but continues to determine all sumption, for example, is that decentralization will im- civil service employment policies and stipulates service prove the rate of poverty reduction, since local communi- delivery parameters. Policy synchronization also looks at z ties are best equipped to decide what is most suitable for ation the nature of a function, the political landscape and ad- their development (see Box 1.4). Another idea is that de- ministrative capacities. The local provision of health ser- centralization leads to better governance and the more vices, for instance, needs to be coordinated with national efficient use of public expenditures. These outcomes, health concerns such as consistent immunization and the however, depend not just on decentralization per se, but provision of family planning.
Box 1.4: Poverty and Decentralization: How Strong Are the Connections?
ecentralization can be linked to the individual country contexts, development Some attempts are now being made to Dcommitment to improve governance conditions or service sectors. Decentralization study the intersections between poverty 11 at all levels, to support democratic proponents have generally focused more reduction and decentralization in a more practices, and to bolster effective and on overarching issues such as policy and concerted fashion, and to begin defining efficient public administration. This institutional design and the efficiency of some of the basic elements of “pro-poor is rooted in the recognition that local service delivery, assuming that poverty decentralization.” For UNDP country democracy and decision-making can reduction would follow. While this can be programmes, this underscores the need provide programmes and services that are the case, theoretically, national and local for careful analysis in decentralization suitable for local needs, and will contribute contexts and the many variables at work in advocacy strategies. to reducing poverty and achieving the decentralization processes are not always MDGs. Some recent research, however, has connected in a straightforward fashion. The International Monetary Fund (Brixiova questioned whether or not decentralization et al. 2003) has surveyed research generally produces these benefits. A recent At the same time, economic literature on suggesting that a positive correlation can study by the Organisation for Economic poverty has said little on how decentralization exist between political decentralization Co-operation and Development (OECD can achieve poverty reduction objectives and the human development index. Fiscal 2004) surveyed 19 countries and found that through the provision of opportunities decentralization may improve performance two-thirds reported somewhat negative and capabilities, and the promotion of on health, when accompanied by higher or negative impacts on poverty from participation, security and the rights of the sub-national spending; in particular, infant decentralization. poor and excluded. Economic development mortality rates have declined in some poor and poverty reduction are still widely viewed countries. In contrast, however, infant To date, much of the evidence suggesting as central government concerns, although mortality has worsened in some middle- that decentralization contributes to poverty the concept of local economic development is income countries. A study on education reduction has been anecdotal, or specific to gaining ground (see Box 2.2). found that decentralization policies cont. 1 B
Box 1.4: Poverty and Decentralization: How Strong Are the Connections? cont. asic I are successful when local governments he OECD suggests that donors use that might specify service delivery norms to ssues
raise their own revenues, communities these criteria to differentiate between ensure the access of the poor. Tax structures T in exert pressure for decentralization, and countries that are capable of pro-poor could be strengthened and linked to the U nderstanding there is adequate or quickly developed local decentralization and those that are not. benefits provided to local residents, while administrative capacity. Assistance to the former might involve including measures to protect those with coordinated budget support, an emphasis the lowest incomes. Donors could also
The OECD survey describes four background on national ownership, and the facilitation assist in the analysis of whether or not D ecentrali variables that need to be analysed for of greater communication between central intergovernmental transfers are consistent the potential impacts of decentralization and local authorities, and civil society. with poverty reduction efforts and the policies on poverty: country setting Countries with more limited capacity pro-poor distribution of finance, and help z ation (including population densities, might benefit more from support for in strengthening systems as needed. In infrastructure and inequalities across deconcentration as a first step towards tandem, local governments might benefit regions); the capacity of local actors, and decentralization, community participation from developing a range of financial the degree of accountability and legal and local capacity development, and planning, budgeting and investment enforcement; existing social institutions, further research on the design of pro-poor capacities. including relationships with excluded decentralization strategies. groups; and the political power structure. The paper underlines that A paper on fiscal decentralization intergovernmental fiscal policy must be The survey also identifies four elements prepared by the University of Georgia in thought of as a system, with the different relevant to poverty reduction during the United States for the US Agency for pieces fitting together—making one-off the process of decentralizing: the ability International Development (USAID) (Boex reforms unlikely to be successful. To have and willingness to carry out reforms, et al. 2005) proposes that donors support the potential to contribute to poverty 12 transparency and participation, the the sound assignment of expenditure reduction, fiscal decentralization must be potential for elite capture and corruption, responsibilities in the context of broader coupled with strong local governance that and policy coherence encompassing both poverty reduction strategies, and the promotes participation and accountability. other national reforms and donor initiatives. development of regulatory frameworks
also on effective local governance, management and de- Pitfalls: velopment, and surrounding political dynamics. • Shortfalls and inefficiency in service provision
n a general way, it is possible to describe some of the • Widening of disparities, including within and among pitfalls and promises that may be associated with de- regions, and between rural and urban areas I centralization. These may be important in analysing • “Elite” capture that perpetuates local forms of exclusion political ambitions for reform processes, or as part of de- • Reassertion of traditional forms of discrimination against termining entry points for support. They will likely vary women or excluded groups over time, and may need to be factored into short- and long-term programme planning frameworks. See the fol- • Loss of confidence when local systems fail to deliver lowing section for a discussion on the factors that sup- • Greater difficulty in managing macroeconomic stability port successful decentralization. • Reduced fiscal efficiency • Loss of economies of scale gained from central government provision of services • Increased opportunities for corruption What makes decentralization work? 1 B asic • Poor sequencing that shifts responsibilities without The technicalities and mechanics of decentralization— I resources, or fails to build on the potential synergy of designing appropriate structures tailored to national pri- ssues different types of public sector reforms
orities, ensuring that different phases build on each other in
and developing new capacities—are critical components. U • Capacity constraints nderstanding But political currents and configurations deserve equal weight. Rhetorically, governments can present many Promises rationales for moving forward with decentralization, in- • Greater local participation that contributes to political
cluding those meant to advance a human development D
renewal ecentrali agenda. In reality, political agendas will likely predomi- • Stronger, deeper democracy nate. These may be connected to the legitimacy of the state, the management of different constituencies, the • The emergence of local leadership z relations between the centre and sub-national areas, ation • Increased accountability, from the ground up electoral processes and political party constellations, • Greater transparency among other issues. • Increased institutional capacity any contributors to the network discussion • More effective service provision noted that they worked in countries where po- • Services tailored more precisely to local demands and M litical statements are routinely made in support needs of decentralization, but the process itself only goes so far. • More efficient use of local resources Whatever its motivation, genuine political will manifests in concrete ways. Strong political will is generally demon- • More targeted economic development strated by a clearly stated desire for reform, and actions • Easing of conflict flashpoints through increased autonomy such as the passage and implementation of legislation. 13 • The incubation of pilot projects driven by local Weak political will appears in lip service to decentraliza- communities that can be replicated in other localities tion objectives, the absence of laws and strong vested interests. See Box 1.5 for questions to gauge political will, and Snapshot 1.2 for a regional experience.
Box 1.5: Assessing the Depth of Political Will — Some Questions to Ask
—Is decentralization a top political priority —Is decentralization required in the opportunities could come from steps and defined as such in public statements constitution or by law, or is it an issue of towards decentralization? and political platforms? public policy? —If political power shifts, is support for or —Are there prominent political advocates or —What have been past national experiences opposition to decentralization likely to opponents of decentralization? with decentralization? Have these continue? —What are other sources of support influenced the political system? —How stable is the macroeconomic context? or opposition—including elite or —What level of support for decentralization What are potential economic risks or gains? powerful groups, civil society or other exists among sub-national political or Could they have a political impact? constituencies? other entities? —Who could be adversely affected by —What is the standing of decentralization —How stable is the current political decentralization, and how might they compared to other major public policy environment? What political risks or conceivably respond? reforms? 1 For the Arab States, a Governance Gap = a Development Gap B asic I
Mona Haidar from UNDP’s Sub-regional Resource er; a great deal of this can be explained by gover- ssues Facility for the Arab States linked policy and institu- nance and institutional factors. Policy reforms can
tional reforms: be done relatively quickly, but institutional reform in U Snapshot 1.2 needed for proper policy implementation faces nderstanding The governance gap is at the root of the develop- much more resistance. Without correcting institu- ment gap in the Arab region. Bridging the gov- tions, new policies bring little long-run benefit. ernance gap will be a challenge, but it is also an Beyond that, governance is linked to wealth, power opportunity. D and authority that would shift under decentraliza- ecentrali tion. Major decentralization programmes in the istorically, the overall model of governance in region consequently boil down to capacity-build-
the region has been one of state-led, state- z H ing programmes or light “deconcentration” pro- ation centered and state-regulated development. Over grammes at best. the past 15 years, exogenous forces have pushed for reform. These include the demands of interna- Necessary steps forward might include the cre- tional organizations such as the World Bank and ation of public, detailed pathways to reform that International Monetary Fund, the establishment respond to the specific demands for change made of the World Trade Organization, the partnership by citizens within their countries; comprehensive agreements made with the European Union, and legal reform, and the restructuring and reform of the demonstration effect of the East Asian econo- various state institutions; the reform of institutions mies. In a few Arab countries, indigenous factors of market-led development; the increased involve- and self-initiatives have been forces for reform. ment in public debates of civil society and marginal groups, as well as the private sector; and greater The reforms applied have had limited impact on government accountability. 14 economic and development performance, howev-
Whatever form decentralization takes, its full benefits are • Links between national and sub-national levels through reaped when local governance systems are broadly par- policies, and political and government structures ticipatory and accountable. They must be equipped with • Synergies with other governance or public sector the capacities and funds to respond to local needs and management reforms demands, particularly for public services and local eco- nomic development. • Careful matching of responsibilities, capacities and resources Other factors that support decentralization include, but • Fiscal systems, whether for local revenue raising or in- are not limited to: tergovernmental transfers, that factor in local capacities • National consensus and needs • A balanced distribution of political power • Accountability that embraces politicians, civil servants and the general public • Appropriately sequenced reforms • Regular elections • The presence and effective use of human and institutional capacities • The willingness to manage human diversity and respond to inequity • Well-crafted and consistent legislation and policies • Territorial planning, as required Understanding the role of UNDP cluding participation, equity, sustainability and account- 1 B ability—all of which are essential supports to successful asic he highly politicized and at times sensitive nature I
decentralization. Working across sectors and with actors ssues of decentralization, along with examples of failed on many levels, UNDP can help countries and communi-
or inadequate decentralization experiments, re- ties pursue innovative strategies tailored to their needs. in T U quire UNDP to exercise extra care in engaging on these is- Box 1.7 highlights some of the lessons learned about nderstanding sues. A number of countries remain explicitly committed UNDP’s contributions in a past evaluation. to centralized policies rooted in their institutional struc- tures and traditions. Carefully targeted, well-analysed Some contributors to the network discussion underlined forms of support should accord with national priorities that some UNDP country offices may need to examine D ecentrali and local realities, and emphasize flexibility and ongoing their overly strong focus on central ministries. This may communication (see Snapshot 1.3 and Box 1.6). mean that less work is done with local authorities and
civil society groups, and that fewer impacts filter down to z In general, UNDP’s strength comes from its reputation as ation sub-national levels. a trusted and neutral multilateral organization. It can as- sist national and local dialogues on decentralization as a step towards the formulation of new policies and strat- egies, including by bringing in its institutional expertise and capacity to share knowledge and experiences from diverse sources. UNDP is also charged with upholding the principles of human development and human rights, in-
Close Analysis, Realism and Flexibility
Michael Soko from UNDP Zambia chronicled experi- ments, and the understanding of roles and respon- 15 ences with challenges to designing and implementing sibilities of various levels of governments. These decentralization programmes: are often exacerbated by many years of support Snapshot 1.3 programmes that bypassed regular central or local ncorporation of a realistic situation analysis that governance structures. For example, communi- Itakes into account socioeconomic, political and ties have been encouraged over several decades legal challenges and capacities required is a major to implement civil works such as roads, construc- challenge because in most case only technical tion of clinics, water wells, etc. on a self-help basis issues are addressed. Our experience has been or through support from donor- or NGO-funded that such a detailed analysis is vital to enable the programmes outside the framework of local au- identification of issues and social dynamics that if thorities. This causes communities to have limited unattended to would inhibit full participation of or no expectations for services delivered by local stakeholders. authorities.
The correct sequencing of activities can be prob- Finally, multi-donor programmes often have some lematic if a rigid approach to implementation is benchmarks established, but they tend to be adopted. We have found it useful to maintain a rela- unrealistic, especially if the situation analysis was tively flexible set of benchmarks that can be con- not sufficiently detailed. Correcting this situation, tinuously adjusted based on new developments in however, can reduce or even stop disbursements to the political environment and social dynamics. the programme. A possible solution is continuous engagement of all stakeholders and maintenance Mismatches frequently crop up among stakeholder of an open dialogue. perceptions and expectations, policy pronounce- 1 B
Box 1.6: Don’t Rush... asic I Decentralization requires a long-term perspective, particularly where political will is low and/or capacities are weak. Network discussion ssues participants highlighted some of the problems when programmes go too fast:
in U
—The rush to implement the latest development trends —There is not time to research and build on best practices. nderstanding overwhelms or fails to take advantage of local capacities. —Responsibilities may be assigned before capacities and resources —National and local ownership is reduced. are in place, and without consideration for requirements in different sectors. —Expectations of quick-win results cannot be met. D ecentrali —Opportunities are missed to build common understanding of —Poor sequencing may diminish efficiency and generate conflicts decentralization, along with buy in. that will need to be addressed in the future. z ation
Box 1.7: Lessons Learned from a Past Evaluation
In 2000, the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development and UNDP jointly evaluated UNDP’s role in decentralization and local governance. They summarized the lessons learned as follows:
On the role and experience of UNDP On internal and external On concepts, methodologies and The greatest value-added role of UNDP is at partnerships practices the upstream policy level. UNDP effectiveness depends on a broader Decentralization is a highly political and UNDP credibility depends on a critical mass network base. politicized process. 16 of resources. The efficiency of decentralization support Decentralization, as transformational Decentralization can benefit from depends on close donor coordination. change, generates resistance. international experience. Implementation is greatly enhanced by Decentralized governance implies multiple Credibility depends on having a strategic integrated management. levels (subsidiarity principle). commitment. Local quality depends on a balance of Linkages to sustainable human corporate support and local control. development are difficult to establish. Better integration of United Nations system Ongoing monitoring and evaluation are key activity leads to better products and to success and learning.
services. Source: UNDP and the Government of Germany 2000. 2 A spects
Aspects of Local Governance: of L Mapping the Terrain ocal 2 G overnance
All countries have some form of local governance, regardless of how centralized or de- centralized they may be. UNDP can assist these sub-national levels (see Box 2.1) as part : M :
of its commitment to democratic governance and the achievement of human develop- apping ment. When local people fully participate in their own governance, they have a voice in
deciding on local policies, determining the use of resources and ensuring the delivery the
of public services—in short, making choices about their human development. UNDP’s T errain 2008-2011 Strategic Plan calls for bolstering assistance to countries in the areas of local development and local governance, along with decentralization.
In some countries, local governance may require support within the context of decen- tralization or other public sector reforms, including through the synchronization of lo- cal and national actions. In other states, particularly those where decentralization re- mains a sensitive concept, or the centre has been eroded by conflict or severe capacity constraints, a more targeted emphasis on local governance may be appropriate.
The previous chapter provided an introduction to decentralization; this one covers basic local governance concepts and outlines challenges likely to be encountered in UNDP programming. The last part of the chapter gives slightly extra weight to three 17 issues that were prominent in the network discussion and are important in many pro- gramme countries: special considerations for conflict situations, fiscal issues, and rural and urban contexts. Chapter 3 takes a more concerted look at general strategies for programming in a variety of environments.
Box 2.1: What Is Local?
This publication uses the word local to refer to all sub-national levels of governance. These vary in number and structure by country and governance system, but they can include states, provinces, regions, districts, municipalities, counties, sub-districts, parishes, communes, townships, villages or communities.
The term local, while applied in its most general sense here, should not obscure the likelihood that governance issues will vary across different tiers. They may need to be looked at separately and in their interactions with each other.
In addition, while local can refer to a variety of stakeholders, this publication is primarily about local governance and government. It considers other common development actors, such as civil society and the private sector, through their supporting roles. What does local governance mean? can involve national and local actors, changes in na- 2 A
tional and local political, legal, administrative and fiscal spects The following are some common terms. systems. Local governance covers the broad spectrum of
issues and actors that influence local political, economic of
Local governance is distinct from decentralization, al- L and overall human development planning and decision- ocal though the two terms are at times used interchangeably.
making at the local level. Some of the elements shaping G Decentralization is a national level political process that local governance include political patterns, institutional overnance
Box 2.2: Growing Interest in Local Economic Development M : apping Most developed countries today have local actors joining forces around dynamic, complement external assistance for local
strategies to boost local economic local sustainable development processes. economic development. the T
development—this has become a core errain function of many local governments. Local economic development initiatives Bert Helmsing from the Institute of Social Comprehensive strategies, and consistent generally encompass strategic planning Studies in The Netherlands noted, based financial and institutional arrangements to strengthen economic capacities, such primarily on research on Africa, that link the efforts of national, regional and as through stronger local regulatory government officials can resent giving room local governments around the objective of frameworks, a better climate for business to businesses, often because they resist local economic development, and recognize investment, improved infrastructure, and losing central control and opportunities for the importance of close partnerships with equitable access to decent employment rent-seeking. For their part, entrepreneurs the private sector and communities. for women and marginalized workers. know that state power may be abused. Through territorial approaches, these This leads to strategies such as using eveloping and transitional countries initiatives can be linked to steps to reduce access to state power for individual gain, Dare less likely to have local economic spatial “poverty traps” that come from or maintaining a low profile so as not to 18 development strategies in place, although geographical isolation, climate, economic become a victim of predatory action. Zero- there is a growing interest in the potential restructuring and so on. Traditionally, this sum game perceptions make it difficult of this approach to address demands type of strategy has been oriented around for different actors to agree to act in for employment, higher incomes and urban areas; more work needs to be done concert to generate positive local economic better services. In the network discussion, in capturing its potential for rural, primarily development outcomes. Robert Daughters from the InterAmerican agricultural economies. Development Bank described how the bank’s Helmsing cautioned against “over- expanding roster of sub-national clients in In the network discussion, Momoudou engineering” local governance processes by Latin America has increasingly requested local Touray from UNDP’s Bureau for Crisis drawing on particular governance models economic development support. Prevention and Recovery pointed out that that view local corporatism suspiciously incomplete decentralization processes and pluralism favourably. It may be more Kadmiel Wekwete from UNCDF and hobble local governments in pursuing desirable to see what actually works on the Lenni Montiel from UNDP’s Bureau local economic development. Limited ground. Which governance configuration for Development Policy highlighted legal empowerment to make critical actually improves local economic that development of local governance capital investments, and marginal control performance? Which has produced positive relates closely to local development in over revenues and expenditures drain and reduced negative externalities, and general, but especially to local economic opportunities to invest in services and created opportunities for various forms of development. Local governance has to be infrastructure as an economic stimulus. learning and competence in local economic seen as catalysing poverty reduction and Touray suggested that support for more development policy? From there, further facilitating local economic development evenhanded decentralization of political analysis should look at how impacts can towards achieving the MDGs, with different and fiscal authority and resources should become more socially inclusive. arrangements, accountability mechanisms, the degree of UNDP local governance programmes provide oppor- 2 A civil society empowerment and capacities for generating tunities to help communities develop these capacities, spects local resources. framed by the principles of participation, human rights,
transparency, gender equality and respect for human di- of L Local government generally denotes government institu- versity. Typical initiatives involve capacity development, ocal tions at the local level, comprising representative bodies,
the strengthening of local institutions, participatory plan- G administrative organs and the local branches of the central ning and budgeting exercises, and civic education. overnance government. Municipalities and local or district councils are common terms used to refer to local government. n the past, national development and governance is-
sues have absorbed the bulk of international devel- M : apping Local economic development describes collective ef- I opment assistance. But local governance can make forts by various local actors to plan and manage sustain- critical contributions both within a locality and to broad-
the able and equitable local human development. This can er national objectives. By the same token, poor local gov- T involve creating institutions and infrastructure, manag- ernance, even if confined to some localities or regions, errain ing resources, and developing local skills (see Box 2.2). slows local and national progress.
MDG localization involves adjusting local development strategies around achieving the global goals, including Who’s involved? through locally adapted MDG targets (see also page 56). The configuration of local governance actors will shift Local development encompasses all of these concepts. It by country and among localities within a country. Iden- refers to the interactions of local stakeholders to promote tifying these actors, what they want and who is working human development, in the context of national frame- with whom helps build understanding of their incentives works and policies that may include varying degrees of and interactions, and who could be potential drivers of decentralization. Local development as an outcome com- change. Some common examples are: prises access to quality basic services, achievement of the 19 MDGs and local economic development. • Local elected or appointed representatives • Local civil servants • Local government associations (see Box 3.3) Why is local governance important? • National political figures Local governance that is participatory, effective and ade- quately funded produces focused and efficient decision- • Civil servants from the central government posted in a making that translates into reality many of the promises given area of decentralization listed in the first chapter of this book • Civil servants in central ministries for local governance (see page 13). It is an essential building block for local or related issues and national development, poverty reduction, greater • Traditional authorities (see Box 5.3) equity, and local and national systems of democratic governance. While there are many potential constraints • Civil society groups (see Box 5.2) on local governance, as well as risks for UNDP in working • Private sector concerns (see Box 5.2) on it (see Viewpoint 2.1), it can extend the possibility of • Multilateral and bilateral donors more targeted solutions to development problems, more accountability, better and more comprehensive service See Chapter 5 for more details on potential partners. delivery, and the growth of a more politically aware and representative culture. the national level, but vary by degree. Local capacities, 2
Common local governance challenges A infrastructure and tax bases are generally more limited, spects The scope of local governance in general depends on for example, and formal institutions tend to be weaker.
national and local governance traditions (see Box 2.3), of Remote or difficult rural areas often face a brain drain due L
current political patterns, and the extent and design of ocal to weak incentives for civil servants and employment-re- decentralization. Challenges can be similar to those on
lated migration for local populations. The following pages G overnance
Claudia Melim-Mcleod from UNDP’s Oslo Governance tion that has been commonly used. Many interna-
Center commented: tional organizations actually choose to offer support M : apping directly to the Standing Conference of Towns and aving a legal framework for decentralization is a Municipalities, an association of local governments
the basic condition to work with national partners in perceived as a reputable and effective channel for
H T this area. However, even when a legal basis is there, aid. From a donor perspective, this provides a conve- errain strengthening local governments commonly has an nient avenue for project implementation, reducing effect on power relations between central and local the need to deal with the complex national political
Viewpoint 2.1: Choosing Assistance Strategies with Care
levels, which can exacerbate internal tensions in con- environment at large. It can be argued, however, that texts where the concepts of devolution, subsidiarity, this approach also decreases the pressure for effec- etc., meet political resistance on the central level. tive decentralization and national dialogue, since it is easier for local actors to rely on external aid than to - Serbia is one such case: Although there is a le push for a real decentralization process across the 20 gal basis for working on local governance and political landscape. decentralization, this is considered sensitive for a va- riety of reasons due to recent history. The challenges In conclusion, while working directly with local for UNDP then are two-fold: First, finding an adequate governments can bring quick results and be more framework to engage with local governments, and expedient from a delivery point of view, it also entails second, doing so while maintaining a positive work- some important risks: a) direct assistance to local ing relationship with central level authorities, with governments, if not carefully done, can decrease the whom we may also be partnering on other projects. A need for dialogue and negotiations between central very refined understanding of the political situation in and regional/local levels that are part and parcel the country is crucial here and testifies to how capac- of a democratic processes; b) national inequalities ity development is much more than a technical issue. can be inadvertently widened, exacerbating local Who are the players, who wants what, and who is do- tensions; and c) there is a risk that external support ing what to whom to obtain what they want? Having can actually delay decentralization (including fiscal a good overview of the political landscape is crucial if decentralization, implementation of the principles we are to navigate these tricky waters. of devolution, subsidiarity, local accountability, etc.) if it is seen as a substitute for resources that could In contexts such as Serbia, there may just not be an and should be allocated from central levels. UNDP entry point to engage with central authorities on must exercise judgment very carefully in these cases, issues pertaining to decentralization. Engaging with balancing short- and medium-term objectives and civil society organizations such as local government quick wins with longer term, cumbersome, yet crucial associations and providing support through them democratic processes. outside central level mechanisms is one possible op- 2 Box 2.3: Local Governance Traditions, Strong and Weak A spects
Local governance traditions generally fit —A positive, if not institutionalized, are popularly elected, yet remain set on of
somewhere on a spectrum that runs from relationship between traditional ethnic maintaining strong central control L ocal strong to weak. or indigenous forms of local decision-
—A few national, centralized, political G
making and elected leaders of local overnance Strong local governance is often parties that dominate politics at all government characterized by: levels (local political diversity is weak) —Local government administrations —A long history of popularly elected local —Conflict between tradition or ethnic M :
that are not highly politicized and that apping governments that effectively provide local traditions and the administrations demonstrate a measure of staff career
basic services, such as street repair or of elected local leaders stability, probably based on a local civil the
park and cultural services, and even T
service law —Local administrations that are managed errain some advanced functions, such as the largely according to the interests of management of utilities, education and —Increasingly open and participatory local the party in office as opposed to the health care government with active community interests of the community as a whole involvement —Local governments that are held —Local staff whose careers are almost accountable for their financial Weak local governance may feature: entirely determined by their political expenditures by established practice, —Appointed local officials or officials party affiliation (i.e., when your party the public and national government who have been recently elected for the is in, you are in; when your party is out, oversight first—or one of the few times—in the you are out) —A considerable degree of local country’s history —Considerable waste, corruption and government autonomy —Local governments that provide few, if weak oversight of local government 21 —A decentralized or decentralizing any, services without the involvement expenditures democratic system of national and support of the central government —Little citizen involvement or interest in government (local capacity is weak) local public affairs
—Political competition or a diversity of —Nationally, a highly centralized system Source: USAID 2000. political parties at the local level in which authoritarian national leaders
briefly touch upon some common challenges—which ocal governance may confront multiple capacity may also be entry points for UNDP programmes. Snap- shortfalls that relate to both the internal work- shot 2.1 sketches some individual country scenarios that L ings of institutions and the external environment while highly specific, illustrate how these issues play out in which the institutions function. Gaps often appear in in reality. institutional arrangements, human resources, political skills, planning and financial management, and participa- Capacity development: Capacity development is funda- tory approaches to governing. They may exist at the cen- mental to all aspects of UNDP support, and was raised tral and local levels, in the relationships between the two, in the network discussion as the most important area of and in relationships between local governments and oth- emphasis for local governance programming. While ca- er actors in local governance, such as civil society and the pacity development is separately described here, it can private sector. Generally, women and excluded groups apply to all the local governance challenges noted on the (related to ethnicity, caste, religion, socioeconomic stand- following pages. ing, and so on) have particular capacity development needs, at times related to more limited access to educa- tion and economic autonomy, or even the psychological local activities and budget allocations may overlap across 2 A hindrances imposed by social conditioning. A problem in multiple central ministries, for example. Accountability spects many of the poorest countries is that severely limited hu- mechanisms may be based on an insufficient definition of man and other resources end up almost entirely absorbed performance standards. Poor application of the subsidiar- of L by central structures. ity principle may result in the uneven and inefficient -as ocal
signment of responsibilities. G Some efforts to develop local governance capacities have overnance been viewed as disjointed, prescriptive and/or unsustain- Locally, management systems are often out of date or able, with little long-term impact. These tendencies are otherwise deficient, including in terms of lacking a clear encouraged by an overly narrow focus on specific capac- vision and strategic direction based on local needs. Hu- M : apping ity gaps, a lack of clarity on the role of local governance, man resource planning may be inadequate, and proper fragmented donor interests and disagreements over de- project management systems may not be in place.
the velopment objectives. T
Resource mobilization: The lack of local resources often ex- errain See page 38 in Chapter 3 for a more detailed description plains the sense that decentralization and local governance of capacity development programming. exist in name only. Localities face a widening public credibil- ity gap if the quantity and/or type of resources mean they Relations with the centre: Local governance is affected by cannot deliver services or use funds effectively. For more de- the political attitude of the central state, which may be tails, see the section on fiscal issues in this chapter. committed or opposed to local control of public functions and resources. The central position can vary across regions Participation: Participation may be direct or representa- or other parameters—such as ethnicity, levels of econom- tional or both, or be interpreted as involving consultations ic activity, natural resource availability, etc.—and can shift or campaigns to distribute information. Highly central- quickly depending on dominant political groups. Local ized or controlled political cultures are by nature resistant governments in wealthier areas may have more strength to broadening public participation in governance. Other 22 in negotiating with central counterparts, for example. participation issues may apply to women and excluded groups. Local government mechanisms to allow public The degree and adequacy of national decentralization as participation may be poor or nonexistent, or may be in determined by the centre also affects local governments. place but with a limited connection to local political or They can end up hamstrung by poorly planned or execut- governmental processes. They may be inadequate in pro- ed decentralization processes, facing administrative con- viding information for formulating local development flicts and resource shortfalls, among other issues. plans or enforcing accountability in implementation.
Legal and policy frameworks: Different legal frameworks See Viewpoints 2.2 and 2.3 for additional thinking on may guide issues such as the distribution of powers, the these issues. sub-national finance system and the management of public employees. They may be part of the constitution, Corruption: Decentralization’s record related to corrup- national or local statutes, or presidential decrees. Prob- tion is mixed. Greater local participation in governance lems with laws often involve contradictions between stat- can open the door to broader public oversight that curbs utes, poor design and limited application. corrupt practices. But decentralized administration and resources can also provide new opportunities for corrup- The design of institutions and systems: Governance sys- tion to flourish, particularly in cases where social - toler tems globally contend with inadequate and obsolete in- ance is high, accountability mechanisms are limited and stitutional structures and administrative systems. While some form of elite capture allows one group to domi- central policies normally shape these, the weakest links nate public decision-making. Other contributing factors in terms of capacities and resources are often local. Other may include social instability, poor civil service pay, a low complications crop up in the management of relation- grade of public commitment in the civil service, opaque ships among different authorities. Lines for reporting on information collection, and the intervention of national 2 A
Henrik Fredborg Larsen from the UNDP Regional Centre n most of our country programmes in Asia, we sup- spects in Bangkok wrote: Iport the meaningful participation of women and
individual indigenous or disadvantaged groups; this of L
The bulk of UNDP’s work on strengthening participa- needs to translate into a more holistic focus on local ocal tion has in the past focused on direct participation (in
democracy. This could imply engaging more concert- G overnance
Viewpoint 2.2: A Greater Focus on Participation Through Representation : M : apping particular, in planning and auditing of accounts and edly in advocacy and policy reforms to address institu- service delivery). UNDP needs to engage more closely tional constraints, including reforms of representational
the in developing sub-national councils and assemblies arrangements and quotas, political parties’ functioning T that offer participation through representation, and and the choice of electoral systems at the local level. errain helping to make local democratic institutions more We also need to continue to address structural and inclusive and accountable. Only by ensuring that individual constraints, such as by supporting women these institutions increasingly represent the interests in particular and others whose voices go unheard so of all citizens—women and men—can we trust that they can compete in local elections and ensure that they will play their role in state-building at the local local councils represent the interests of all. One of the level, find non-violent solutions to conflict and deliver vehicles for this has been the UNDP regional initiative against their very often significant responsibilities for on local democracy in Asia (for more information, see services supporting the achievement of the MDGs. http://regionalcentrebangkok.undp.or.th). political factions in local affairs. In general, corruption re- Disparities: Patterns of power and discrimination can per- 23 flects deficits in governance and human rights, often with petuate ingrained social, economic and political dispari- negative impacts on poverty and human security. ties on the local level. There is justifiable concern about the problem of “elite” capture that can take place if decen- ocal corruption can add an additional layer for tralization weakens accountability mechanisms. Without citizens already contending with fallout from cen- proactive strategies, women’s participation in local gov- Ltral corruption. Local governments frequently do ernance will likely only marginally improve. not have reporting or enforcement systems to respond to corrupt practices, even as these steadily erode public Service provision: More accountable and targeted service faith in the efficacy of local governance. (See also page 61 provision is one of the promises of decentralization and in Chapter 4.) local governance, but it remains a complex arena. Poorly sequenced decentralization and/or local governments Social capital: Social capital is built from the customs of with significant capacity gaps can both be responsible for local groups, which stipulate patterns of behaviour and drop-offs in services, inequitable distribution and poor social values. These can support or detract from effective quality. The duplication of service delivery structures oc- local governance. Some communities place a strong em- curs when similar services are provided through both phasis on civic participation and egalitarianism. Common central and local government departments. negative tendencies include longstanding forms of dis- crimination, a tolerance for inequity, a passive approach Many possible service delivery configurations exist: cen- to problem solving, a lack of understanding of the pos- tral; central-regional; central-local; special purpose local sibilities of civic participation, and an unwillingness to authorities; public-private partnerships; franchise ar- work cooperatively. Limited social cohesion may deepen rangements; service contracts; compulsory or voluntary the influence of some of these factors. provision by individuals, civil society groups or the pri- vate sector; and so on. These may fall under different laws Antonio J. Peláez Tortosa from the University of Warwick include participatory budgeting, decentralized planning, in the United Kingdom outlined global and local steps to social audits and citizen report cards. 2 A promote participation: spects oreover, these and other countries, in going through
Becoming actively involved in theoretical discussion: Mdemocratization, have introduced pro-participatory of L
A very fruitful debate on the concept of democracy is local governance initiatives when reforming pre-existing ocal re-emerging today among scholars and development institutional systems. Constitutional reforms, for example, G practitioners as a consequence of the growing number of have included laws on citizen and popular participation, overnance successful cases of unconventional local democracy. This state decentralization, codes of local governments, etc. The debate is producing two main ideas. existence of an enabling institutional environment for the
creation of participatory governance frameworks at the M : First, the traditional confrontation between representative local level—i.e., popular councils or similar schemes—is, apping democracy and participatory democracy may be resolved therefore, crucial. if new forms of complementarity are developed. The two the T errain
Viewpoint 2.3: Rethinking Democracy models are not mutually exclusive. Reconciliation can A global network of scholars and development practitio- only be achieved if the defining principles are revisited ners involved in these and other similar experiences would and properly adapted, however. In particular, the liberal be of great usefulness for the promotion of new forms of idea of clearly separating the state and civil society must participatory democratic governance. be an object of further analysis, because it is precisely the interaction between local government institutions and Linking tangible benefits, incentives for civil soci- citizen associations that is bringing about new participa- ety organizations and reform of local governments: tory arrangements producing human development results. Any participatory institutional scheme must be highly pragmatic. It should be mostly aimed at solving specific 24 econdly, a global approach to democracy requires the problems and responding to the priorities of citizens, for Srejection of all forms of democratic fundamentalism. instance, through the planning and implementation of ur- While many countries have now engaged in democratiza- ban and rural infrastructure projects. Hence, the translation tion in line with the liberal pattern of democracy, examples of participatory proposals into immediate and tangible of innovative institutional arrangements are emerging all benefits for the population may enhance the credibility over the world, with local democracy substantially varying and legitimacy of the entire local governance system, and depending on the historical and cultural context. This encourage the emergence of new civic associations. ongoing process deserves due attention. Socioeconomic differences among members of a given A global development organization such as UNDP could community may severely discourage the participation of contribute very efficiently to the development of this de- some people. Participatory institutions must be inclusive, bate by providing empirical examples of local democracy and the entire participatory initiative must be conceived from around the globe. In return, UNDP could benefit very as a social learning process, which may imply the need to much from its participation in such a debate by refining its reformulate the idea of local authority. theoretical foundations in this area, and by clearly identify- ing new governance challenges. Capacity development programmes addressed to local civil servants and elected representatives must train and Leading a global learning process: Innovative partici- instruct them as facilitators of the participatory process, patory institutional arrangements are proliferating in a rather than as mere managers or decision-makers. By do- number of developing and emerging countries, such as ing so, participatory frameworks may become true schools Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, India, Mexico, Mozambique, the of democracy. Philippines, South Africa, Uganda, and others. Examples 2
The Issues at Stake: Four Local Governance Scenarios A spects
The following examples, drawn from the network lack of capacity, including to use more complicated
discussion, illustrate some of the challenges faced by planning tools; and a heavy methodology pre- of L local governance programmes. scribed by the centre that left little room for local ocal Snapshot 2.1
adaptation. Despite these difficulties, the participa- G Afghanistan: The concepts of local governance tory methodology was well received since it helped overnance and decentralization do not exist as they are known create support for the plan, raised awareness and in other countries. A classic polycentric governance led to a willingness to implement the plan. framework has many nodes of power competing M : apping with one another. Local development is driven by Other challenges emerged once the plans were in large national programmes designed and funded place; there was a lack of funding and capacities
the by international organizations, and tied to specific to carry them out. The central Government was T sectoral targets. Without an organic concept of not willing to transfer resources and local govern- errain territorial development or a mechanism (functional ments struggled to mobilize their own. A large local authorities) to implement it, there is little World Bank project to provide funds to the poorest possibility of measurable and sustained progress communities created a parallel financing structure, on basic issues such as child survival and economic and encouraged some municipalities to present growth. The lack of a generally agreed framework themselves as poorer than they are to secure funds. for conflict-sensitive development has also meant —Lara Yocarini, UNDP Bureau for Development Policy that projects can end up competing with one an- other for clients and resources. Central and Eastern Europe and the Com- monwealth of Independent States: Significant Currently, governors are appointed by the Presi- progress is being made in adopting decentraliza- dent under a law that grants them significant tion frameworks, but implementation remains ad 25 responsibility, but their de facto authority is limited hoc. A more strategic and systematic approach by the national programme modalities and the is needed. This requires capacity, which depends separation of the police from the local administra- on civil service reform and local human resources tion. In addition, few international organizations management systems. Personnel management and trust the governors as partners since most tend to employment conditions, especially at local level, be former jihadi commanders who maintain their have long been neglected, with donors working powerbase through personal militias. Provincial on civil service reform, including UNDP, tending to councils were elected two years ago, but little has focus on the central level. been done to build their capacity to carry out their legal if limited functions. They are poorly equipped A huge challenge is attracting and retaining com- and financed. Paul— Lundberg and Masood Amer, petent staff. Personnel management often focuses UNDP Afghanistan on the administrative dimension of managing staff and record-keeping, placing little value on devel- Benin: The decentralization process took off in oping staff competencies, or linking these with the 2003. Each municipality is now obliged to elaborate strategic plans and objectives of the municipality. a five-year municipal development plan. Some Another issue relates to the fragmented structures opted for a participatory planning process; others of local governance, an extremely important issue hired a local consultancy firm to write the plans for for the quality of service delivery and decentraliza- them. Some of the key challenges that emerged tion in general. The majority of governments are during the participatory processes included the po- not willing to apply one of the more radical strate- liticization of planning, with mayors and councillors gies—amalgamation or establishment of a second not automatically supporting majority decisions; a tier of local governance. There are different cont. 2
The Issues at Stake: Four Local Governance Scenarios cont. A spects
reasons for this, including the old debate about economic infrastructure is poor. The Government’s
“participation versus economics.” In some countries, efforts to restore peace and security have been of L the central government fears that local govern- supported by the international community, but ocal Snapshot 2.1
ments can become too powerful and too vocal, and localities need to access minimum services to help G it will be difficult to control them.Jurgita — Siugzdi- them live in decent conditions. The present local overnance niene, UNDP Bratislava Regional Centre governance rules are based on a mix of respect for the public legal authorities and a consideration of Congo-Brazzaville: The post-conflict situation that the Ninja “military authorities” in part of the region. M : apping has prevailed for 10 years in the Pool region is not This informal political situation does not allow favourable for local governance, despite a planned
preparations for a fair, transparent election process, the decentralization process. Local administrations are which in my view is one of the most important T errain weak, without the minimum equipment to help social governance regulators. civil servants to perform their tasks. The basic socio- —Eloi Kouadio, UNDP Congo-Brazzaville
and policies, and vary according to the characteristics of cause people have the information they need to make local governments. informed choices. This kind of transparency at the local level can be hindered by political or cultural traditions Service provision challenges are often analysed by sector. that work against it, and/or the inability to collect, orga- Large infrastructure projects have different requirements nize and share appropriate information. Many countries than schools and health care systems, or rural economic are adopting e-governance systems to improve public development support services—including in terms of communication, but the success of these depends in part whether these should be centralized or decentralized. on technological capacities and infrastructure. 26 Another important distinction involves the public deliv- ery of services versus the public financing of services.
While UNDP is not directly involved in service provision The special needs of conflict countries as a programme activity, it can assist in the development ocal governance programming can be particularly of appropriate policies, public capacities and governance complex in conflict situations, but also has poten- structures that reflect principles such as equitable access. L tial as a strategy for recovery and peacebuilding. It can help enlarge space for people to articulate their con- Data: Local governance data for planning or monitoring cerns, increase local capacities to respond to these, and are notoriously limited. Figures can be old, incomplete, in- reduce the frictions people can feel when they are subject sufficiently disaggregated, not comparable over time, or, to the decisions of people in other locations whom they for fiscal issues, budgeted rather than actual. These gaps perceive as acting contrary to their interests. If the central come from disinterest; limited resources; poor capacities government is weak or non-existent, local governments to collect, analyse and maintain the reliability of data; and become the primary providers of services and sources of the complexity of fiscal systems and flows in many coun- collective authority. tries. Sound data may be particularly important in the lo- cal governance field, however, given the variability in lo- The network discussion identified multiple challenges to cal situations. This applies both to local and central policy programming in this kind of environment. Social cohesion decisions, which can become too blunt and generalized is often low and aggravated by political conflict or ambigu- when they have no reference to local information. ity. Capacities and infrastructure may have been severely diminished. Qualified professionals commonly are the first Communication and public awareness: Good commu- to leave crisis areas, while options to generate revenues nication practices support democratic participation be- become extremely limited. Skewed local power relations 2 A
Siphosami Malunga from UNDP’s Oslo Governance —Local authorities fully understand the dynamics of spects Centre wrote: the conflict, and are empowered to address these
in an accountable and participatory manner. of L
xperience has shown that many of the world’s ocal conflicts are caused by competition for access to —Local authorities ably respond to the reconfigura- E G state authority or power and resources. In many cases, tion of minorities/majorities that are created by overnance secession or some form of autonomy has been the decentralization. If decentralization creates new key demand of belligerents. Consequently, decentral- minorities through the redistribution of power, they : M : apping Viewpoint 2.4: Why Local Governance and Decentralization Can Help Solve Conflict
the T ization has been instrumental in resolving conflicts, may have new grievances of their own resulting in errain which gives it a rationale beyond the traditional a resurgence of violence if local authorities are not administrative and political reform arguments for it. responsive to the needs of all groups. Thus far, however, there is no definitive evidence that decentralization alone actually prevents conflicts in all —Local decision-making is truly representative and situations over the long term. not a mere extension of the central state.
It is important to clarify why decentralization is being —There is strong political commitment and support sought as a solution to a conflict situation. Other from the central state for local government or de- solutions may also be required, since the mere act of centralized entities. decentralizing is usually not enough to resolve the Given the obvious advantages of proximity to the root causes of conflict. It needs to be accompanied 27 by real changes in the way decisions are made at the local populations, local governments are clearly best local level, resources are accessed, and services are placed to address the myriad problems that many delivered. countries recovering from conflict may face, includ- ing by promoting public participation, conducting Decentralization combined with stronger local reconstruction, providing basic services such as secu- governance is more likely to succeed in diffusing or rity, and restoring government legitimacy. A focus on preventing conflict or where: understanding how decentralization impacts all our development work, including in conflicts, and how —Improved local service delivery results from real strengthening local governance is an important ele- access to required resources and their equitable ment of recovery from conflict is indeed an impera- distribution. tive for UNDP. may reassert themselves, to the detriment of some people A spotlight on fiscal issues or communities. There may be no viable legal frameworks in Fiscal issues pose some of the greatest challenges to local place or options to implement those that are. governance and decentralization processes (see Snapshot Appropriately addressing these issues, as in other con- 2.2 as an example). Political constraints, including a reluc- flict recovery programmes, requires care and should be tance to yield substantive power to local authorities, of- grounded in detailed analysis of the political, economic ten explain why fiscal decentralization lags behind other and social context (see Viewpoint 2.4, and for a more de- types. The common technical emphasis on strengthening tailed discussion, page 59 in Chapter 4). fiscal institutions and systems in some cases has fostered an insufficient emphasis on other issues. One OECD-De- velopment Assistance Committee (DAC) study (2004) he many types of fiscal capacity shortfalls include 2 A concluded that efforts to improve financial management a lack of reliable data or the ability to generate spects (such as planning and accounting) have been more suc- and process it, limited access to modern financial
T of cessful than fundamental improvements in the institu- management techniques, and poor understanding of the L tional systems for local government finance. connections between local budgeting and planning pro- ocal
cesses. When accountability mechanisms are inadequate, G The traditional public finance approach to “fiscal federal- resources can be siphoned off, spent ineffectively, or, if lo- overnance ism” emphasizes setting appropriate expenditures and cal elites dominate the political process, used inequitably. taxes for each level of government and designing in- tergovernmental transfers accordingly. Responsibilities The configuration of local funding streams—actual or po- M : apping should be well defined to increase accountability and re- tential—varies, but generally speaking, there are several duce duplication, and should be assigned to the lowest basic sources of local finance. One is taxes, which have to
the tier of government capable of efficiently carrying them be looked at in terms of the roles and responsibilities of T out. Some sectors may be more efficiently administered both local and central governments. Some balance nor- errain at certain levels than others, but choices are often made mally needs to be struck between national distribution to group roughly similar services given the economies of and stabilization goals, efficiency and the accountability administration and transaction costs. to local residents that stems from the local financing of services. A second source of funding is sub-national bor- The reality of fiscal systems rarely complies with this rowing, which may be critical for longer term investments formula, however. Depending on how decentralization in local productive capacities. With the growth of global has been conceived and its stage of implementation, credit markets and the deregulation that has taken place local governments may not receive adequate resources in many countries, municipalities now have more access from the central government to carry out new functions, to this kind of financing. even as they cannot legally raise resources through tax- es or other means. Frameworks to make central to local The third funding type, and still the most common in many 28 resource transfers may not be in place or operating ef- countries, is intergovernmental transfers. These may or fectively, or end up reinforcing centralization to the det- may not come with particular kinds of conditions, which riment of autonomous local decision-making. Where lo- can distort local priorities, but may also contribute to re- cal governments do have the legal option to raise local distribution objectives and ensure links to national devel- revenues, they may still have to operate in a struggling opment goals. The design of intergovernmental transfers local economy with a large, hard-to-tax informal sector. is particularly important when local governments play Territorial atomization can result in many small govern- a significant role in delivering essential social services. ments with very limited capacities to either raise or man- World Bank research (Litvack et al. 1998) suggests that age resources. the most effective transfer systems are designed objec- tively and openly, preferably by an independent expert ash-strapped municipalities in some cases resort group or formal system. They are relatively stable to sup- to excessive borrowing, a potential threat to mac- port local budgeting, but also linked to national macro- C roeconomic stability if appropriate controls are not economic considerations. The transfer formula should be in place. Alternatively, they may become entangled in per- as transparent, credible and simple as possible. petual negotiations with the centre for intergovernmental transfers. Disparities can deepen as wealthier and more The many elements of fiscal decentralization and local competent municipalities come out ahead. Some govern- fiscal capacity need to be appropriately coordinated and ments simply fail to deliver on their promises, stimulating viewed as intersecting components of a system. Experi- local cynicism. Another scenario takes place when local ences reported during the network discussion under- governments become dependent on central transfers and lined what happens when these links are not made. From do not seek to raise local resources, even when entitled to UNDP China, Hou Xinan reported that the fiscal system do so. In some cases, resource transfers may exceed local there was actually recentralized while expenditure re- managerial and administrative capacities. sponsibilities had been decentralized. This has led to Latin America’s Fiscal Decentralization Shortfalls 2 A spects Ady P. Carrera Hernández from Centro de Investig- ment is insufficient, with gaps in administrative,
ación y Docencia Económicas (CIDE) Mexico listed ob- legal and staff resources to manage effectively of L stacles in Latin America to fair and effective financial and efficiently. ocal Snapshot 2.2
management that meets the needs of communities G within a framework of democracy and transparency: —There is no integrated, systematic and ongoing overnance policy to strengthen local government institu- —Intergovernmental fiscal coordination structures tions.
are designed to maintain the financial domi- M : apping nance of the national government. Based on the theory and practice of fiscal decen- tralization, it is possible to identify elements that
—Fiscal decentralization processes are based on should be present in any decentralization process the T
a greater transfer of resources to local govern- aiming to strengthen government at the regional errain ments, but without strengthening their tax-rais- and local level: ing powers. —Each sphere or level of government should have —Defective designs of transfers to municipalities its own significant income source. strengthen their fiscal dependency, and thereby reduce their level of fiscal autonomy, which is the —Likewise, it should have a considerable degree of basis of political autonomy. autonomy in the administration of these income sources. This involves having the capacity to set —Intergovernmental transfers are designed to the rates of taxes that it exclusively controls. fit with the interests of certain political players, rather than being done on the basis of efficiency —Local governments should have an increased ca- or fairness. pacity to determine how to spend their budgets, 29 with reduced interference from other levels of —The institutional development of local govern- government.
weak local fiscal capacities, hindered the delivery of basic cally too small to serve as sustainable service delivery public services, and produced disparities in access to ser- mechanisms (UNDP 2005b). vices, including between rural and urban areas. In Bangladesh, UNDP and UNCDF have taken a relatively ontributors from the Andrew Young School of comprehensive approach to fiscal issues by partnering on Policy Studies at the University of Georgia in a local governance development project in the district of C the United States reported on their partnership Sirajganj that placed a strong emphasis on financing and with UNDP on multiple fiscal decentralization and local public expenditure management. The project included governance initiatives. A recent examination of reforms participatory planning and budget exercises, open budget in Armenia, Croatia, Georgia, Macedonia, and Serbia re- meetings, and training related to financial management, vealed some common patterns. First, the assignment of auditing, information disclosure and enhancing local rev- revenue sources to sub-national levels of government enues. Central authorities participated, including in study has occurred prior to the clear definition of expenditure trips to India and in training on fiscal decentralization. They responsibilities, implying a piecemeal approach encour- subsequently decided to begin releasing direct block grants aged by the lack of a coherent decentralization strategy. to localities in Sirajganj, some of which have now boosted Secondly, excessive fragmentation of local government their financing capacity by 200 percent. The World Bank structures means that many jurisdictions are economi- came forward with assistance for national implementation. Urban and rural contexts has helped spur upwards of $9 billion in investments in 2 A
city development (for more, see www.citiesalliance.org). spects The distinctions between rural and urban localities have
not always been well understood within UNDP’s work on Claudio Acioly from The Institute for Housing and Urban of local governance and decentralization. But the explosive L Studies in The Netherlands pointed out that from the ocal growth of urban areas in many countries calls for greater 1990s onwards, well-governed cities have been acknowl- G focus in programmes and policies, while recognizing the edged on the international level as fundamental to mac- overnance continued needs of rural communities. Today, more than roeconomic development. Major UN conferences, such half the world’s population lives in cities. They contain as the UN Conference on Environment and Development the highest concentrations of people living in poverty. in 1992 and Habitat II in 1996, also reinforced their impor- M : apping tance in solving global environmental problems, and pro- ell-governed cities can make substantial con- moted principles related to decentralization, civil society
tributions to national development, and be- the participation, partnerships, tenure regularization and the T
come rich reservoirs of human capacity and errain W right to housing. creativity. Their complexity may require more advanced management capacities than rural regions, however, He highlighted growing interest in urban management, along with higher levels of human and financial resourc- defined as the instruments, activities, tasks and functions es. While rural communities may be more concerned with that make a city operate. Sound urban management is issues such as land use, irrigation and outward migration, premised on efficiency, efficacy and equity in the distribu- cities face challenges such as burgeoning informal sec- tion of resources and public investments. It assures that tors, shortfalls in public services due to rapid population basic services are provided, various stakeholders act in a growth, the mushrooming of slums and high crime rates. harmonized manner, and conflicts are resolved when in- terests diverge. It unleashes the capacities and potentials Pelle Persson, a Senior Programme Officer with the World of its constituents to forge sustainable local development Bank, commented in the network discussion that since processes. Acioly noted that public-private partnerships, few countries and development agencies have policies 30 particularly in the supply, management and maintenance to promote the positive impacts of urbanization, many of public services, have become one popular instrument, cities suffer as a result. In sub-Saharan Africa and South given budget restrictions and the efficiency that the pri- Asia, where policies are among the weakest, slum dwell- vate sector can offer. Different forms of privatization and ers now make up a majority of urban populations. Pers- concessions are increasingly common in public transport, son suggested three priorities: encouraging a hard look solid waste management, electricity and water systems, at what cities contribute to national development and where measurable individual consumption can be trans- engaging local authorities in national policy dialogues; lated into tariffs and costs. examining how cities can mobilize domestic capital for urban infrastructure; and recognizing that national and A particular issue for UNDP programmes in urban envi- city policies need to factor in urban growth. ronments is urban safety. In the last five years, 60 percent of urban residents in the developing world have been Cities need to be seen as empowered entities, rather crime victims, according to UN-HABITAT (2007). Poverty, than enfeebled arms of the central government, Persson disparities and rapid urbanization have all fanned rising wrote. In this role, they will be able to attract domestic rates of urban violence. Crime and instability can also private financing that will be required given the sheer be politically related, connected to disintegrating social size of urban infrastructure and service needs. Persson standards such as from disrupted family networks, or tied works with the Cities Alliance, a global coalition of cities to gender in the form of rape or domestic violence. and development partners focused on the developmen- tal role of cities. Since its founding in 1999, the alliance Other threats to urban safety come from forced evictions, often of slum dwellers with no security of tenure. These Seventy-five percent of people in Latin America live in cities. UN- are commonly done in the name of urban redevelop- HABITAT predicts that by 2030, a majority of the citizens in Asia and Af- ment, but the consequences include deepening poverty rica will be in urban areas as well (2006b). and social exclusion. A third category of risks relates to 2 A the environment. The growth of cities in environmentally spects unsustainable ways, including through the destruction of surrounding habitats and over-consumption of natural of L resources, has left city dwellers imperiled by floods, land- ocal
slides and rising sea levels, among other phenomenon. G overnance
Urban safety requires local governance with the capaci- ties to identify pressing local threats and protect the pop- ulation accordingly. Effective urban planning, improved M : apping policing and emergency response systems, and stronger community engagement are common approaches ap-
the plied around the world. In these and other strategies, the T links between threats to safety and poverty need to be errain recognized. The poor are generally not only more vulner- able to risks, but with limited resources and political pres- ence, less able to manage them and protect themselves, or recover from disaster once it strikes.
UNDP’s Regional Project on Local Governance in Latin America has produced a conceptual framework for ad- dressing local security issues, from prevention to control, along with tools to diagnose the state of security, formu- late and monitor projects, and develop capacities. 31
3 PRINCIPLES, STRATEGIES, EXPERIENCES STRATEGIES, PRINCIPLES, Programming: Principles, Strategies, 3 Experiences
The previous two chapters provided a basic introduction to local governance and de- centralization issues relevant to UNDP programmes. This chapter builds on that back- ground by offering questions and definitions that may help frame future programme strategies. A series of past experiences from UNDP, UNCDF and UN-HABITAT have been excerpted from the network discussion to give a flavour of how programmes have ac- tually evolved.
As a starting point, a number of core principles guide effective local governance and decentralization work. One of the most important involves avoiding prescriptive rem- edies in favour of nationally and locally appropriate solutions, with the concepts of national and local ownership upheld in all aspects of programming.
ince local governance and decentralization are politically charged processes, the political environment should be systematically monitored throughout pro- S gramme design and implementation. The potential for sudden political shifts requires a capacity to anticipate and make adjustments. Limited political will and/or weak central policy frameworks may not automatically preclude options to support local governance and/or local development, or to look for other strategic entry points 32 that may yield results over the longer term.
Open systems or other holistic approaches to analysis (see Box 3.1) can be useful in tracking how different aspects of local governance and decentralization may affect each other, and pinpointing potential programme synergies. Framework objectives for all programme activities should be capacity development and sustainability. Capacity development strategies should seek to bolster existing capabilities, support local pri- orities, and recognize the possible need for both technical and political skills.
The many links that local governance and decentralization programmes can make in- clude those to poverty reduction and the MDGs, but they may require an active pro- gramme focus. Other potential connections may be drawn to parallel public reform or governance processes, with consideration for timing and sequencing. Vertical links between the local and national levels are important, as are horizontal links between local authorities, such as through national associations. Cross-jurisdictional planning may be appropriate for balancing rural and urban development priorities.
Finally, the broad scope of local governance and decentralization programming makes it particularly important to view partnerships as more than about who is working to- gether and the related logistics. A well-considered partnership strategy should define what outcomes can be achieved through which kinds of collective efforts (see also Chapter 5). for more detailed analysis on the local and/or 3 Box 3.1: Taking an Open Systems Approach national level: EXPERIENCES STRATEGIES, PRINCIPLES,
One possible analytical framework realistic implementation strategies, • What laws and policies related to local for assessing entry points for local an integrated approach to capacity governance and decentralization are governance and decentralization development and joint action by already in place? programmes is the open systems development partners. Appropriate • Do these form a consistent framework approach. It provides a global picture for identifying bottlenecks and/or that supports decentralization and local of all the different components of communicating strategies to respond governance? If not, what are the gaps? these multifaceted processes, looks to them, it should not be used in a at how they interact and assesses normative or static way. • Is decentralization actively being pursued? Has it been linked to other public sector the strength of different links. Broadly, the key elements might be: Open systems analysis reflects the reforms? —Types of decentralization: political, constantly shifting political and social • What recent related political statements administrative and fiscal context in which decentralization and have been made? local governance evolve, and helps —National environment: Governance • Among decision makers, nationally and/or pinpoint the factors that shape their reforms, public sector reforms, locally, who favours decentralization and/or nature and progress. national development strategies, stronger local governance? Who doesn’t? sectoral policies, local development This approach emphasizes the primacy Who might be willing to be an ally, but has strategies, local governance and of political analysis, connections not yet come forward? participation, local governance and among different aspects of • Are major political events on the horizon— municipal development decentralization and local governance, such as national or local elections, or public the coordination of different actors, —Global and regional context policy initiatives? a focus on the drivers of change, Source: EuropeAid 2007. • What is the relationship between the centre 33 and localities, either in general or in reference to specific regions or municipalities?
Making an initial assessment: • Does a local governance association exist? How influential What’s happened? What’s needed? is it? Grounding local governance and decentralization pro- • What is the degree of decentralization, as a whole and grammes in local and national contexts includes defining across different types (political, administrative and fiscal)? what has been done before, as well as gaps and challenges. Is there a national plan to coordinate the implementation As very broad categories, least-developed, middle-income, of decentralization laws and policies? transition, conflict countries and small island developing • In particular sectors or more generally, which levels of states all face different circumstances. Assessments should government are currently performing which functions? analyse the current state of the country, considering ca- pacities, resources, and national/local needs and priorities. • What is the general state of local governance, in Cultural and political traditions will play a role, as will the the country or in targeted programme regions? Do strength of the economy, environmental health, geogra- traditional authorities participate? phy, patterns of population disbursement, and exclusion- • Does the supply of local governance functions match ary practices, including those related to gender. See Snap- local demand (see Snapshot 3.2)? shot 3.1 for one national scenario. • How do people view the effectiveness of current local governance? The following questions can help in pursuing more spe- cific points of analysis. They are not comprehensive, but • Is there a local planning and budgeting system in place? encapsulate some significant aspects of local governance Is it meaningful or a paper exercise? Are expenditures and decentralization that can be used as a springboard actively tracked and reported? Intensive Dialogue Shapes a Forward-Looking Programme in Turkmenistan 3 PRINCIPLES, STRATEGIES, EXPERIENCES STRATEGIES, PRINCIPLES,
Bayramgul Garabaeva from UNDP Turkmenistan n addressing some of these issues in its new shared this experience: Iprogramme of cooperation in 2007, UNDP faced political sensitivities, limited access to key decision Snapshot 3.1 Decentralization is not a concept that is openly makers and the lack of an authoritative ministry discussed in Turkmenistan, where the political for local governments. Developing the programme influences of the post-Soviet transition period are required careful and thorough analysis. Concerted still in play. The government system remains highly efforts went into engaging high-level decision centralized, with powers concentrated in the Presi- makers to define future objectives and share ideas dency. Nonetheless, several local government laws on local governance challenges. have been passed related to planning, budgeting, local taxation, the use of natural resources and civic A set of focused strategies emerged. These should engagement. In 2006, elections were held for local help move local governance forward in a manner councils. The central Government has proposed a that is feasible and consistent with Turkmenistan’s local development strategy encompassing socio- national priorities. Interventions will include economic issues, democracy and good governance. providing international expertise to sharpen legal and policy frameworks that cover the political and Current institutional frameworks and capacities, how- financial capacities of local governments; insti- ever, are weak. Regulatory inconsistencies include tutional development; more participatory local keeping major responsibilities for planning local development planning; social mobilization and investments in central ministries. Poor coordination partnerships for quality service delivery, with an between locally elected governments and central emphasis on participatory planning involving local governmental departments impedes service delivery. governments and community members; and advo- Community participation in local planning remains cacy and communication to inform national policy 34 minimal, while awareness of local development con- makers on the outcomes and lessons learned. cerns is low among decision-makers.
• What sources of local revenue are allowed by law? • What are the national and local mechanisms for • If these include intergovernmental transfers, are they participation? Are they being used? being disbursed? • What are public perceptions about the value of • Can local governments pass and enforce laws? participation? Are there disparities in terms of gender or other facets of diversity? Has “elite capture” taken place? • How are local government officials and/or staff elected or appointed, and trained? Can local authorities make hiring • What is the state of relationships between local and firing decisions? What is the balance between local governments, and civil society and the private sector? government personnel and those sent from the centre? • What are other international development actors doing • What capacity development resources exist within the related to local governance and decentralization? country? Which ones are missing? • What are the local and national track records on service delivery? Is public perception positive or negative in terms of quantity, quality and equitable access? • What are the national and local mechanisms for accountability? Are they being enforced? Fostering Supply and Demand in Pakistan 3 PRINCIPLES, STRATEGIES, EXPERIENCES STRATEGIES, PRINCIPLES,
lvaro Rodriquez, Farhan Sabih and Shirin Gul liaison committees, monitoring committees at Afrom UNDP Pakistan highlighted the need every tier of local government and district om- to consider both supply and demand in provid- budspersons. The judiciary and a system of public Snapshot 3.2 ing technical assistance to local governance. They safety commissions, which comprise politicians defined supply side interventions as related to how from the ruling and opposition parties as well as the government conducts business, and demand civil society, have assumed primary roles in ensur- side interventions as the ways in which citizens ing police accountability. engage with the government. They provided ex- amples from the devolution reform spearheaded in UNDP has helped capitalize on these reforms by Pakistan by the 2001 Local Government Ordinance. working with multiple public sector and civil soci- ety actors. Encouraging new relationships between On the supply side, this included new incentives stakeholders has been part of an emphasis on for politicians and civil servants to improve service expanding social capital, cultivating notions of the delivery, additional forms of accountability, and public good, developing awareness of the benefits new mechanisms for public participation. On the of mutual cooperation, and reducing dependency demand side, the reforms established citizen com- on external resources and decisions. UNDP has munity boards to execute development projects also been instrumental in introducing information jointly funded by communities and local councils, technology systems at the district level for monitor- a generously defined freedom of information ing, analysing data and streamlining the provision provision covering all local government offices, of public information. complaint cells for citizen grievances, citizen police
35 A caution: hindrances to • Unrealistic programme benchmarks given the complex implementation and sustainability issues at stake There can be multiple external obstacles to programme • A lack of coordination between different development implementation, as discussed in Chapters 1 and 2. Other partners hindrances arise in the internal processes of programme • Assistance that creates parallel structures or emphasizes analysis, design and/or implementation. While some of some elements without consideration for inter-related these, such as programme benchmarks required by do- issues or balance nors, may not be fully under the control of UNDP and • Weak capacities to integrate multidisciplinary other implementing agencies, awareness in advance can perspectives (such as anthropology, sociology, political mitigate some of their effects. economy, etc.)
Common examples mentioned in the network discussion • Mismatches between programme design, and were: stakeholder priorities and perceptions • A lack of recognition that local governance and decen- • Overly centralized programmes focused primarily on tralization require integrated, long-term support (see initiatives in the capital Box 3.2) • The inability to replicate successful initiatives or use • A lack of understanding that decentralization is as much them to carve a wider political space for future progress a political as a technical process on local governance and decentralization • Resource constraints that encourage one-off interventions • Limited attention to sustainability 3 Box 3.2: What Donors Are Doing EXPERIENCES STRATEGIES, PRINCIPLES,
2006 OECD survey of 500 decen- The survey findings included: —Most focus on specific regions or locali- tralization and local governance ties, with an emphasis on improving A —Projects by individual donors remain the initiatives supported by seven development planning and service delivery, but with- dominant approach. assistance agencies highlighted some out strong connections to systematic challenges. In particular, the substantial —Project budget size varies, but many are national reforms. number of small projects is producing very small. —A significant number can be considered problems with overlap, lack of coordination local governance projects because they and occasional conflicts, underscoring the —Only a small percentage are supporting involve civil society, community groups need for closer attention to the principles comprehensive national decentralization and local development; less clear is the of the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness reforms by addressing major adminis- extent to which they support formal (see Box 5.1). trative, legal, fiscal, political and other issues. local government structures. Source: OECD Informal Donor Working Group on Local Governance and Decentralisation 2006.
Where to work: some entry points of advocacy, knowledge sharing and capacity develop- ment initiatives, operating through a network of govern- he network discussion raised the question of ment partners on the national and sub-national levels. Its when UNDP and other development partners scope and complexity can be great, however, particularly should work on decentralization and local gover- T in cases with little political support for decentralization nance on the national level, and when on the local level. and weak governance capacities. Resource constraints This decision is driven by national priorities and context, are a common challenge. See Chapter 4 on links between 36 the activities of other development partners and current different levels. programme frameworks. The national level: High-level national work normally At the same time, UNDP can and does help development focuses on advocacy and national dialogue around the debates move forward by advocating for human devel- formation and implementation of policies and laws, as opment, convening different actors to build understand- well as assistance in bridging capacity gaps in central in- ing and knowledge, and helping to broker new forms stitutions. This kind of work should be conducted in light of consensus. There is the possibility across all levels of of such overall objectives as strengthening service deliv- demonstrating development success stories that can be ery, advancing poverty reduction, fostering participation, replicated. Programming entry points can be considered reducing disparities and supporting other national devel- both in terms of their potential to deliver a defined set of opment goals. results for a particular system, institution or group, and because they promise a wider impact by capitalizing on The local level: Strategies oriented around one or more the synergies and interrelationships among many local localities generally entail working directly with local gov- governance and decentralization issues. ernments or communities.
UNDP programmes related to local governance and de- Local government support seeks to strengthen the capac- centralization normally focus on one or more of the fol- ity of local government institutions to fulfil their -man lowing entry points. dates. Activities may comprise capacity development for local development planning and fiscal management; All levels of government: This approach can connect investments in small-scale infrastructure or service de- national decentralization processes and the strengthen- livery requirements; the creation of mechanisms for par- ing of local governance. It will generally involve a mixture ticipation, including of excluded groups such as women; Box 3.3: Working with Local Government Associations 3 Local government associations make a credible, democratic and a reliable defender for resource mobilization and partnering is EXPERIENCES STRATEGIES, PRINCIPLES, number of important contributions. As of municipal interests. Every new national key, but must be linked to transparency and collective representatives of municipalities, government signs a cooperation agreement effectiveness, and grounded in the shared they can act as opinion leaders and with the association that includes targets vision. advocates with central government for decentralization policies. It also offers institutions and political leaders. They can input into major pieces of legislation rom UNDP Russia, Liliana offer technical advice to members, provide and supports municipalities in filling FProskuryakova and Alessia Scano bargaining power in the government capacity gaps. Bahloul maintained that suggested that when UNDP and other UN labour market, share information about the association has been able to develop agencies interact with local government local government affairs, and serve as an independent voice in part through associations to conduct projects, the sources of specialized training and capacity sustained support from external donors, associations should participate from the development. particularly USAID. needs assessment stage onward. The two contributors argued for treating ne of the questions framing the Jurgita Siugzdiniene, also from the the associations as more than project Onetwork discussion asked about Bratislava Regional Centre, emphasized contractors, because as real partners, ways to strengthen partnerships with that many local government associations they can share valuable knowledge and local government associations; many lack policy skills and technical expertise, experiences with project beneficiaries. participants in the discussion responded which reduces their potential impact. Rafeeque Siddiqui from UNDP Nepal with ideas and experiences. John Jackson, from Capacity Building proposed that local governance associations International, said his experiences in take part in activities related to UN In Cambodia, according to Katharina Southeast Europe led him to conclude that assistance for national policy-making and Huebner, UNDP has worked with the associations can often act as advocates, but the formulation of new laws. European Commission to support the few are strong enough as institutions to national and provincial associations that be considered real partners of the central Nestor Vega Jimenez, from the 37 have been formed since the first local government. Gaps in their professionalism Latin American Federation of Cities, government elections in 2002. The project often come from a lack of staff who can Municipalities and Local Government has focused on helping associations manage high levels of responsibility and Associations (FLACMA) in Ecuador, called develop their statutes and internal rules, authority. He suggested that programmes for strengthening the municipal association including financial policies and guidelines. to strengthen local government movement to exert more influence in The introduction of a membership fee associations should be ongoing and operate political discussion, including in moving system has inculcated a sense of ownership in tandem with other governance reform decentralization beyond “the academic, among members. Other activities include initiatives. administrative and technical” world. a best practices award, communication and leadership training, support in In Cote D’Ivoire, UNDP has worked with two Several resources may be useful in working devising annual plans and budgets, the national associations of local governments. with local governance associations. establishment of offices and the publication The experience has underscored several Globally, UCLG, formed from the earlier of information leaflets. Future plans call points, according to Madeleine Oka-Balima. International Union of Local Authorities for stronger links to similar associations in First, support for advocacy should be tied to (IULA), advocates for democratic local self- other Asian countries so that association the development of a shared vision among government, including through cooperation leaders can learn from each other. members. Second, capacity development between local governments, and within should cover both institutional frameworks the wider international community. UNDP’s Hachemi Bahloul from the UNDP Bratislava and targeted member officials, and include Bratislava Regional Centre has put together Regional Centre described how the National some exposure to other experiences within a toolkit called “Transforming a Local Association of Municipalities in the the country or surrounding region, or from Government Association.” Republic of Bulgaria has become a powerful other parts of the world. Finally, support organization widely considered to be knowledge sharing and the expansion of accountability nance systems need to be looked at within a multidisci- 3 systems. This kind of intervention can support national plinary framework that considers the relevance of political EXPERIENCES STRATEGIES, PRINCIPLES, decentralization processes if lessons can be captured and and organizational cultures, local history and practices, conveyed through national advocacy. and the values and expectations of government officials and staff, civil society and community members. Capacity Direct community support helps communities respond to development therefore should not be viewed simply as a common priorities. Some experiences have proven that one-off event, but rather as a systematic, integral part of this can result in the transparent and cost-effective use all decentralization and local governance processes. of resources, strong local ownership and greater social capital. It can weaken local governments, however, by Several participants in the network discussion agreed establishing parallel structures. Infrastructure may not be that strategies should consider all stakeholders, and sustainable because of the lack of public financing for re- encourage a long-term approach that is flexible and re- current expenditures. sponsive to current or future public sector reforms (see Box 3.4). Identifying priority interventions should factor third but less common option is area-based devel- in how different capacities may reinforce each other, and opment, which targets the specific development how needs and dynamics shift over time. New capacities A challenges of particular geographical areas. It is may affect how the division of labour between central appropriate mainly in situations involving conflict or di- and local governments is rationalized, for example, with saster, spatial poverty traps, or the physical concentration more well-equipped local institutions able to take on in- of excluded groups. creased responsibilities.
The intergovernmental level: This might include work UNDP, in looking at supporting integrated local develop- with local governance associations (see Box 3.3). It can ment, involving both the local and national levels, has also involve intergovernmental systems, such as for mak- suggested that five core functional capacities are particu- ing fiscal transfers, compiling data or sharing informa- larly important: engagement with stakeholders; the abil- 38 tion. ity to assess a situation, and define a vision and mandate; the formulation of policies and strategies; the scope to The sector level: Support here focuses on one or more budget, manage and implement plans; and the capacity sectors. It may deal with national and local policies, sup- to monitor and evaluate activities. ply and demand for services, and related capacities. This approach can be problematic if it fails to encourage ap- In the network discussion, Raf Tuts from UN-HABITAT propriate coordination between different sectors. stressed that in looking at the large picture of local gover- nance and decentralization, it is critical to first distinguish between challenges addressed by capacity building (hu- Perspectives on capacity man resource development, organizational development development and institutional strengthening) and challenges requir- ing structural change (legislation, policy change and re- Across the options for programme entry points, capacity source allocation). He shortlisted several essential local development strategies are a priority, underpinning the government competencies, starting with local govern- sustainability of all other development interventions. Ide- ments moving their focus from control and regulation to ally, the demand for capacity development should come enabling and empowering roles. They need to be active from national and local authorities themselves. An em- focal points for local economic development to stimulate phasis on the supply side, however, also recognizes that the creation of wealth, and become more efficient in their local authorities in particular face resource constraints use of resources, while the private sector and civil society and may not be aware of capacity needs or have the organizations need to be able to work as partners in ser- means to address them. vice delivery. Tuts suggested achieving these capacities The multiple capacity gaps that characterize many gover- depends on a mix of organizational development, knowl- edge transfer, skills development and attitude change. He and Lenni Montiel from UNDP’s Bureau 3 Box 3.4: General Guidelines to Support Local EXPERIENCES STRATEGIES, PRINCIPLES, for Development Policy referred to the 3rd Governance Capacities World Urban Forum in 2006, which exam- ined local governance capacity challenges The following points can be used to frame capacity development analysis and identified through research and practice programming: during the 1990s. It recommended three main areas of action that could apply to —Start with a long-term perspective. urban and rural areas. First, capacity-build- —Abandon prescriptive, mechanical approaches in favour of those that are more ing strategies need to be developed to link flexible, exploratory, knowledgeable of the local context and adaptable. capacity building with policy shifts; ensure —Use a minimal number of analytical and development tools, which should a continuous triangle between capacity preferably be linked to one framework. building, and institutional and organiza- tional development; recognize political —Avoid assumptions about what seems to be adequate in assessing commitment; ensure local relevance; build institutional capacities, and ensure that even the assessment process on local networks; continuously assess and contributes to some level of capacity development. develop curricula; recognize changes in —Define capacity needs comprehensively so that synergies can be understood stakeholders and deliver training to stake- and effective entry points chosen. holders together. —Clarify the purpose for capacity development, set feasible objectives, and time Second, the supply side of capacity build- strategies, where appropriate, to match resource allocations. ing should encompass the need to go to —Pay attention to political analysis, and acknowledge and manage political scale; long-term support; attention to constraints. staff within institutions, including- pay —Emphasize local ownership and demand for change. ment structures; and the value of creative learning institutions. Finally, evaluation —Encourage participation in the design and execution of a strategy. 39 and impact assessment exercises should —Factor in the need for effective, proactive leadership that stems from political prioritize suitable tools to monitor capac- and interpersonal skills. ity-building efforts. Florian Steinberg with —Pursue strong alliances with stakeholders in order to reduce resistance to the Asian Development Bank suggested changes in social relationships. that performance indicators could relate to the delivery of certain services, respon- —Ensure that strategies are culturally appropriate. siveness to clients, or the use of new man- —Emphasize training oriented around implementation. agement tools. —Conduct recurrent capacity analysis, correcting errors and incorporating The network discussion included a num- innovations as needed. Source: Montiel 2006. ber of comments related to training. Na- dine Bushell from the UNDP Sub-regional Resource Facility for the Caribbean sug- offer the spectrum of basic skills needed by many Afghan gested that a local government training center be estab- civil servants and, through the regular provision of cours- lished in a tertiary education institute there to offer ongo- es, help prevent backsliding. ing support to major local governance reforms, as well as training in such areas as project management and results- A few contributors highlighted problems with current ini- based management. From the UN Assistance Mission to tiatives. According to Diego Antoni and Cristina Martin at Afghanistan (UNAMA), Shahmahood Miakhel noted that UNDP Mexico, many private and public courses are read- the country’s many short-term projects to strengthen lo- ily available in Mexico, covering the gamut of technical cal governance capacities have been a good start, but local governance issues, from public financing to plan- with limited impacts. He proposed permanent training ning and administration. Less common are courses link- facilities at both the national and sub-national levels to ing local governance to human rights, gender equality, Country experiences 3 sustainable development, and capacities to broker social EXPERIENCES STRATEGIES, PRINCIPLES, The most recent summary of UNDP interventions in lo- consensus through dialogue. cal governance and decentralization provides a general Paul Schuttenbelt at Urban Solutions pointed out that sense of the types of programmes being implemented. It most capacity development programmes have failed to identified the following categories: keep up with rapid changes in cities, and have little rel- • Developing local capacities related to post-conflict evance to the day-to-day struggles of local governance development, the role of local authorities, responses officers. Fixed menus of training courses remain far more to HIV and AIDS, preparedness for and recovery from common than tailor-made efforts that focus on actual natural disasters, food security, planning practices and local governance challenges, and integrate solutions to localizing the MDGs capacity gaps in human resources as well as in organiza- tional and institutional structures. • Assisting the development of national decentralization strategies wo international capacity development initiatives • Offering new sources of knowledge through networks, mentioned in the network discussion included e-discussions, national human development reports UN-HABITAT’s work with national training organi- T and other publications zations to support local authorities and stakeholders. If individual national partners cannot offer adequate train- • Backing steps towards gender equality in local ing resources on their own, UN-HABITAT may form alli- government, including by helping to increase women’s ances with two or more organizations that bring different opportunities as civil servants and politicians, and but complementary capacities to the table. promote gender-responsive planning • Strengthening community-driven development, Training initiatives are based on thorough needs as- including through the participation of civil society sessments, and linked to reforms and local and national organizations in local policy-making 40 funding. The training of trainers, strong action planning • Supporting local government associations components and in-depth training impact evaluations are common features, along with the local adaptation of Many initiatives are carried out through joint interventions global best practice tools. The subjects covered can in- with UNCDF and UN-HABITAT, or in partnership with other clude leadership competencies, bridge-building between international development actors, including bilateral do- civil society and local government, strategic planning for nors, the World Bank and civil society organizations. local economic development, anti-corruption initiatives, financial management and participatory planning. The network discussion provided an opportunity for people from UNDP country offices, partner agencies and The UN Institute for Training and Research’s (UNITAR) De- other experts to elaborate the details of their experi- centralized Cooperation Programme devises capacity de- ences working on local governance and decentralization, velopment programmes and knowledge products based including their reflections on what has been successful. on the requirements of local governments. A worldwide Some of these are excerpted on the following pages, di- network of associated centres hosted by local govern- vided approximately as national and local. They are not ments has been formed; learning events for local officials offered as formulas for programme strategies or as evi- take place several times a year. The courses use municipal dence for drawing global conclusions. Each experience success stories from the CityShare network, and assess is unique, arising from the distinct mixtures of individual local conditions to help attendees work through specific national and local circumstances. Collectively, however, local project development and implementation issues. they do offer insights into the complexity of local gover- nance and decentralization programmes. A few common themes emerge. decade or more—and ongoing infusions 3 Box 3.5: Champions for Local Governance EXPERIENCES STRATEGIES, PRINCIPLES, of resources. Some have involved local pi- lots scaled up once they have demonstrat- Several contributors to the network that UNDP serves in some countries. ed their value. A pivotal point often comes discussion mentioned the importance when political support gains sufficient of champions in the field of local Champions can rally people around momentum, either through successful pi- governance and decentralization, a cause, helping to disseminate lots or advocacy that inspires the support given the need for concerted political and embed new ways of thinking of influential “champions” (see Box 3.5). will and strong momentum to push and behaving. They can also help in brokering consensus and in managing complex reforms past the point of Fourth, the connections between local tensions or high expectations, being theoretical exercises. Champions governance and decentralization and can be at the national or local level, particularly when reforms do not other public processes, along with the full and might be either individuals or an move forward as quickly as people spectrum of development issues, are ap- institution, such as a local government might expect. Local champions can parent. These are explored in more detail in ministry. It can also be important be valuable in setting an example of the next chapter. At UNDP, programmes for to have a champion within the ethics and conduct in public office. local governance and decentralization may international donor community, a role fall under the governance practice, but they can also integrate supportive strate- gies or connections to other practice areas, First, most programmes must work on multiple issues namely, poverty reduction, crisis preven- and levels—either initially, or because over time it be- tion and recovery, and environmental management. comes clear that they have to. Whether they are heavily centralized or decentralized, legal, policy, political, gov- Not all the following examples are success stories. Some ernance and fiscal systems consist of component parts illustrate obstacles and shortfalls. Even when progress constantly affecting each other. Working strictly on local seems incremental, however, there are possibilities for 41 development may be the most appropriate initial entry learning and the fine-tuning of strategies, along with the point in a country where decentralization is a sensitive is- chance that at least some new ways of thinking and act- sue, for example. But to be sustainable and meaningful— ing will begin to take root. and at times replicable—local interventions should be implemented with regular consideration of the national context, including national political trends and central The national political arena capacities. Possible strategies entail supporting: Second, the experiences on the following pages have oc- • The reform, development and roll out of decentraliza- curred for diverse reasons, including planned public re- tion policies form processes, shifts in political configurations, natural disasters, post-conflict reconciliation, accession to the • The formulation and costing of national decentraliza- World Trade Organization, territorial imbalances, political tion programmes and local development strategies interest and a sense of global competitiveness. This sug- • The development and implementation of fiscal gests the need to remain aware, to look for opportunities frameworks as they arise, and to think in ways that are innovative, but • The creation of sectoral plans and budgets that respond closely aligned with local realities. In several cases, the to local needs and priorities word decentralization has proved to be too fraught with negative associations. This did not prevent dynamic ini- • Expanded national capacities to systematically collect, tiatives from going on under the aegis of local develop- analyse and disaggregate data, and develop and use ment and governance. monitoring and evaluation systems
Third, many successful experiences have taken time—a Compiled with reference to the UNDP/UNV/UNCDF Strategy State- ment on Local Development. • Greater coherence between local and national policies Fostering buy-in from line ministry personnel 3 and frameworks, including by engaging local stakeholders EXPERIENCES STRATEGIES, PRINCIPLES, A promise to pursue decentralization was part of the in national planning processes and vice versa 1994 peace agreement ending Angola’s civil conflict. In 2002, the Government approved the National Strategy he following examples come from Egypt, Angola, for Decentralization. But a low level of political will, stem- the Maldives and Panama. Several of the countries ming in part from concerns about the emergence of com- T have historically been resistant to decentralization, peting centres of power, meant that little progress was but are now moving in that direction. UNDP’s role is often made in implementing the policy. In addition, the strat- that of an advocate, a convener of stakeholders for policy egy was not viewed as a collective vision by key govern- dialogues to work on a common vision, and an identifier ment branches, including the finance, planning and local and supporter of potential national champions. government ministries.
Nonetheless, it had created some room for maneuver. Ongoing advocacy deepens policy dialogue and UNDP Angola, which had been requested by the Gov- political interest ernment to offer assistance on decentralization and lo- cal governance, began reaching out to key players in the In Egypt, UNDP has encouraged a national dialogue policy sub-system. One high-level advisor became an about decentralization and local governance by publish- enthusiastic champion of decentralization and local gov- ing the 2004 Egypt Human Development Report on De- ernance, helping to harness the support of line ministry centralization, and sponsoring a 2006 high-level mission personnel positioned to translate new policies into ac- from UNCDF that brought together prominent govern- tions. In recent years, municipalities have gained greater ment officials, donors and academics. Part of the mission fiscal autonomy, the Government has approved the Mu- included meeting with the governors of 12 of Egypt’s 26 nicipal Development Programme, bank facilities have governorates to listen to their feedback on the opera- been established in municipalities and key infrastruc- tions of local authorities, and recommendations for im- tures have been rehabilitated. A Decentralization and Lo- 42 proving the policy environment, institutional structures cal Governance Working Group involving all central and and overall capacities. Contact with a pivotal member of local partners serves as an ongoing forum for dialogue the ruling party contributed to heightened interest about and information sharing, and at times as a donor coordi- decentralization issues among senior political leaders. nation forum.
A constructive and ongoing policy dialogue has resulted. —Alfredo Teixeira, UNDP Angola Decentralization has been mentioned in several presi- dential speeches, and a pro-decentralization paragraph was part of recent constitutional reforms. Drawing on in- A natural disaster and multiparty politics prompt put from a spectrum of national partners and supported policy evolution by several bilateral donors, the Ministry of Local Develop- ment and UNDP have agreed on a programme of coop- In the Maldives, the 2004 tsunami and a shift to a multipar- eration to strengthen the ministry’s technical capacities ty political system have been factors allowing more open in three areas. These include enhancing the policy and discussion and action on local governance and decentral- legal environment for the local authorities system; ad- ization, previously deemed politically sensitive subjects. justing institutional structures and developing statutory In 2005, the Government requested UNDP’s support in procedures; and managing human resources, including designing and implementing the Atolls Development for through developing skills related to administrative, pub- Sustainable Livelihoods project. It focused on the poten- lic expenditure and asset management. tial benefits for poverty reduction from decentralization, a politically acceptable approach at that stage. —Rania Hedeya, UNDP Egypt In 2007, the central Government formally requested assis- tance on local governance. The tsunami had underscored the value of local leadership in managing local resources Government. Some attention has been devoted to articu- 3 and relief efforts. Moves towards local governance were lating what each level of government can do best, and EXPERIENCES STRATEGIES, PRINCIPLES, also viewed as a logical extension of the political reforms what mechanisms are needed to control and monitor that produced the multiparty system. these activities. There has also been an effort to sensitize policy makers by defining criteria for decentralization. If The Government is now pursuing, as key policy objec- the challenge to achieve political consensus on these is- tives, the strengthening of local governance through sues can be surmounted, the next step will be to find the decentralized government and administrative reform, most effective model for managing the state. This should and the increased self-reliance of local communities. The be linked to clear development objectives, including to new National Decentralization Programme includes six redress territorial inequalities, and make poverty reduc- components: creating local governments, electing local tion and social inclusion efforts more effective. councils, transferring responsibilities, enabling govern- ment staff, providing fiscal resources and empowering —Maribel Landau, UNDP Panama local citizens. UNDP supports these through partnerships and related initiatives, including ongoing work on capac- ity development for local island and atoll development On the local level communities around critical climate change and environ- mental sustainability issues. Programme strategies can target: • Local elections and representation —Ram Shankar, UNDP Maldives • Local implementation of decentralization reforms, including the clarification of functions, the restructuring of government institutions, and the development of New territorial imbalances foster reconsideration guidance for local government operations of unitary systems • The capacities of local authorities to fulfil their mandates 43 A unitary country, Panama has had few advances towards and functions, including in engaging stakeholders, decentralization. At the municipal level, mayors are formulating strategies, budgeting, monitoring, etc. elected, but have limited authority. All services and in- • The capacities of local service provides to deliver quality vestments are provided by the central Government, and services that respond to demand and contribute to coordinated by centrally appointed provincial governors. human development, including to analyse and promote UNDP has worked with other UN agencies in encourag- demand, mobilize and use resources, and develop ing municipal decentralization, but without the requisite public-private partnerships political traction. More recently, however, territorial im- balances in development that followed the assumption • Strategic sectoral or economic development interventions of control of the Panama Canal and its extension have through the provision of funding, especially budget raised awareness of the potential benefits from some support, or small grants to jumpstart activities degree of decentralization. UNDP and UN-HABITAT have • Local resource mobilization, including through legal been engaged with the national Government in formu- empowerment for the poor and land governance rights lating a decentralization policy, and discussing different • Community strategies oriented around alternative options for structuring the system of municipalities and livelihoods and service provision, integrated natural provinces. resources management and/or multi-stakeholder This process has emphasized the heterogeneity of the dialogues municipalities, and the need to pursue a gradual trans- Experiences from Mozambique, West Africa, Ukraine, fer and diversification of responsibilities and resources China, Djibouti and Tanzania follow. In several cases, lo- according to local capacities. Given Panama’s status as a cal governance programming has started with a few pi- unitary country, it has also stressed the role of the prov- lot communities to determine what works or does not, ince as an intermediary and coordinator for the central Ibid. as a step towards national replication. This approach may time; expanded their powers to plan, budget and imple- 3 provide opportunities to reach particular communities, ment local initiatives; and highlighted the need to rein- EXPERIENCES STRATEGIES, PRINCIPLES, including those marginalized due to economic, political, force local human and institutional capacities. cultural, geographical or other factors. UNDP continues to advise the central Government, includ- Local development planning is often an entry point, of- ing the Ministry of Planning and Development, through fering scope for a spectrum of activities ranging from policy dialogues and research related to decentralization, public participation to the cultivation of foundational local economic development, natural resource develop- governance capacities. The local level can also be the ment and community management programmes. It has place to engage civil society groups, the private sector, backed the Ministry of State Administration in imple- traditional authorities and other stakeholders, and to look menting new laws on decentralization and local gover- at fostering targeted actions on crosscutting issues such nance, modernizing local institutions and improving the as gender equality and HIV and AIDS. Several examples efficiency of local administration policies. illustrate the connections between the local and national levels (see also Chapter 4). —Israel Jacob Massuanganhe, UNDP and UNCDF Mozambique
Pilots and long-term support achieve institutional change Planning for the poorest communities Peace and concerted political and economic reforms are UNCDF co-finances pilots in six West African countries— increasing the role of sub-national governance in Mozam- Benin, Burkina Faso, Guinea, Mali, Niger and Senegal— bique. To demonstrate what can work on the local level, that support decentralization and local development. UNCDF and UNDP a decade ago piloted a programme in These countries have pursued varying degrees of decen- tralization and deconcentration. There is room for opti- Nampula province. It combined participatory planning 44 with the development of local government capacities mism over the longer term, but political will has fallen for planning, financing and infrastructure development. short of the legislative framework, so decentralization is All 18 districts in the province were able to create district often poorly sequenced and the transfer of resources has plans and establish consultative councils. The latter were not gone smoothly. intended to work with sub-district councils that in turn UNCDF is active in some of the poorest and most remote would interact with community groups, allowing a full regions of these countries, where poor services, limited range of development priorities to be expressed. production bases, degraded environmental conditions The initiative included a strong focus on civil society and low capacities are common. As a starting point, the pi- participation, recognizing these groups as key partners lots help communities prepare five-year communal devel- in governance and conduits for improved citizen partici- opment plans linked to annual and multi-year investment pation. The private sector was encouraged through the plans. An expert advisory mechanism supports planning promotion of small and medium enterprises, which con- and budgeting exercises, while a local development fund tributed to employment and the provision of services. provides direct local budget support that can be a lever Block grants underscored the positive potential of local for additional resources. All project bidding and contract- governance institutions by assisting with immediate im- ing procedures take place at the community level. These provements in infrastructure and human welfare. approaches help develop management skills, familiarize local authorities with financial and accounting procedures, The early success of this model convinced the World Bank and ensure that communities make their own decisions to help replicate it in four other regions; it has now been about essential services, the local economy, natural re- nationally adopted by central government policy. New source management, food security and so on. legislation has made districts the focal point for poverty eradication; defined them as budgetary units for the first The results of the UNCDF pilots have included greater employment, increased tax revenues, and land use de- Experimenting with grass-roots community 3 PRINCIPLES, STRATEGIES, EXPERIENCES STRATEGIES, PRINCIPLES, cisions based on objective criteria rather than political development to respond to emerging issues clientelism. Long planning processes can be problematic for local populations, however. Difficult conditions and China’s search for structural adjustments to its public severely constrained local capacities imply that external administrative systems has stemmed from its massive support will need to be in place for some time to come. economic reforms, consequent wave of urban migra- tion, and intensified socioeconomic changes after acces- —Christian Fournier, UNCDF Senegal sion to the World Trade Organization and a 2004 shift in development policy. One strategy has been to promote grass-roots community development, particularly to re- An area-based approach runs into limitations of spond to emerging issues such as urbanization, and the scale challenges facing newly unemployed workers and rural migrants. With UNDP assistance, the Ministry of Civil Af- Ukraine has made some progress towards decentraliza- fairs has implemented the China Urban Community De- tion, but the process remains hampered by a lack of pol- velopment Project. It aims to improve urban grass-roots icy and legal frameworks. Municipal capacities are low, government by restructuring existing governance orga- local development priorities attract insufficient focus and nizations, and accelerating civil society participation and resources, and poverty remains entrenched. From 2000 democratic development processes. to 2006, UNDP promoted local participation in develop- ment through an area-based approach. Four projects—in The project adopted a pilot approach, given the immen- two geographical areas, and on two issue areas—helped sity of the needs across China’s 70,000 urban communi- communities form organizations to identify priority ties. Expert groups assessed governance restructuring needs, develop strategies for tackling them and raise lo- and community participation in pilot sites, and took part cal resources. Close relationships with local authorities in overseas study tours to look at similar issues in other were cultivated; civil society organizations, academia and countries. Their final research report informed new na- 45 private sector concerns also participated. UNDP used the tional policy recommendations, contributed to the revi- knowledge gleaned from these experiences to make pol- sion of the Organic Law on Resident Community Com- icy recommendations to the national Government. mittees and fed into the creation of official guidebooks on urban community development that have been na- An evaluation found the programme was consistent with tionally distributed. UNDP continues working with civil the need to encourage change from within in a gradual society organizations to support rural residents, particu- way, but the scope was limited. The focus on lower level out- larly disadvantaged groups, in participating in local gov- puts was not entirely in sync with the overall objectives of ernance and protecting their rights. One project is help- decentralization and more effective local governance. Many ing women leaders expand their capacities for effective obstacles could not be addressed—such as the tangle of engagement. public financing provisions, the burdensome overregula- tion of small and medium enterprises, and corruption. A —Subinay Nandy, UNDP China scaled-up partnership approach needed to back capacity development for politicians and civil servants, and assist in creating stronger funding allocation mechanisms. These les- sons have been used to formulate the new Local Develop- ment Programme. It integrates central policy advice and ad- vocacy; capacity development for local authorities aimed at more participatory and accountable local governance; and community mobilization to foster community-led develop- ment and collaborative relationships with local authorities.
—Joanna Kazana, UNDP Ukraine Laying a foundation for peace through 3 PRINCIPLES, STRATEGIES, EXPERIENCES STRATEGIES, PRINCIPLES, development and dialogue UNDP’s assessment of Djibouti’s post-conflict reconstruc- tion and rehabilitation needs led to a programme em- phasizing social infrastructure and the promotion of local development. Decentralization had been a demand of rebel and opposition groups, but the central Government expressed reluctance for political reasons. Serious ques- tions were raised about regional and local capacities.
The UNDP programme was able to begin opening space for the role for local administrations in development deci- sion-making. Three basic components were involved. The first established consultation mechanisms in each region, paired with social mobilization that helped build con- sensus around major development issues and instituted the practice of social dialogue. Under the second com- ponent, each region created a planning unit to develop a strategic vision of local development and advise the regional administration. The third component entailed social infrastructure investments and income-generation activities, along with the strengthening of capacities to plan and execute poverty reduction projects.
The programme encountered many obstacles, such as 46 the lack of a comprehensive capacity development strat- egy, poorly coordinated transfers of civil servants from the central to local levels, weak links to localities within some line ministries, and limited understanding of demo- cratic governance concepts. Even so, one lesson was that it is critical to focus on processes such as social dialogue, since these develop basic competencies and generate grass-roots support for future activities.
Recently, central government support for bringing gover- nance and development closer to the people appears to be growing. Regional and communal elections have tak- en place, and a project supporting decentralization and local administration has been launched in two regions, in line with a second-generation poverty reduction strat- egy paper. Drawing together a half dozen development partners, the project will focus on establishing local insti- tutions, and strengthening their capacities for planning, programming and accessing financial resources.
—Mathieu Ciowela, Harbi Omar and Hassan Ali, UNDP Djibouti 4 MAKING LINKS MAKING
4 Making Links
The examples chronicled in Chapter 3 confirm that local governance and decentraliza- tion processes involve many actors, systems and institutions, and cross a spectrum of development and public reform issues. Responding effectively to this complexity may be one of the greatest challenges to programming in these areas. This chapter again draws on some of the experiences described in the network discussion to look at links in three common categories: between the local and national levels, among different pub- lic sector reform processes, and across issues such as human rights and gender equality. Depending on the context, local governance and decentralization programmes may need to take some or all of these on board.
It may also be relevant to look both at connections to different areas of a national UNDP programme, as well as to initiatives pursued by different development partners, par- ticularly in the context of UN reform and coordination, and the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness.
Making links helps different strategies build on each other. Failing to do so can ham- string progress and lead to lost time and resources, as several contributors to the net- work discussion emphasized. In the most problematic cases, programmes have been 47 rendered ineffective. Other challenges have included delays in implementation and difficulties in defining programme results. Identifying and managing potential risks is particularly important in highly politicized or sensitive contexts.
The examples that follow are not comprehensive. Lists at the start of each topic provide additional issues for consideration.
Links between the local and national levels Local governance and development processes are strongly influenced by central policy choices. Decentralization, in turn, depends on effective local governance. While it may make sense in a given country context to focus on one level as an entry point—for ex- ample, national advocacy in countries where political support for decentralization has been uneven—it is also essential to cultivate ongoing recognition of the links between the national and local levels, including shifts over time. These may include variations in relationships between different levels of local government—such as community, mu- nicipality and state or district—and between local governments and different national institutions, such as sectoral or other ministries (see Viewpoint 4.1).
Since country programmes cannot work on all issues at the same time, part of this pro- cess entails understanding where the most strategic entry points lie, and how interven- tions on different levels can reinforce each other to magnify the overall impact. Typical links include: • Political alignments colleges of communal elected officials—to organize pro- 4 MAKING LINKS MAKING • Development planning, including guidelines for vincial meetings. These brought different political con- strategies and budgets stituencies together to examine local governance chal- lenges and search for mutually beneficial solutions. Plans • Institutional mechanisms call for establishing a mechanism for ongoing dialogue • Resource flows, including revenue raising and fiscal between provincial and national officials to facilitate rela- transfers tions between local bodies, and for installing a national • Capacities of institutions and personnel mechanism to coordinate decentralization and local gov- ernance once new policies are fully in place. • The distribution of civil servants • Infrastructure Writing on the Comoros, Sascha Le Large at UNDP de- scribed how local constituencies have blocked the de- • Data collection and use velopment of a cohesive vision for decentralization, even • Conflict resolution though it is viewed as a chance for reconciliation, follow- • Implementation of national peace accords ing the 1997-2001 secessionist crises. Traditionally, peo- ple in the Comoros adhere strongly to their community of origin. Village institutions are powerful, made more so he network discussion included several examples in recent years through diaspora remittances, which now of how country programmes have combined ac- are three times the amount of foreign aid. T tivities on the local and national levels. From Bu- rundi, Jean Kabahizi described the multiple challenges Control of public finances has been at the heart of the after 12 years of conflict and crisis: extreme poverty, weak Comoros’ political conflicts. Two islands have significant and inexperienced institutions, and difficult political re- revenues; two have limited revenues. A revenue-sharing lations that afflict the local and national levels. ACon- agreement has skewed incentives for revenue collection stitution has emerged from the Arusha Accords peace and produced a climate of mistrust. Community budgets process, with laws to follow on both decentralization and 48 also differ from island to island, and are based mainly on local governance. Democratic elections in 2005 put in traditional or voluntary contributions. Revenue dispari- place two levels of local councils. ties have spurred ongoing concerns about the impact on national unity. The UNDP programme initially focused on mobilizing various development partners around rehabilitation and UNDP has supported several national studies and brain- socioeconomic reintegration to begin establishing basic storming workshops that have attempted to broker con- community infrastructure and participatory development sensus about the future balance between local and na- in local rehabilitation plans. A second phase was to sup- tional control. These have identified recurrent issues with port government efforts to formulate a national policy of institutions, capacity building and resources. It is also ap- decentralization and community development. Contacts parent that devolving responsibilities will demand better with partners including the World Bank and the European monitoring from the bottom up, top down and horizon- Union have produced a letter of policy as a preliminary tally, along with continuous policy dialogue and the on- step. In parallel, a pilot local governance programme be- going communication of a shared vision. gan supporting local communities on setting up institu- tional frameworks and strengthening capacities to plan Eric Opoku from UNDP Ghana discussed deepening local development strategies. participation to counteract centralizing tendencies taking place without clear policy choices. Despite Ghana’s con- Specific efforts have been needed to address political siderable progress in institutional development of district conflicts that ruptured communication among localities and sub-district structures, there has been a growing within different provinces. UNDP began at the national concentration of power and resources in key sector min- level by working with the Senate—the Upper House of istries, departments and agencies that plan implement, the Parliament is elected by universal indirect vote by monitor and evaluate essential services to communi- 4 Hachemi Bahloul from UNDP’s Bratislava Regional Cen- panied by policies that establish or restore the links LINKS MAKING tre commented: between national and local development. National and local development plans should be aligned In many countries where decentralization is taking (through bottom-up and top-down processes) to place, local planning is done in isolation from national ensure the overall coherence of the national develop- strategic development frameworks. The latter in turn ment process and synergies between interventions at often do not integrate adequately local needs and different levels. Also, central government and donor priorities. Donors, even when they support the formu- financial support for local development should be
Viewpoint 4.1: Bridging Local and National Planning lation of national development strategies and plans, provided in the frame of coherent and integrated lo- often continue to finance the implementation of cal development frameworks. separate discrete area-based or local governance and development programmes. While such programmes n a context of scarce resources and capacities, local contribute to national development efforts, they are Iand national development planning are important not always well articulated with central level strate- to ensure strategic focus, and the adequate prioritiza- gies and plans. Hence, they result in local processes tion and sequencing of development efforts. Integrat- that are rich in community participation but have ed planning is often advocated to address central and weak links with national priorities, government agen- local level inter-sectoral coordination and coherence cies and national funding sources. They thus have problems. However, it is also relevant to address coor- limited prospects for sustainability. dination, coherence and funding issues between the national and local levels. 49 This vertical de-linking is combined with a horizontal fragmentation of support for local development. The National integrated planning that incorporates the financial transfers made by central governments to local level can ensure: local authorities are not always based on the priorities identified in democratically formulated local develop- —The identification of and agreement on the strate- ment agendas. In such a situation, the effectiveness of gic links and synergies between local and national these transfers in meeting local priority needs and/or development; ensuring coherent local development is not clear. —The adequate distribution of responsibilities for Donor support for local development is sometimes development between local and national actors; made conditional upon the participatory prepara- tion of a variety of local thematic or sectoral strate- —The integration of local development funding in gic plans. Lack of coordination in their preparation the budgetary process; often means the co-existence of a large number —The allocation of central resources for local devel- of inconsistent local plans, and thus a dispersion opment on the basis of clear and agreed strategic of local development efforts. And again, limited frameworks (national and local); and coordination with higher level strategic develop- ment frameworks often means that local plans are —Coherent donor support to national and local de- detached from sustainable state funding sources velopment efforts. and remain essentially wish lists. The establishment of a national integrated planning The point is that decentralization needs to be accom- system that incorporates the local level requires the cont. have begun reflecting national partisanship, although 4 MAKING LINKS MAKING design of mechanisms and processes ensuring they are technically non-partisan. horizontal integration at the central level on the one hand, and horizontal integration at the local A coherent overall fiscal decentralization policy and stra- level on the other, as well as vertical national-local tegic framework is not in place, and a fund for granting integration. While the specific mechanisms and disbursements from the centre has been poorly struc- processes for vertical integration would need to be tured, allowing only marginal adjustments for local priori- tailored to national circumstances, interventions ties. While district assemblies have authority over annual would most certainly need to include: budgets, guidelines on planning and budgeting are not fully synchronized, including with those for the District Assembly Common Fund and the national Medium-Term Viewpoint 4.1: cont. Development Plan. Information from the centre on funds available for planning and budgeting is often delayed or —Institutionalized mechanisms for multi-actor complicated by discretionary central interventions. (including local actors) strategic dialogue; For its part, UNDP is collaborating both with the Ministry of —The harmonization of central and local govern- Local Government, Rural Development and Environment, ment planning and budget cycles; and the Local Government Service Council on a number of policy reviews, including for a proposed Local Govern- —The preparation of guidelines for integrated ment Finance Bill. A newer focus has been to facilitate local development planning and budgeting popular participation, especially of women and disadvan- aligned with the central planning and budget- taged groups, in local governance and decision-making ing processes; and processes. Other interventions help district assemblies engage civil society in the preparation of district develop- —The institutionalization of local government rep- ment plans, and seek to boost accountability, including 50 resentation in the national budgeting process. through improved access to information. The hope is that local participation, over time, will demystify governance The MDGs could provide common strategic as a reserve for the elite, increase people’s interest and objectives across different levels and be the com- commitment, and strengthen decision-making, resulting mon frame of reference for a national integrated in more accountability and effective utilization of local planning system. This could also constitute an and national resources. opportunity for enhanced UN system cooperation in support of the achievement of the MDGs. The UNDP and UNCDF in Yemen have learned what happens donor community in general could use this frame- when a successful local pilot confronts the limits of na- work to harmonize its activities and contribute tional capacities, as detailed by Aladeen Shawa, UNCDF’s to the achievement of the objectives of the Paris Local Economic Development Advisor. In 2004, the two Declaration on Aid Effectiveness. agencies joined forces for the Decentralization and Lo- cal Development Support Programme, designed around UNCDF’s local development programme model and im- plemented by the Ministry of Local Administration. At first, six districts introduced new public expenditure and asset ties. Sector policies have fostered this centralization, with management procedures, using budget support with lo- many agencies continuing to retain their “hierarchy” from cal resources to implement participatory development national to regional to district offices. Furthermore, lines plans. The programme spread to 48 districts, assisted by of accountability are confused. Assorted political repre- nine donors, and became the primary platform for help- sentatives draw authority, legitimacy and their constitu- ing to develop local governance in Yemen. encies from different sources. District assembly elections t also aided the ministry to assess the local governance ever, despite serious challenges stemming from the leg- 4 system, the overall policy and legal environment, and acy of central control. These include poor and obsolete LINKS MAKING I its own structures. This information guided the draft- structures, work methods and equipment, along with lim- ing of the National Decentralization Strategy, which will ited professional capacities. Some level of decentraliza- strengthen the role of local authorities in local develop- tion has been initiated, including a new legal framework ment starting in 2009. A significant challenge, however, for decentralization and new laws on local government has been the ministry’s limited operational capacity. An and elections. These define the extension of municipal institutional development strategy has been produced competencies, the direct election of mayors, the estab- and will be implemented, but working on capacity devel- lishment of new institutions, certain forms of fiscal de- opment from the beginning would have strengthened the centralization and limited central government control. ministry’s ability to fully function as the primary national entity for supporting and supervising local authorities. But the recently adopted Constitution has affected this fledgling system. It defines the municipal assembly as the main local decision-making organ, with the power to Connecting to other public reforms or elect executive organs. To bring existing laws into con- processes formance, an in-depth legal reform has produced new laws on local self-government, local elections and territo- Since local governance and decentralization programmes rial organization. According to the new Law on Local Elec- can be influenced by other public sector reforms, ini- tions, municipal assemblies are elected on a proportional tial programme analysis should account for processes basis, based on a decision made by the political parties. already taking place or on the horizon, looking for pos- This is a step away from local sustainable democracy, sible synergies and identifying potential risks. Common since there is now limited citizen participation through examples of public reforms or processes that can affect direct representation in municipal assemblies. local governance and decentralization include: • Constitutional revision To help address some of these issues, UNDP is supporting 51 the reform of central public administration, while assisting • Legal reform in developing sustainable local capacities to manage citi- • Restructuring of public administration zen-oriented municipal administrations. It is also backing • Elections the Serbian association of local authorities in advocating for conditions that foster sound local governance. • Development policy shifts • Changes in political systems or configurations n Sudan, the 2002-2006 local governance project for Khartoum State lost steam following the passage of • Trade agreements affecting taxation or fiscal revenues the 2003 Local Government Act. The project had been (see Viewpoint 4.2) I intended as a pilot for eventual national replication, with • Adjustments in macroeconomic strategies activities related to local revenue raising, budgeting and • Peace negotiations or agreements information management. Samia El Nager from UNDP Su- dan noted that the project’s final evaluation referred to the In the Republic of Serbia, according to Tomislav Novovic new law as curtailing even the limited freedoms granted to from UNDP, the advent of democracy in 2000 quickly localities by a previous statute. Responsibility for localities pushed macroeconomic stabilization to the front of the moved from elected legislative councils to a constitution- domestic policy agenda. A first phase covered privatiza- ally appointed commissioner, helping extend centralized tion, institutional reforms, banking sector reforms and control. Another constraint came from the lack of connec- shifts in social policy. Starting in 2007, the focus shifted tions between local governance and the broader context to finalizing structural reforms, institution building and of civil service reform. Local governments have no power control mechanisms related to legal frameworks. to hire and set contract conditions, reducing the prospects for competent, neutral local staff committed to commu- Public administration reforms have lagged behind, how- nity development and effective local services. 4 Cristina Hernandez at UNDP’s Sub-regional Resource It seems obvious that good local governance and LINKS MAKING Facility in Senegal wrote: decentralization linked to boosting economic and trade activities in provinces and localities should be s is increasingly recognized, trade is an indispens- promoted. This would encourage the benefits of trade Aable engine for economic growth and an impor- to be felt in places where the production supporting tant tool of development. By expanding markets, fa- it originates (i.e., at local level). For this, local govern-
Viewpoint 4.2: Extending the Economic Benefits of Trade
cilitating competition and disseminating knowledge ments need to have more resources and autonomy to and new technologies, trade can create opportunities set their priorities and strategies. It is also important for growth and promote human development. In the that central and local governments coordinate inte- majority of developing countries, however, the bene- grated economic and social strategies that incorpo- fits of trade do not reach the poor. Despite numerous rate trade. laws and legal frameworks, trade has not been effec- tively promoted in these countries, which remain mar- When I arrived at the Sub-regional Resource Facility ginalized from the globalization process. The reasons in Dakar to act as trade policy advisor, no Country for this situation are very numerous and complex, Programme in the West and Central Africa sub-region including poorly managed capitalism, rigid interna- considered trade as an area of work. In my view, it is tional trade rules and pervasive gender discrimination important to integrate trade in such programmes, and in economic life. But what about bad governance and to do so in a way that it is linked to local governance, the centralization of power, and therefore finance, still local development and decentralization. Furthering present in many countries? What about the effects of cross-practice between governance and trade special- 52 this on the development of the private sector nation- ists is something that I would highly encourage. ally, and even more at the local level?
acing these obstacles, the UNDP project ended up cies launched a local development programme in Byumba producing practices seen as promising, and served Province formulated around capacity development and fi- F as a kind of research initiative, drawing attention to nancing local plans. Several months after the project docu- the need for policy change. Through training, some local ment was signed, the Government launched major admin- operational capacities were strengthened. New links were istrative and territorial reforms, followed by local elections. forged between localities and different central ministries, These accelerated decentralization, which had begun in which promoted common understanding. To date, how- 2000. A strategic framework and revised implementation ever, strong political will remains absent; plans for policy plan followed, as did “performance contracts” between the reform are still not seriously considered. No systematic or mayors and the President of the Republic as a practical tool lasting changes to the policy or legal foundation for local to make districts more accountable. governance have occurred. There is still no state strategy for local governance, and changes after the Comprehen- The shift complicated the UNDP/UNCDF programme. A sive Peace Agreement have not reflected lessons learned. number of activities had to stop for long periods. Signifi- cant changes took place in administrative structures, terri- An experience in Rwanda with administrative and territori- torial boundaries and local staffing. Institutional memory, al reform, combined with elections, was described by Ben- knowledge and statistical data were no longer available oit Larielle from UNDP and UNCDF. In 2004, the two agen- or outdated for new local authorities, many of whom had almost no experience. A comprehensive poverty base- programmes, they require a deliberate focus from the be- 4 line is not yet available. District micro-projects developed ginning, as otherwise attention can quickly become lost LINKS MAKING through participatory community development planning or diffused. They should be highlighted in initial analysis, processes (ubudehe) have not been backed with updated programme design, resource allocations, and monitoring and comprehensive poverty and socioeconomic analysis. and evaluation. Specific strategies and actions, budget Data limitations have also restrained the capacity of UNDP lines and indicators should be defined. Participants noted and UNCDF to measure results on key priorities agreed with that when funds are not earmarked, activities related to donors. these issues often end up sacrificed to other priorities.
ccording to Larielle, the experience has under- In working with local governance stakeholders, contribu- scored the need for open dialogue to coordinate tors recommended keeping strategies pragmatic, and A the initiatives of development partners with na- making strong connections to actions that can improve tional reforms, given the potential for wasted time and people’s everyday lives and respond to local concerns. resources. It has also raised questions about abilities to Social notions that may be more conservative in localities anticipate and manage risks. than on the national level can challenge the introduction of certain topics, requiring creative advocacy efforts sen- sitive to local concerns. Working on crosscutting issues The network discussion noted that the mainstreaming of Contributions to the network discussion made relatively crosscutting issues often involves heavy methodologies few references to crosscutting issues, even though many that should be streamlined. Suggestions for improving of these are not only critical for good governance and work in this area included using conditional grants, and equitable local development, but also mainstays of the providing capacity development training around specific UNDP mandate. Local governance offers numerous en- themes at different levels of government. try points to work on crosscutting issues—participation, 53 planning, revenue raising, budgeting, legal reform, the The following pages offer a brief introduction to some of structure of the civil service and capacity development the major crosscutting issues likely to be encountered in initiatives can all be looked at from gender equality and local governance work—the list is not comprehensive, human rights perspectives, for instance. being tied to some extent to issues raised in the network discussion. Experiences described there are included It is often through crosscutting issues that work to im- where possible. prove local governance materializes. Common examples include: • Human rights Human rights • Access to justice Decentralization and local governance reforms have a • The MDGs number of human rights implications. They can uphold political rights through greater local participation, and • Gender equality economic and social rights from more effective service • Human diversity delivery. On the other hand, they can strengthen local • Post-conflict recovery elites and entrench discrimination, such as through ineq- uitable access to services or fiscal transfer systems that • Environmental issues and climate change favour some people over others. Given these alternative • Anti-corruption initiatives scenarios, and the reality that substantive realization of a • HIV and AIDS spectrum of rights takes place at the local level, human rights considerations should be integral to local gover- Network discussion contributors who did delve into nance and decentralization programmes. They should crosscutting issues emphasized some common points. be couched in terms consistent with the local context, When these issues are incorporated into local governance 4
A Pragmatic Approach in Bosnia and Herzegovina LINKS MAKING
Christian Hainzl, from UNDP Bosnia and Herzegovina, for monitoring annual action plans. Tailored capac- shared an experience from the Rights-based Mu- ity-building measures have cultivated the full range nicipal Development Programme, now operating in of skills needed for local development planning Snapshot 4.1 over 20 municipalities. It uses human rights analysis through on-the-job training. to broaden and complement traditional economic analysis, and to support local development practices The project has encountered several difficulties, with human rights-based components. including the low level of human rights awareness and limited understanding of the links between The programme’s methodology translates human local development and human rights among both rights norms into practical tools used for local local and international actors. The initial phase thus development planning. It was designed by a trans- focused mainly on assessment and analysis for disciplinary team of economists, local governance overall sensitizing. After the methodology proved experts and human rights practitioners, who to be overly complex, the emphasis shifted to explored how to connect human rights and other transforming it into process-oriented tools devel- development approaches, such as local economic oped by or in close cooperation with project staff development, and to identify links that would en- with different types of expertise. courage consensus. There has been an emphasis on practical usefulness and transferability in order to Other difficulties have related to the lack of reliable avoid analytical deadlock. The project has moved quantitative and qualitative data, particularly on beyond assessment and local policy design to the most vulnerable groups. This has required some include the prioritizing, development and co-fund- creativity in “data mining” along with focus group ing of concrete local projects targeting the most techniques to deepen qualitative information. The vulnerable populations. lack of generic capacities for development plan- 54 ning and implementation has called for building roject consultation mechanisms have reflected skills beyond human rights through training on Pthe important human rights principles of policy and planning design, as well as project cycle participation and non-discrimination, which has management. Since limited municipal capacities ensured citizens’ involvement in the identification have also prevented proper monitoring, the project and responses to political, social and economic in some municipalities has worked on monitoring exclusion. Processes usually directly involving 150 mechanisms and related capacities. or more local stakeholders per municipality have mobilized citizens to take part through different An important lesson is that this kind of strategy working bodies and “participation champions” with needs to be “pragmatic” rather than “dogmatic.” a range of expertise. Specific focus group discus- A human rights-based approach is feasible if it sions have been devoted to vulnerable populations combines the conceptual and analytical strength of such as the Roma, returnees, elderly, youth, rural human rights with established development prac- populations, etc., so as to avoid elite or majority tices for solving concrete development problems. capture of the process. It is helpful to start from established practices, and to see where and how human rights can really The principles of participation and accountability deepen and change outcomes. In this sense, the have also applied to selecting, funding and co- human rights-based approach is an “opportunistic” financing priority projects in municipal develop- framework. ment strategies. Targeted information campaigns conducted with municipal information officers Overall, economic, social and cultural rights are key, have informed citizens and provided opportunities although there are not too many standards cont. 4
A Pragmatic Approach in Bosnia and Herzegovina cont. LINKS MAKING
for implementation at the local level. The pro- pact on local development and poverty reduction. gramme had to come up with “standard setting” by itself, which is a challenge (but also motivating, as it The programme in Bosnia and Herzegovina has Snapshot 4.1 helps to pave new ground). contributed in at least four ways to local poverty reduction and social inclusion. It has changed the systematic way of selecting partner munici- vision of local development, inspiring concerted Apalities must be established from the start emphasis on processes and tools to reach vulner- to avoid bias and ensure a competitive process. able people. It has altered the way analysis is done, Applying a human rights-based approach can be particularly for the social sectors. It has given con- particularly challenging in municipalities with poor crete meaning to accountability for local develop- records on human rights. Having a good “mix” al- ment, which helps in advocacy and determining lows cross-municipal comparisons on the effective- which level of government has the prime responsi- ness of the methodology. bility for funding. Finally, it has led to local develop- ment strategies that contain a host of projects not On-the-job training is important but complex; easily found in standard local economic develop- impact assessment takes time. Generally, capacity ment processes, which still rely too much on the needs should be thoroughly assessed and planned idea of “trickle-down.” from the beginning, as additional difficulties arise if capacity development is introduced in the middle UNDP in partnership with other donors has initi- of the process. The involvement of local experts in ated two local governance projects that will build the adjustment and adaptation of the methodology on the Rights-based Municipal Development is of particular importance given their theoretical Programme experience. One will help strengthen and in-depth knowledge of specific issues in their local capacities for social inclusion and work to- 55 communities. This is also crucial for further transfer wards harmonizing local planning methodologies. of knowledge, local ownership and human right sen- A second will build up the training system for local sitization. While analysis, policy development and governments to address deficiencies in local hu- strategizing are important, development strategies man resource and training management. should be implemented in practice and have an im-
because the process of closing human rights gaps is not nity to boost local economies and family incomes. Using about finding the right governance prescription, but human rights analysis to improve accountability, planning about supporting local and national stakeholders in de- and evaluation can boost government performance and veloping capacities to chart their own course of change legitimacy in the eyes of a local community. (see Snapshot 4.1). Human rights principles, as defined by the UNDP Practice In many countries, human rights can be a difficult or sen- Note on Human Rights, provide a framework for equality sitive topic, on top of the already politically fraught issue and non-discrimination to extend human development of decentralization. All UN member states have ratified benefits to all members of a population, including those at least one of the major UN human rights conventions, who may be disadvantaged through discrimination or however; 80 percent have ratified four or more. Since local due to other factors. A human rights agenda draws atten- governments have not been involved in these processes tion to accountability for delivering development bene- and may not know about them, advocacy can help expand fits. It highlights underlying power imbalances that cause awareness, but should also connect abstract ideas to con- development deficits. In brief, looking at programming crete benefits for the community. Economic opportunities through a human rights lens entails emphasizing: for women, for example, are a right, but also an opportu- • Agency, not welfare mediate local disputes; raising awareness in schools and 4 MAKING LINKS MAKING • Obligation, not discretion through community gatherings; and piloting local judi- cial clinics to reach poor victims, with subsequent inte- • Consistent and inclusive decisions gration into the work of local municipalities. • Sustainability not opportunism (International Council on Human Rights Policy 2005) For more information, see the UNDP Access to Justice Practice Note.
All of these concepts can apply to all aspects of local gov- ernance work. A process of identifying rights-holders and duty-bearers, paired with an assessment of causes, oppor- The MDGs tunities and capacities, can help frame decisions about he MDGs are global goals that must be translated how rights can be claimed and fulfilled. At the local level, into the realities of people’s lives through actions programmes may be able to reach groups who are poorly T that are frequently at the local level. In a number represented in either national or local policies—such as of countries, the MDGs have now proven to be an impor- indigenous peoples, minorities, people with disabilities, tant rallying point for local efforts to pursue development the elderly, internally displaced persons, migrant work- policies with measurable outcomes, including improved ers, and people living with HIV and AIDS. Common strat- service delivery; leverage broader partnerships; and more egies comprise advocacy, the creation and implementa- precisely determine financing needs and options. Local- tion of human rights laws, monitoring for enforcement, izing the MDGs can highlight local priorities and unmask mechanisms to correct violations and affirmative action disparities otherwise hidden in national aggregates. It to redress discrimination. can support local governance and decentralization by strengthening local capacities to plan and monitor devel- opment strategies. Access to justice To deliver progress on the MDGs, UNDP has empha- 56 Access to justice may be part of a human-rights approach sized the importance of governance, including at the to local governance programmes. In general, UNDP’s local level. In the network discussion, Hafiz Pasha, from specific niche in justice reform is ensuring that judicial UNDP’s Regional Bureau for Asia and the Pacific, noted systems work for poor and disadvantaged people. This that UNDP’s roles in UN coordination and as the lead UN includes empowering people to seek redress, strength- agency on governance mean it should actively facilitate ening links between formal and informal systems, coun- UN-wide assistance for service delivery, financing and ca- tering biases in these systems, and supporting processes pacities to achieve the MDGs. The organization’s exper- that lead to just and equitable judicial outcomes. tise on improving local policies for service delivery often complements expertise at other UN agencies with strong At the local level, police and court systems are charged sectoral mandates, for example. UNDP can also advocate with the daily business of upholding public safety and for routing national and international funding to local resolving disputes. They must be professionally run to in- governments for MDG activities. spire public trust and contribute to a smoothly running so- cial order. Common challenges include limited capacities In Latin America, according to Juan Manuel Salazar from and resources, practices that reflect local or national pat- the UNDP Sub-regional Resource Facility in Colombia, terns of exclusion, and populations poorly educated about the Regional Project on Local Governance has worked their rights. Entry points for programmes—potentially in- with country offices on tools to incorporate governance volving local officials, civil society and traditional authori- in MDG localization strategies. The project has addressed ties—comprise legal protection, legal awareness, aid and three main aspects as potential programme entry points: counsel, adjudication, enforcement and oversight. participatory planning, monitoring and oversight to make the MDGs locally relevant; the strengthening of Successful initiatives chronicled in the network discussion local capacities to use resources in accordance with the entailed establishing community and paralegal groups to intended development outcomes; and an emphasis on women; India’s panchayat members are now about 40 4 local democracy and civil society involvement to improve percent female. Both cases have involved quota systems. LINKS MAKING the responsiveness of local governments. A comparative analysis of women in local government in 13 Asian and Pacific countries (UNESCAP 2001) suggest- ed that once women are in local government, they call Gender equality greater attention to social issues and community welfare. They often prefer an inclusive, democratic approach to Gender equality concerns apply to all aspects of local governance that emphasizes communication. And they governance. In every society, conventional patterns of tend to encourage other women to participate. gender discrimination surface in political participation, public administration and service delivery. These pro- The Asia-Pacific analysis found that women in that region cesses can almost never be viewed as “gender neutral.” have had more success in gaining access to decision- Correcting some of these inherent biases often requires making positions at the local level than at the centre. The tools such as gender-responsive budgeting and affirma- research attributed this to women finding it easier to fit tive action, many of which have been applied nationally local government work into their family responsibilities, but are increasingly being used locally as well. along with more positions being available and a lower level of competition. In some cases, women’s participa- From a UNDP perspective, the principles of social equity tion in governance is seen as an extension of well-estab- and political legitimacy are upheld when women have a lished involvement in their communities, both informally right to participate in local governance as elected and ap- in neighbourhood development, and more formally pointed officials, and as citizens through voting or other through advocacy groups and NGOs. mechanisms. Local policies, budgets and services—sup- ported not just by women politicians and civil servants, but ome network contributors commented that in- by governments and public administrations as a whole— creasing the number of women in decision-mak- can help close gaps in gender equality and contribute to ing needs to be accompanied by an emphasis on local development. Gender-responsive urban planning, S 57 quality. An experience in Bangladesh found that bringing as the UN Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM) has locally elected women together in a special women’s fo- demonstrated through its Safe Cities programme in Latin rum afforded them opportunities to learn new political America, can cast new light on how women experience skills and collectively develop a platform around gender urban environments differently than men. Their full in- equality issues. Initially, they had been treated as tokens; volvement in all aspects of planning can unleash benefits now they are seen as valuable local advocates on issues for them and their communities, from improved infrastruc- such as child marriage and violence against women. ture to more effective use of resources. Some of the obstacles to women in local government in- The network discussion contained some debate on how clude discriminatory norms, such as those that encourage much progress women are making at the local level. Ale- male dominance of political institutions; limited capacities; jandra Massolo from the Women and Habitat Network of family care responsibilities and the costs of political cam- Latin America noted that while modern and democratic paigns. Political systems can also make a difference; pro- local governments are emerging in her region, women are portional systems, for example, tend to be more open to still vastly under-represented in the executive and legisla- women. Local elections based on ward representation can tive branches, at 5.3 percent and 26 percent, respectively. also boost the chances of women candidates, since wom- She pointed out that strong biases against women are en are more likely to be known within their own locality. still deeply rooted in many municipalities. In the network discussion, Neus Bernabeu, from the UNDP The rate of women’s local government participation in a Regional Bureau for Latin America and the Caribbean, sum- number of countries, however, is ahead of the national marized some of the challenges and requirements for mak- rate, which globally is around 17 percent of national leg- ing progress towards gender equality at the local level: islators. In Lesotho, 55 percent of local councillors are now • Local development actors need to recognize that the reality of interactions among different actors can be most 4 problems of inequality and gender discrimination acute at the local level, where people live in close proxim- LINKS MAKING have clear implications for inclusive and equitable local ity, often sharing the same resources. Distinct scenarios development. Some approach the subject in a marginal may apply to rural and urban areas. Different groups may way, or as a sector, therefore avoiding the need to have co-existed for many generations in the former. In articulate gender approaches in all local tasks to really modern cities, rapid migration is introducing different transform inequalities. groups to each other on an unprecedented scale. • Without local actors, local development is not possible. nternationally, discussions about diversity in cities Nevertheless, we have not questioned local development have gained momentum through a UN Educational, processes that marginalize women or visibly maintain Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) dec- the superiority of one gender in decision-making. I laration and convention on cultural diversity, and the • More women need to be in positions of power. Quotas, Agenda 21 for culture adopted by UCLG. Recent thinking without a doubt, are a useful mechanism, although suggests that sustainable public planning rests on four insufficient by themselves. pillars: a functioning economy, social inclusion, a healthy • Political and institutional mechanisms are needed to environment and well-managed diversity, all connected maintain policies and plans for equality despite changes by effective governance. Supportive diversity-related in government. policies may include those that recognize the value of di- versity, promote social inclusion, support public spaces • Gender equity should be considered a modernizing as areas for interaction, recognize the potential econom- criterion for municipal management, and an indication ic benefits of diversity, and establish local governance of the equality and efficiency of municipal interventions. mechanisms to moderate diversity issues. Many cities are It should be an objective of all planning and budgeting now conducting mapping exercises to learn more about exercises. their diversity, with a shift from the past emphasis on • Real capacities to operate gender mainstreaming multiculturalism (where people live together but main- 58 in municipal and local tasks need to be developed, tain distinct identities) or assimilation (where less pow- particularly in municipal personnel. erful groups merge with the dominant group). A newer • The capacities of women’s organizations for effective approach embraces the notion of hybridization. Through participation should be fortified. a process of cross-cultural exchange and negotiation, people begin building “third cultures” that combine the • Local governments should fulfil their responsibility to elements of those that came before. provide answers to key issues faced by women in their localities, such as gender-based violence. Politically, diversity can be a profoundly challenging is- sue, especially when mainstream thinking stems from a Human diversity dominant or homogenous identity, or when democracy deficits are deep. Exclusionary patterns arising along lines Very few contributors to the network discussion high- of diversity are often correlated with poverty and low hu- lighted issues related to local governance and human man development. Excluded groups may be unable to diversity. Its many facets comprise ethnicity, culture, reli- access mainstream political, economic or social opportu- gion, age, race and language, among others. Definitions nities and benefits. They may be invisible in development of diversity have also been shaped along the lines of cul- planning, with no attention or resources going towards tural sub-sectors such as information technology and the solving problems that may be particular to them. arts, different actors (public and private sector, as well as NGOs) and different “agents” (native, national and those Additional questions arise when communities chose to who have arrived in a given locality through migration). maintain traditions and prefer not to integrate into nation- al and local political and administrative structures. Some Human diversity can have national implications, but the network contributors reported problems with conflicts be-
For more, see UNESCO 2006. Ibid. Situations like these suggest that there 4 Box 4.1: Delving into Disparities LINKS MAKING may be multiple entry points for pro- grammes incorporating ethnic and cul- imothy Scott from UNDP’s processes that include marginalized tural diversity, recognizing that localities Human Development Report groups as part of longer term T may opt for diverse approaches. As with Office mentioned that the Human capacity development initiatives; gender, this process should ideally involve Development Report team has —Take into consideration the role of both participation in local processes, and studied 40 national and regional local traditions and cultures and the reflection of substantive differences reports on decentralization and local help formulate local and national in well-defined public strategies and ear- government. A final paper (Scott advocacy strategies accordingly; marked funding (see Box 4.1). 2006) concluded that decentralization —Support national efforts to can have a significant impact on An important general reference is the 2004 gather and assess quantitative vulnerable groups. UNDP programmes Human Development Report, Cultural Lib- and qualitative information should therefore continue to: erty in Today’s Diverse World. disaggregated by gender, region, —Target gender issues and sector, etc.; and marginalized groups defined by —Help incorporate such data into rural-urban, ethnicity, religion, age, Post-conflict recovery statistical offices and other and physical and mental ability; In post-conflict countries, particularly agencies and institutionalize this those suffering from civil strife, decentral- —Support inclusive, participatory work with legislation and training. ization has supported peace and reconcili- ation processes, but it has also been ma- nipulated to promote disintegration and tween traditional and modern governance and justice sys- additional conflict. The general quality of governance tems, for example. Issues like these should be approached tends to degrade in conflict contexts, which normally with care, avoiding assumptions that all traditional prac- come with shortfalls in finance, flourishing patronage 59 tices will be regressive by default (see Box 5.3). systems and diminished capacities, among other issues y aiming for more inclusive policies and pro- (see also page 26 in Chapter 2). grammes, local governance can help balance the Conflict management and recovery aspects need to be choices and needs of different groups. In more dif- B considered across UNDP decentralization and local gov- ficult contexts, this can be a starting point for redressing ernance programmes in this kind of environment. Inter- human rights violations practiced by one group against ventions should be premised on careful analysis of con- another, or encouraging shifts away from traditional figurations of political and possibly military power (often practices that contradict widely accepted international under the coordination of UN peacekeeping missions). norms. Diversity considerations may be particularly rele- They should consider the distribution of groups on dif- vant in conflict prevention and anti-corruption initiatives, ferent sides of the conflict; patterns of deprivation that given links to power imbalances. may contribute to tensions; the connections between Emmanuel Buendia, from UNDP Philippines, described different governance reforms that may be part of peace- how nominal recognition of indigenous communities building; the sequencing of reforms (so that service de- alone has not reduced their marginalization and dis- livery responsibilities are not transferred without funding empowerment. Many continue to face threats of evic- or capacities, for example); and the roles of the national tion from their ancestral domains to give way to local government, local governments and civil society. infrastructure and economic activities like mining. Their Conventionally, national and international stakeholders voices are hardly heard in local legislative bodies and engaged in post-conflict recovery have neglected support other governance mechanisms; their access to health for local governance. International development agencies services, adequate nutrition and education is minimal. have often bypassed local governments in favour of inter- 4 Local Governance as Crucial for Managing Refugees LINKS MAKING
Joachim Bonin from UNDP Tanzania described the During the inception of the programme, a national following experience: local government reform programme to strengthen district administrations was being implemented. Snapshot 4.2 n 2003, Tanzania hosted more refugees than any As government rules and responsibilities changed Iother country in Africa. To address the strain ex- in the course of the reform, previously agreed and perienced by refugee-hosting communities along tested implementation arrangements had to be the borders with Burundi, Rwanda and the Demo- revised and adapted to new procedures. In the cratic Republic of Congo, the UN country team regions targeted by the UN programme, however, in 2005 initiated a multi-agency Human Security delivery and local ownership of UNDP supported Programme. It focused on enhancing capacities in activities substantially increased when responsi- host communities to transition to a post-refugee bility for fund management and implementation situation. Strengthening local governance was oversight followed the national decentralization identified as a crucial element, especially in moving reform and was placed at the local district level. from a humanitarian operations environment to sustainable development. Some challenges related to human resource capaci- ties. The weakness of district governance institu- The programme consisted of five interconnected tions led to a decision to place programme associ- components, taking into account the multi-sectoral ates—national UN Volunteers (UNVs)—in each demands of the crisis: reducing illicit arms and district administration. They supported the districts light weapons, improving environmental security, in implementing programme activities, encouraged improving food security, improving the life skills of good governance practices and acted as the point vulnerable groups and strengthening sustainability of contact for UNDP programme staff. Positive by supporting local governance. Six UN agencies results from this experience have led other UNDP 60 were involved, with UNDP coordinating the pro- governance programmes in Tanzania to adopt a gramme and focusing on small arms reduction and similar approach. good local governance.
national or national NGOs, on the theory that they are more macy and prospects for peace. See Snapshot 4.2 for one equipped to respond quickly in delivering basic services scenario. and organizing reconstruction. Rural, geographically re- mote areas can also be difficult, dangerous and expensive A recent UNDP workshop on local government in post- to reach. conflict situations discussed many of these issues (UNDP 2007e) as a start towards systematizing some of the les- But these are the areas that often bear the brunt of devas- sons learned in different countries. Participants stressed tation from conflict, and through social exclusion contin- that strategies to strengthen local government capacities ue to brew discontent that ends up violently expressed. should generally not be pursued without links to wider The early post-recovery phase provides opportunities for national strategies and reforms. The only exception is strengthening local government institutions so that they the handful of cases where the national government has can carry forward the sustainable resolution of conflicts, crumbled and local governments become the only func- the management of fair access to resources, the estab- tioning arm of the state. The workshop concluded that lishment of more constructive forms of political expres- UNDP should develop integrated post-conflict national sion and the promotion of local economic development. reconstruction strategies that look at the development of Service delivery and security should be prioritized, be- national and local government systems in tandem. cause the lack of these otherwise undercuts state legiti- Other recommendations emphasized the need for tailor- ing programmes to local specificities and avoiding the as- portive national laws, policies or institutional capacities. 4 sumption that conflict provides a “clean slate” disconnected Harmonized district planning guidelines, for example, can LINKS MAKING from past political, social, economic and cultural consider- define responsibilities and standards for territorial plan- ations. Creating ownership may be difficult, given issues of ning. They can be adjusted based on development trends, limited trust and the kinds of psychological scarring that and vulnerability and disaster risks assessments. conflict produces, but must be pursued. And while there may be urgent demands or needs, some attention needs he deep interconnections between development to be given to the desire to achieve quick results—a pat- and the environment were internationally recog- tern that in conflict situations has resulted, for example, in T nized by the 1992 UN Conference on Environment relying on inappropriate existing power structures. and Development when it adopted Agenda 21. Local Agenda 21 initiatives have since been implemented by many localities, using a broadly participatory approach Environmental issues and climate change to policy development, education, awareness-raising and enforcement mechanisms. These can be a starting point Much of the global environmental crisis stems from the for improved service delivery, including water, sanitation poor and inequitable management of resources, at all lev- and energy. They can take disaster risk reduction and cli- els. The results encompass the advance of climate change mate change on board as well, such as through vulner- and a growing tide of natural disasters, along with con- ability assessments and planning for climate resiliency. flict and deprivation. Of the 20 most costly disasters over the last 35 years, 10 occurred during the past five years (UNDP 2007d). The global water crisis alone has left 1.2 Anti-corruption initiatives billion people without access to safe water and 2.6 billion In the network discussion, Stuart Gilman, Head of the UN without access to sanitation (UNDP 2006), with profound Global Programme Against Corruption at the UN Office impacts on human health and economic development. on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), pointed out that steps to Environmental problems must be tackled both nationally address corruption must take place at the local level, but 61 and locally, although some of the most immediate im- most international agreements focus on the national level, pacts are felt on the local level, whether through natural including the UN Convention against Corruption. Some disasters or the degradation of local resources needed efforts are now being made to translate the convention for livelihoods. A UNDP policy paper from the CEE/CIS into local actions in signatory states. International sup- (2002a) concluded that overly strong centralism in deci- port for anti-corruption initiatives has also tended to sup- sion-making in that region has had particular impacts on port the national level. Groups like the Anti-Corruption local environmental management, including preventing Resource Centre (2007) have emphasized that some of the accurate identification of local environmental prob- the lessons learned from national anti-corruption initia- lems, and the development of local expertise and appro- tives can be applied locally, such as the need for domes- priate policies to deal with them. Some of the issues that tic demand for action, supportive laws, enforcement re- can be suitable for local action include curbing local air sources and proactive community outreach. pollution, controlling the quality of water, managing san- Since multiple, complex factors feed corruption, UNDP’s itation, planning land use and protecting biodiversity. Practice Note on Anti-Corruption programmes suggests At the same time, the scale of most environmental prob- that local pilots can be the place to demonstrate how to lems—which climate change is exacerbating—exceeds the address it and begin to build momentum. Common entry resources and capacities of even relatively well-equipped points can include boosting transparency and account- localities. Environmental management also frequently ability around public service provision, depersonalizing involves the kinds of territorial planning to apportion re- governance structures through more open public par- sources across localities and regions that can only be done ticipation, simplifying procedures, improving the qual- at a higher level of government. Local strategies generally ity of the civil service, strengthening financial manage- need to be situated within or otherwise connected to sup- ment, supporting effective judicial systems, developing Some local governments and civil society 4 Box 4.2: Tools for Transparency LINKS MAKING groups have ably demonstrated innovative approaches to addressing the epidemic, UN-HABITAT has produced several transparency through specific issue commonly through strong local participa- publications to guide local governance entry points. tion that tailors strategies closely to the programming related to transparency. The two-volume Restore the Health complex social and economic dynamics affecting the spread of HIV. Local govern- “Tools to Support Transparency in of Your Organization, created with ments may be at the forefront of public ser- Local Governance,” a publication the Partners Foundation for Local vice delivery, but even when they are not, developed with Transparency Development and the Open Society they can still be critical in other responses. International, features sections Institute, highlights strategies and They can be best positioned to reach out to on conducting assessments and tools for defining corruption, building vulnerable groups, for example, and to col- monitoring, improving access to coalitions to curtail it and putting lect data on the course of the epidemic. information, defining expectations in place mechanisms for sustained for professional ethics, reforming prevention (see www.unhabitat.org ecentralization has presented institutions and working towards for both resources). challenges to AIDS responses, in D some cases because of the pro- liferation of local structures and confusion complaints mechanisms (with consideration for the need about different roles due to poor coordi- for anonymity in communities where people live close to nation. A number of countries have set up autonomous each other), adjusting incentives, and engaging civil so- national AIDS authorities, in recognition of the need for ciety and the private sector in watchdog functions. For multi-sectoral responses that extend beyond the health further reference, see also Box 4.2. ministry. Many of these authorities have established simi- lar organs at the provincial, district or community level. In general, they have not been well integrated into local 62 HIV and AIDS administrations and service provision structures, however. HIV and AIDS may require concerted attention on the lo- Limited resources and capacities, and inadequate legal cal level, especially if HIV prevalence rates are high. While structures are frequent handicaps. The lack of a budget dis- national statistics may paint one picture, prevalence can courages other sectors from incorporating AIDS strategies vary widely among localities. Risk factors rise in cities in their work, diminishing the prospects for the intended well situated for trafficking in commercial sex workers or cross-sectoral impacts. drugs, for example. Migration and rapid urbanization are To address some of these issues, the Alliance of Mayors’ also associated with the spread of HIV. Social conventions Initiative for Community Action on AIDS at the Local around gender create special vulnerabilities for women, Level (AMICAALL) is working on establishing closer links particularly those in poor communities. between local authorities and much better resourced na- Too often, AIDS is still treated as a public health issue, tional plans. AMICAALL also advocates for local leaders when in fact it is a broader development challenge, in- to mobilize resources through South-South and South- tricately linked to governance. High HIV rates have rami- North partnerships. In India, a UNIFEM-supported project fications not only for health and prevention services, but has worked with the local panchayat raj system, particu- also for the economy and labour markets, the number of larly the many women representatives brought in under people in poverty, family structures, care burdens that nationally mandated quotas, on gender-responsive HIV deprive women of opportunities to work and gain an ed- and AIDS strategies related to employment, health and ucation, the protection of legal and human rights, and so nutrition, coordinated access to public services and ad- on. Effective governance can thread together multi-sec- vocacy for women’s civil rights. tor responses to these and other forms of fallout. 5 E xpanding
the C 5 Expanding the Circle of Partners ircle
of P
The complex nature of local governance and decentralization work calls for coordina- artners tion and partnerships. These contribute to the clearer identification of problems, strate- gic thinking to address them, and the integration of multiple forms of expertise to work across levels of government, sectors and types of support. An evaluation conducted by UNDP and the Government of Germany concluded that the efficiency of decentraliza- tion support depends on close donor coordination, while UNDP’s effectiveness rests on its ability to build broad networks (UNDP and the Government of Germany 2000). Part- nerships and the process of fostering consensus can be particularly critical in sensitive national contexts where working alone could raise questions about UNDP’s neutrality, or simply fail to spark sufficient political commitment.
The notion of partnerships has assumed a central role in discussions about develop- ment cooperation in recent years, including those related to UN reform, the MDGs and the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness (see Box 5.1). UNDP, as a neutral, multilateral development organization at the heart of the UN system, has a capacity to both form partnerships for its own programmes and broker broader alliances, including among national and local counterparts, and international donors. The UN Resident Coordina- tor system and various UN reform processes can help knit together the efforts of UN 63 country teams. Other vital partners are civil society groups, the private sector and aca- demic institutions.
This chapter looks at how to frame a partnership strategy, and then delves into some of the most common forms of collaboration and coordination.
Adopting a strategy hatever partnerships are most appropriate in a country, they should be built into programme assessments and planning from the beginning. Ide- W ally, a formal partnership strategy maps out whom the partners are, how they should work together, when they should work together, and what they should ex- pect to achieve collectively. In the network discussion, Zena Ali-Ahmad from the UNDP Sub-regional Resource Facility for the Arab States cautioned against the tendency to “re-group” initiatives once they are underway.
National and/or local ownership and leadership should be central, as a core UNDP cor- porate principle endorsed in the new Strategic Plan and fully embedded within the harmonized UN planning process. The plan has also defined South-South cooperation as a key priority. Many southern networks are now active in the field of decentralization and local governance (see the last two sections of this chapter), while local governance associations are pursuing new links within and across countries (see Box 3.3). 5 Box 5.1: Partnership Principles from the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness E xpanding
In 2005, the OECD-DAC organized a aid agencies to increase efficiency and different methodologies and operational
high-level forum that produced the reduce burdens on national partners; approaches. Different regions or localities the
Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness. may end up in the position of competing for C —Managing for development results, ircle Ninety developing countries, 30 donor comprising clear and measurable funds. Collaboration among international
countries and 30 development agencies, development partners paired with strong of
definitions of objectives and P artners including the United Nations and the World performance, and; respect for national and/or local ownership Bank, committed to five principles for can foster more coordinated and effective —Mutual accountability for the use of aid. development cooperation partnerships: support. One potential benefit is the freeing of resources for development that may —Advancing national ownership; The Paris principles may be particularly otherwise be absorbed by administrative —Aligning development cooperation with relevant in the field of decentralization costs, or duplicated or contradictory national strategies; and local governance, since it tends programmes. to be heavily fragmented by many —Harmonizing the activities of different
Partnership strategies should reflect UNDP strengths in many different players, they must be backed by appropri- convening different stakeholders, catalysing innovative ate resources and consistent institutional commitment, strategies, and facilitating access to new knowledge and both within countries and globally. other resources. They should support donor coordina- tion aligned behind national development strategies, and seek new alliances and partnership modalities. The Working as a UN team UNDP and German Government evaluation (ibid.) recom- Clarity on common strategies within the UN system is an 64 mended pursuing diverse execution and implementation important aspect of work with national and local part- arrangements with an expanded array of state, civil soci- ners. The UN reform agenda, with its emphasis on coordi- ety and private sector partners, on the national and local nating the efforts of different agencies working within a levels. given country, has provided new opportunities to pursue ome of the challenges to partnerships reported interagency collaboration, including through the prepa- in the network discussion may need to be ad- ration of UN development assistance frameworks, coun- dressed in partnership strategies. They include try programme action plans, national working groups, S and so on. To deepen coordination, network participants a lack of common programme definitions or objectives and incompatible funding modalities. Other problems suggested establishing common pools of resources for stem from weak or poorly defined national coordination decentralization and local governance programmes, mechanisms. Conflicting agency biases include prefer- along with clear standards defining comparative advan- ences for local government empowerment, sectoral ap- tages and implementation capacities. proaches and direct community support through the In Armenia, a plan for UN collaboration on local economic provision of social funds. Because the scope of decentral- governance emerged from brainstorming among differ- ization and local governance can be huge, there can also ent agencies preparing the UN development assistance be a tendency for international organizations to slice up framework. The agencies looked at how to fit together different regions of the countries for their programmes, their activities, deciding first to focus on a cluster of vil- but without sufficient links among initiatives. lages where UNDP Community Development and Perfor- Several participants in the network discussion stated that mance Budgeting projects are being implemented. An for partnerships to produce more than a casual infor- ongoing UNDP programme for small and medium enter- mation exchange, particularly when they stretch across prises was chosen to support business start-ups, assisted 5
Regular Working Groups Table Common Concerns E xpanding
The network discussion included several references tion, and indigenous communities and traditional to the formation of working groups on local gov- governance.
the ernance and decentralization, such as one in the C Snapshot 5.1 Philippines chaired by the Department of Interior On the legal framework, for example, it has called ircle attention to the need to make the Internal Revenue and Local Governments. It comprises represen- of
tatives from donor agencies, national and local Allotment system more equitable while providing P artners government units, and civil society organizations. greater incentives for local governments to raise The group has highlighted obstacles to local gover- their own revenues, and to consider whether or not nance related to the legal framework, local-national the three-year term of local government officials is relations, capacity development, performance conducive to medium-term development planning benchmarking, local revenue generation, urbaniza- and investments.
by contributions from the UN Industrial Development Or- Other UNDP local governance and decentralization part- ganization (UNIDO). The International Labour Organiza- ners within the UN system include (but are not limited tion (ILO) will provide employment-related training, and to) the ILO, UNFPA, UNICEF, UNIDO, UNITAR and the UN the World Food Programme food-for-work and food-for- Research Institute for Social Development. education schemes as part of locally prioritized invest- ment projects. Other inputs will come through a UN Chil- dren’s Fund (UNICEF) programme for the disabled and a Donor coordination UN Population Fund (UNFPA) project to engage youth, The Paris Declaration extended the thrust towards donor women and the elderly in community decision-making. coordination beyond UN agencies to include bilateral 65 UN collaboration can also leverage engagement by other and other multilateral agencies (see Viewpoint 5.1 for a donors. In Mali, UNDP and UNCDF provided joint assis- critical perspective). Participants in the network discus- tance to help design and pilot financial tools for decen- sion reported on a few efforts to advance decentraliza- tralization. The project demonstrated that funds could be tion and local governance work in this direction. In Bhu- channeled through public treasury mechanisms to fund tan, for example, UNDP, UNCDF, the Dutch group SNV investments in communes with no risk of loss along the and Danida work together to support local governance way, something that had been thought impossible. This and decentralization through capacity development on success convinced other donors, who joined forces to as- the block, district and central levels. Other assistance sist the central Government in creating a permanent fi- goes into strengthening existing policies, implementing nancial institution to manage investments for communes the 2001 Local Governance Act, and bolstering local par- and other decentralized entities. ticipation, including through grants for locally prioritized development activities. UNDP’s 2008-2011 Strategic Plan calls for strengthen- ing collaboration with UNCDF, particularly around local UNDP is the leading donor counterpart, providing up- development as a lynchpin for achieving the MDGs. The stream technical assistance, capacity development re- plan notes under the general area of expanding gover- sources, programme management and capital invest- nance capacities that typical UNDP partners include the ments. UNCDF contributes capital resources and technical World Bank on economic governance, the UN Task Force backstopping. SNV offers technical assistance and some on the Rule of Law on justice, UNIFEM on gender equal- financial support for capacity building. Danida focuses on ity, and UN-HABITAT and UNCDF on issues of local and capacity development for the Ministry of Home and Cul- regional governance, decentralization and localization of tural Affairs, which manages decentralization policy. the MDGs. lobally, common donor coordination mecha- seems to have improved efficiency and coordination, par- 5 E nisms include joint working groups (see Snap- ticularly in the health sector. But sector devolution under xpanding G shot 5.1) and sector-wide approaches (SWAPs). the SWAPs is now complicating local development coor- A mixed experience with the latter was reported from dination by district assemblies, underscoring the need to
the Malawi, where a joint Government-donor focus on SWAPs regularly assess the interactions between different de- C ircle
of
Jörg Faust at the German Development Institute conflicts between levels of government. Central P artners commented: governments are especially reluctant to decentralize politically and fiscally. How then are donors to expect The Paris Declaration recommendations focus on the sustainable ownership from them? importance of national ownership and its positive consequences for alignment, donor coordination and he Paris Declaration also suggests increasing own- aid effectiveness. Unfortunately, the recommenda- Tership of the recipient government in order to tions are not necessarily helpful for most developing increase alignment and improve donor coordination.
Viewpoint 5.1: Contradictions in the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness
countries, because they are based on the assump- But what happens if a lack of ownership is the rule tion that recipient governments have a considerable rather than the exception, as is the case with decen- degree of ownership. But encompassing and sustain- tralization? One possible scenario is that donors are able ownership is not so much a result of individual supposed to coordinate their activities, but given the political willingness, but rather of political institutions lack of ownership, the recipient government provides that drive politicians towards the broader interests of few incentives for donors to move towards common 66 society. Without a critical “quality” of political institu- planning and implementation tions, sustainable ownership as a starting point can- not be ensured. A second scenario is excessive donor coordination, often in combination with sector-wide approaches. ost developing countries confront problematic Given disbursement pressure and the need to show Mpolitical institutions, but the Paris Declaration coordination results in highly “visible” countries, remains relatively mute on confronting their struc- donors take over the policy-planning process. The tural and institutional challenges in order to improve result is the increasingly criticized centralist planning ownership. This conundrum is especially relevant euphoria of the “coordinated” donor community. for decentralization, where donors are supposed to Whether this is compatible with decentralized and improve political institutions in recipient countries so local searches for innovation and legitimation seems that state structures gain higher levels of legitimacy questionable at least. and provide better public services. Thus, donors face a dilemma. On the one hand, there It would be incorrect to assume a continuously high is growing recognition of the importance of subsidiar- degree of ownership by partner governments with re- ity-oriented state structures for sustainable socio- gard to decentralization. In most cases, reforms have economic development. On the other hand, central gained momentum only in times of mounting politi- governments rarely have an endogenous interest in cal and economic pressure on the central govern- decentralization. If donors attempt to fill the resulting ment. This is in accordance with a political economy gap, it seems questionable whether this will support perspective, which identifies decentralization as a decentralized policy-making and implementation. highly political process characterized by distributional centralization processes and players. is invariably shaped by political relationships, institutional 5 E configurations and capacities. The open systems approach xpanding While a number of bilateral and multilateral agencies described in Box 3.1 may be an appropriate method for have been engaged in programmes on local governance this kind of assessment. At times, some caution may be re-
the and decentralization, two larger participants from outside quired with longstanding institutional partnerships—for C the UN system are USAID and the European Commission. instance, with a sector ministry. While valuable in them- ircle USAID has a decentralization and democratic local gov-
selves, these may offer only a narrow band of perspectives of ernance component under its overall governance wing. that cannot substitute for the more holistic understanding P artners The European Commission says it plans to expand its ef- that decentralization processes require. forts in this area and has been engaged in developing a comprehensive policy framework. In the network dis- Some challenges to working with national or local part- cussion, Dominique Steverlynck from the Commission’s ners stem from decentralization processes that are in- EuropeAid Co-operation Office noted the launching of complete or poorly structured. Ernesto Bautista from the EC’s Informal Working Group on Decentralisation and UNDP Pacific described problems with parallel mecha- Local Governance. A partnership initiative with KfW, the nisms, such as in Fiji, where the local government system group seeks to improve the effectiveness of local gover- awkwardly straddles the Ministry of Fijian Affairs (provin- nance and decentralization operations through holistic, cial councils) and the Ministry of Local Government (city aligned and harmonized strategies. and town councils). He noted cases in other countries where the constituency development funds of parlia- In many countries, the World Bank has been central to mentarians have grown beyond funds reserved for local work on decentralization, as have the regional develop- governments, to the point where local government vi- ment banks. The Asian Development Bank has been ac- ability suffers. The UNDP and German Government evalu- tive recently on urban sustainability issues, while the Af- ation (ibid.) reported cases of rivalry between sub-units rican Development Bank is supporting transparent and of national governments, and advised looking carefully at accountable local governance in light of new resource sociopolitical facts and legal criteria in choosing appropri- 67 flows in many countries. In Latin America, the InterAmeri- ate partners. can Development Bank, with decades of work on urban development and governance, is emphasizing local eco- Political challenges can arise in countries with a high de- nomic development strategies and some forms of territo- gree of political fragmentation, where UNDP might be rial planning. perceived as “taking sides,” or where decentralization re- mains a controversial subject, possibly along political lines. Partnerships here have to be assessed through the lens of Sub-national, national and regional UNDP’s mandate for neutrality, with attention to the possi- partnerships bility that political rivalries will emerge or shift. Some coun- tries have had successful experiences in drawing different artnership with a national government through national partners together around dialogues to begin the a country programme is the starting point for process of establishing basic consensus. UNDP may also be UNDP support to local governance and decen- P able to build bridges between national and local partners tralization. In the course of implementation, national and where these links are weak or missing, although again care local partners may include political figures, civil servants, should be exercised, particularly in cases where local au- local government associations (see Box 3.3), civil society thorities may be viewed as a political threat to the centre. groups and the private sector (see Box 5.2 and Viewpoint 5.2), traditional authorities (see Box 5.3) and research in- UNDP has extended the scope of its partnerships with civil stitutes. society and the private sector in recent years; the Strategic Plan calls for a continued emphasis on innovative and stra- In-country partnerships need to be guided by a spirit of tegic alliances. Analysis and experiences have repeatedly national ownership. They also need to be understood, indi- confirmed that these groups are central to the success and vidually and collectively, within the national context, which sustainability of local governance and decentralization. 5 Box 5.2: The Value of Civil Society and the Private Sector, Carefully Defined E xpanding
wo key local governance partners can capacities. They can be poorly managed, and the equitable distribution of costs and
Tbe civil society groups and the private unrepresentative of the local community, benefits. It should define the links between the
sector. Civil society groups may act as social unwilling to voice the concerns of poor or public and private roles. Public investments C ircle mobilizers, advocate for local priorities, excluded groups, subject to traditions that can ensure the construction of adequate
increase transparency and accountability support discrimination, or poorly integrated infrastructure that supports market growth, of P
through monitoring, and foster public in local political processes. for example. Well-crafted and enforceable artners participation. The private sector is a public regulations provide the level of lynchpin of local economic development, With these cautions in mind, the notable security essential for economic exchange. including through generating employment contributions of civil society groups to local A major challenge remains the informal and livelihoods. Both civil society groups governance have been widely recognized. sector, the size of which is inversely related and the private sector can be part of the In the network discussion, Pradeep Sharma to local economic development and directly equation of providing basic social services. from UNDP Timor-Leste attributed the related to poverty. Kashyap stressed growing assertiveness of women politicians that more needs to be done to translate The ways that they complement local in some local governments in India to the macroeconomic and trade policies that government functions should be clearly “simple, innovative and community specific could support distributional equity at the defined, however. Neither category can be communications methods used by NGOs local level. viewed as a source of a “cure-all” for local to create mass awareness among women governance ills. While the private sector and the community at large.” Terry Kiragu s in the case of civil society, private has received relatively little attention from and Ernest Rwamucyo from UNDP’s Bureau Asector businesses can have gaps some international donors, civil society for Development Policy described how civil in capacities, such as poorly structured groups at times have been treated as more society assessments of local service delivery management systems and a limited ability reliable and effective alternatives to local are being used to advocate at the national to capture and process market information. 68 governments. Questions have been raised level for MDG localization in Tanzania. As for-profit enterprises, they may lack about what this implies for sustainability interest in or understanding of the notion of and the process of strengthening local On partnerships with the private sector, social responsibility. Some may be aligned governments in order to instill the Arun Kashyap from UNDP’s Bureau for with political practices linked primarily to democratic principles of representation Development Policy stressed that these short-term monetary gain. and participation for the longer term. can provide knowledge, innovation Overly concentrated support for local civil and resources. They are not just about While the privatization of services has society groups has resulted in the creation privatization, but about fulfilling unmet been presented as the ultimate form of of parallel structures, the fracturing of needs for services, creating new economic decentralization, some commentators participation as some groups focus on opportunities, and encouraging inclusive have also argued that this can be a type certain issues to the exclusion of others, markets and equitable economic of recentralization that is not necessarily and the undermining of local government governance. a step forward, such as when large legitimacy. multinational corporations are providing Ideally, a local governance framework services and costs rise, penalizing poorer The network discussion also raised guides public-private partnerships, people. concerns about the limits of civil society upholding the principles of accountability
Their engagement encourages local participation and tification for avoiding interactions with these groups. buy-in, along with bringing additional skills and resources to the table. Care should be taken to avoid benefiting indi- In the network discussion, Maleye Diop and Kwame Asu- vidual interests, but this should not become a blanket jus- bonteng from the UNDP Johannesburg Regional Centre profiled a long-running initiative to foster 5 Box 5.3: Reaching Out to Traditional Authorities E partnerships through capacity develop- xpanding ment—namely, public-private partner- Traditional authorities with proven In working with traditional ships for service delivery. The programme
abilities to mobilize their communities authorities, it is important to question the operates in four regions, addressing gaps around human development, serve stereotypes or assumptions. A notion C in local skills and knowledge that stand ircle as crucial mediators of conflicts and that central planning had done away
in the way of exploring service delivery provide insights on local development with local authorities was common of options to complement public services. P needs should be included in the scope in Tajikistan, for example. But a artners Global training materials originally devel- of local governance programming. traditional system of councils of elders, oped with Yale University in the United the mahalla, had continued to operate States have been adapted in a number of n the Pacific Islands states, for parallel to the central system. It still countries. The Polytechnic of Namibia, for example, many communities are I makes major inputs into all aspects of instance, offers a regular curriculum for relatively isolated given their locations local development, from education to new students as well as local authorities on separate islands. Helga-Bara community value systems. and elected officials. This in turn supports Bragadottir from UNDP Fiji reported institutional reforms intended to extend in the network discussion that this Engagement with traditional the national reach of public-private ser- has allowed traditional authorities to authorities can be problematic, vice provision. continue to exert a strong influence, requiring the close management of even though they may not be part political sensitivities. Ernest Fausther etworks of institutions based in of the local governance structures. from UNDP Lesotho described how the global South that operate With most societies organized around a project to train newly elected N around local governance and de- lineages and clans, finding ways to councillors on managing funds centralization issues offer many possibili- harmonize traditional and modern received from the central Government ties for partnerships that tap their advoca- government systems remains a major encountered conflicts between the cy skills and expertise. Those participating 69 challenge. councillors and traditional chiefs in the network discussion included the faced with sharing their power in Municipal Development Partnership for As part of a local governance project communities. East and Southern Africa, which promotes in the Solomon Islands, UNDP worked decentralization through programmes to both with provincial government There may be a need to balance strengthen local governments. Other ex- leaders and traditional authorities interaction with traditional and amples are the Women and Habitat Net- in the provincial Council of Chiefs elected political actors. Risks should work of Latin America, FLACMA and the and the Catholic Church to institute be assessed, including the potential Association of Local Government Training reforms for improving governance. for support to inadvertently deepen Institutions for Asia. A tripartite committee was formed traditional forms of discrimination A major global umbrella organization with representatives from each group or consolidate inequitable access to is UCLG. This consortium of cities in 127 to chart the course of the project, resources. Traditional systems need countries often collaborates with UN and to discuss and address common to be carefully considered for the agencies on local governance advocacy, issues. A clear demarcation of roles role they play, but also in light of the including UN-HABITAT, which has a series and functions ensured good working global human rights norms the UN is of highly interactive partnerships with lo- relationships while promoting mandated to uphold. cal authorities and their associations. transparency and accountability. In the network discussion, Alain Kanyin- da from UN-HABITAT described how the agency engages mayors from large cities and the leaders of local governance as- sociations in its governance: The UN Ad- 5 E Richard Batley at the University of Birmingham in the and supporting the quality of outputs. Awareness and xpanding United Kingdom, contributed the following submission the capacity to regulate in this positive sense need based on recent articles: to be developed. More likely alternatives to govern-
ment regulation, particularly where capacity and the C
Non-state provision of basic services is a large and understanding are limited, are external accreditation, ircle often predominant fact of life for poor as well as non- outsourced regulation, the franchising of local service
poor people. In some respects, donors’ widespread of provision to NGOs and private firms with a reputation P artners concern with “scaling-up” seems a little off-track. to defend, and community monitoring.
on-state service provision already fills much of Governments may be able to create a facilitating envi- Nthe gap in the quantity if not quality of state ronment for non-state provision at a very broad level, provision. At least until government can provide with stable legal frameworks and access to generic
Viewpoint 5.2: Non-State Service Providers—Filling the Gaps?
more comprehensive and better services, what needs subsidies for salaries and other core costs. But where greatly to be improved is the level of collaboration it comes to working empathetically with communities between governments and non-state providers. and reacting sensitively to local realities, the more likely model is of large NGOs mediating between govern- It is not enough for donors to seek policy statements ment/donors and local NGOs or community organiza- of governments’ willingness to collaborate with the tions, and offering technical support to the latter. non-state sector; such statements are readily forth- coming. Formal policy dialogue typically engages ight contractual arrangements between govern- 70 at the level of policy design in set-piece events with Tment and non-state providers present challenges large NGOs and advocacy organizations. The direct to a government’s capacity for contract design and providers of services to the poor— community orga- implementation, and tend to rule out the local and nizations, small NGOs and entrepreneurs—are largely informal providers that are often most important to excluded. Engagement between governments and poorer people. On the other hand, overly loose part- the non-state sector is also missing at the operational nerships create confusion and conflict about roles and level; this is where the history of distrust and rivalry responsibilities. Joint ventures of government with frustrates policy intent. non-state providers and co-production with service recipients present the possibility of clearly stating the There are cases of effective (pro-service) regulation roles of the partners without subordinating one to the by government, but the general lessons are that it other. They allow the scaling-up of organized service can only work where the regulator has information, is provision not by creating massive organizations, but capable of enforcing standards and has no incentive by disseminating replicable models of collaboration. to repress non-state providers, and where providers have incentives to comply. Government regulation is Reports from research projects on the non-state only desirable when it is slimmed down and re-direct- provision of basic services can be found at www.idd. ed from the control of service inputs to monitoring bham.ac.uk/service-providers/index.htm.
visory Committee of Local Authorities provides substan- local authorities, civil society and central governments tive input on strategic directions. Globally, UN-HABITAT through the World Urban Forum and more recently an sponsors the regular exchange of information among electronic networking campaign. Locally, years of work with hundreds of municipalities, from the poorest towns since they may be rooted in common experiences and 5 E to the wealthiest cities, have spurred crucial changes in possibly more politically palatable. A regional UNDP pro- xpanding urban management, and opened the door to city-to-city gramme in Asia-Pacific has found that while certain sensi- cooperation. tivities can arise around the open sharing of information,
the demand for a regional platform for discussion has been C
strong. The Regional Expert Network on Local Democracy ircle
in Asia-Pacific assists countries in developing more inclu- Communities of practice of
sive and accountable sub-national councils and assem- P Decentralization’s relatively long history as a develop- artners blies, including through analysis of local representation. ment process means that many experiences have been It engages central and local government professionals, documented and analysed, but they have not always civil society organizations, UNDP practitioners and other been shared. UNDP, with its own extensive networks interested stakeholders. A series of e-discussions has in- across developing countries, can encourage this process, cluded issues such as electoral systems at the local level, including through national, regional and international and women and disadvantaged groups in local politics. communities of practice. Ideally, these feature the ex- change of knowledge, opportunities to coordinate initia- nother regional programme has evolved in Latin tives and form new partnerships, and discussion about America, where UNDP has disseminated knowl- practical solutions to real-world problems. A edge products such as a guide to administra- tive and fiscal decentralization. It has also created tools Participants in the network discussion consistently under- for strengthening the administrative, fiscal and financial scored the need for a more routine sharing of knowledge management of local governments, and assessing the about decentralization and local governance, including performance of decentralized public administration, in- across countries and even among members of a given tergovernmental relations and local capacities to absorb country team, as did the UNDP and German Government new responsibilities. evaluation (ibid.). The discussion offered proposals to cre- 71 ate communities of practice around similar development Martin Vielajus and Michel Sauquet from the Institute de contexts, such as small-island states, and to make more recherché et débat sur la gouvernance (IRG) in France pro- concerted efforts to reach out to other organizations, posed giving some attention to the differences between particularly those that have not been traditional UNDP the French and Anglo-Saxon conceptions of decentral- partners. A mix of more theoretical analysts and practi- ization. The former is more oriented around transferring tioners could expose both to new ways of thinking and administrative competencies, while the later takes an doing. integrated approach covering the devolution of power and emphasizing the central role of local democracy. As a One success story has taken place in India, where UNDP French institute, the IRG is a repository of innovative anal- has spearheaded the Solution Exchange on Decentraliza- yses related to governance in French-speaking countries, tion through the UN Country Team. It has become a vi- including cross-national and cross-regional comparisons. brant community of practice that shares practical ideas, with active government participation. It also serves as a feedback mechanism for policy makers. Repeated inter- actions with India’s top-notch research organizations and civil society organizations have made it logical for UNDP to engage them in supporting other countries. A group in Bangalore, for example, has advised on community-mo- bilization through self-help groups in Timor-Leste.
National and regional forums, or other forms of South- South exchange can be particularly effective in circulat- ing ideas about local governance and decentralization, 6 W hat S kills D What Skills Does a Country Team Need? oes
a
6 C ountr Local governance and decentralization work requires both political and technical skills correlated with national and local priorities. These may be found within the governance y T eam unit in UNDP country offices, but complementary sources may include: other UNDP N
country office programme units, regional and global UNDP experts and knowledge eed
networks, other UN agencies, multilateral and bilateral donors, national and interna- ? tional civil society groups, and academic institutions. Under the umbrella of national ownership, UN reform and donor coordination, these avenues can be starting points for enlarging the skills of programme teams.
The many angles of local governance and decentralization programmes may call for a multidisciplinary team. Preparatory analysis needs to clearly identify the full spectrum of required skills, and pinpoint those that are available or missing. Political skills should receive careful attention, and in sensitive contexts, may outweigh purely technical competencies in importance.
Some participants in the network discussion suggested that work in this field often requires a combination of staff who can implement activities, and conduct ongoing research and information exchanges to guide the programme. Monitoring and evalua- 72 tion capacities are needed as well (see the following chapter).
This chapter summarizes some typical skills for local governance and decentralization programmes, categorized as political capacities, technical competencies and coordi- nation skills. The following lists are not comprehensive, and the distinctions between them are not always strictly defined. Nevertheless, they may provide a reference point for starting new programmes or strengthening existing ones.
Political capacities These may be related to: • Analysing current political dynamics
• Knowing the history of the country and its configurations of power
• Conducting high-level advocacy
• Convening community dialogues
• Encouraging participation, including of civic groups in situations where they may be weak or have a poorly defined role
• Helping to broker consensus • Managing the differing interests of groups defined by Coordination skills 6 W
political, ethnic, religious or other affiliations hat These can encompass: S
• Understanding and responding effectively to varying kills • Understanding the value of collaboration
concepts and traditions associated with decentraliza- D tion • Knowing the comparative advantages of different oes
agencies and stakeholders a C
• Supporting conflict-sensitive governance ountr • Balancing traditional mandates with new ways of • Communicating new and possibly challenging ideas thinking and operating y T eam
• Listening to diverse perspectives N Technical competencies eed
• Integrating these perspectives to strengthen ? These can encompass knowledge about: programme outcomes Political science and governance systems • • Brokering consensus • Public administration
• Macroeconomics Options for cultivating skills within UNDP offices include the UNDP Oslo Governance Centre, which offers online • Local economic issues courses on democratic governance, including a module • Legal frameworks on local governance and decentralization. • Multidisciplinary approaches (political economy, sociology, etc.)
• Specific social and economic sectors
• Crosscutting issues such as gender equality, human 73 rights and the MDGs.
• Political, administrative, and fiscal decentralization models and terms
• Institutional and systems design
• National capacities (political, economic, social, institutional, etc.)
• Different types of capacity development support
• Participatory planning and budgeting
• Data collection and analysis, including disaggregation
• Monitoring and evaluation 7 M onitoring
Monitoring and Evaluation and E
7 valuation
Monitoring and evaluation are important elements of UNDP programmes, framed in
corporate policy by the core principles of human development and human rights, UN coordination and global partnership, national ownership and managing for results. This chapter summarizes basic definitions from UNDP corporate policy, and explores dimen- sions of indicators and measurement relevant to local governance and decentralization programmes.
Basic definitions Evaluation judges the relevance, appropriateness, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability of development efforts, based on agreed criteria and benchmarks among key partners and stakeholders. It rigorously pursues answers to specific questions, as- sesses what works and why, and highlights intended and unintended results.
onitoring is a continuous function providing managers and key stakehold- ers with regular feedback on the consistencies and/or discrepancies be- M tween planned and actual activities, and programme performance, and 74 on internal and external factors affecting results. It can validate the programme ap- proach or offer guidance on necessary changes. Systematic monitoring is an impor- tant input to evaluation.
In local governance and decentralization programmes, monitoring and evaluation may be complicated by two factors. First, many layers of inputs, institutions, systems, actors and processes are involved and interacting with each other. Second, political factors can affect what is being monitored, how it is being monitored and the determination of the results. Monitoring and evaluation for these programmes must acknowledge this com- plexity, even if they fall short of capturing all aspects of it. They also need to recognize that support for local governance and decentralization often unfolds over the long term.
While evaluations are conducted under certain corporate criteria (see the corporate policy for more details), some level of monitoring should be included in all local gover- nance and decentralization programme plans and budgets. There is no one-size-fits all approach, but some general considerations can be outlined, such as starting with the definition of common terms and indicators. This process may extend outside UNDP to include national and local counterparts, as well as other UN agencies and donors, de- pending on who is involved in the programme. The open systems approach described in Chapter 3 may be useful (see Box 3.1 and Box 7.1). Expectations should be realis- tic—decentralization may not have a measurable impact on poverty alleviation in a
The definitions of monitoring and evaluation are adapted from the UNDP Evaluation Policy (Executive Board of UNDP and UNFPA 2006). provide an incentive for change. They can 7 Box 7.1: An Open Systems Approach to M then be used to support policy dialogue, onitoring Monitoring and Evaluation improve efficiency in the use of resources, When used to assess outcomes and impacts, this approach would consider: flag impending problems, and increase
transparency and accountability. and —Avoiding too many pre-defined performance indicators as this may blur the E overall picture In monitoring the performance of local valuation —Using participatory approaches to seek broad acceptance and ownership of governance, the chosen indicators need to reflect the local context. They should performance indicators and ways to apply them not be considered simply a subset or du- —Understanding the behaviour of organizations and individuals in complex, plication of national indicators, although interactive and multi-organizational settings they may need to make connections —Going beyond quantitative measurement by stimulating dialogue on what between local and national processes. constitutes qualitative improvements Other systems may already be in place as —Focusing on context-specific situations, given that conditions can vary across a platform for additional work. Identify- regions and municipalities ing specific, disaggregated indicators for crosscutting issues such as gender equal- —Using anecdotes from practice to clarify what is happening ity helps ensure that these issues receive —Involving various stakeholders, as perceptions on outcomes and impacts may concerted attention. vary, including from a gender equality perspective Challenges to monitoring local gover- —Underpinning assessments with well-targeted studies, surveys and grass-roots nance can include limited or poor quality methods of enquiry on what actually happens on the ground data. For these cases, qualitative forms of —Paying attention to multiple forms of accountability, including to national and assessment can be explored. While deter- local partners, collaborating UN and donor partners, community members, mining and calculating indicators can be 75 service users, marginalized groups, etc. a highly participatory process that brings —Investing in collective learning on the transformational aspects of different stakeholders together, it can also easily become politicized. Some attention decentralization should be paid to timing—the run-up to —Ensuring an ongoing flow of information throughout the assessment, including a contentious election may not be the the local dissemination of findings as warranted best choice for a measurement exercise, Source: Adapted from EuropeAid 2007. for example. There may also be a limited willingness to make monitoring exercises public, although that should be a long- one-year timeframe, for example. Political, economic and term objective. social incentives should be factored in as likely determi- nants of programme impacts. UNDP’s Oslo Governance Centre has been engaged in assisting countries to develop indicators to measure and assess governance. On the local level, it has looked at Indicators and measurement methods and tools related to local governance assess- Sound indicators lie at the heart of monitoring perfor- ments, local government performance, municipal bench- mance. They should be clear and use valid data to summa- marking, urban governance indicators, decentralization rize information about a given subject, demonstrating that indexes, and the state of democracy. UNDP’s Regional certain conditions exist or not, or that certain results have Centre in Panama has developed a diagnostic method for been achieved or not. By defining targets or trends that measuring decentralization processes. It uses so-called can be understood and acted on by the intended audi- SMART indicators and has been in incorporated in two ence—such as local policy makers—good indicators also tools: the Diagnostic Tool for Assessing Intergovernmen-
Specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. tal Relationships and the Diagnostic Tool for the Analysis 7 M of Local Management Capacities. onitoring
Other major global work on local governance indicators has been done by the OECD-DAC, the World Bank and and
USAID. UN-HABITAT’s Urban Governance Index comprises E indicators for effectiveness, equity, participation and ac- valuation countability. In West Africa, the Partenariat pour le Dével- oppement Municipal in Cotonou tracks decentralization in the region and has been involved in monitoring and evaluation.
he Oslo programme is intended to support the kinds of national and regional initiatives de- T scribed in the network discussion. These included one in India, where UNDP has supported work on indices to measure devolution and rural performance. It looks at how to measure devolution, based on what funds, func- tions and functionaries state governments have trans- ferred to local bodies, along with performance based on the given devolution levels.
The Philippines intends to nationally roll out a Local Gov- ernance Performance Management System and a Local Government Financial Performance Management Sys- 76 tem. The first is a web-based, self-diagnostic tool with 107 indicators covering good governance, administration, delivery of social services, economic development and environmental management. The financial performance system has 14 indicators covering the quality and effi- ciency of revenue generation from both traditional and non-traditional sources, the quality and sustainability of expenditures, and debt management.
In Africa, the Impact Alliance has created the Local Gov- ernance Barometer. It has been devised to support local capacity development efforts. Driven by local actors and applied so far in seven countries, the barometer involves dialogue, shared learning, ownership of results and col- laboration in addressing shortcomings. This process fos- ters consensus around identifying local governance pa- rameters, while building local measurement capacities. It taps local knowledge and commitment, and reflects an approach to measurement that can be understood out- side the locality. Additional Resources The following resources provide more detailed, and in someThe following cases region- resources or country-specificprovide more detailed, information and in some on cases region- or country-specific information on the topics thecovered topics in covered this handbook. in this handbook.
Select UNDP and UN resources Bureau for Development Policy, Democratic Gover- World Association of Cities and Local Authorities Coordi- nance/Decentralization, Local Governance and Urban/ nation [www.waclac.org] Rural Development Programme [www.undp.org/gover- nance/sl-dlgud.htm]. World Association of the Major Metropolises [www. metropolis.org] Decentralization and local governance in Asia and the Pacific (Regional Centre in Bangkok) [http://regionalcen- Other relevant institutions trebangkok.undp.or.th/practices/governance/decentral- ization/] Asian Resource Centre for Decentralisation (University of Local governance and decentralization in Europe and the Philippines) [www.gdnet.org/middle.php?oid=211& CIS (Bratislava Regional Centre) [http://europeandcis. zone=org&action=org&org=2561] undp.org/governance/lgdc/] Council of Europe, library of the Department of Local National and regional human development reports, Government and Transfrontier Co-operation [http:// searchable under decentralization [http://hdr.undp. www.coe.int/t/e/legal_affairs/local_and_regional_de- org/en/reports/] mocracy]
Oslo Governance Centre [www.undp.org/oslocentre] European Group of Public Administration, Study Group on Local Governance [http://www.iiasiisa.be/egpa/ag- Programme on Governance in the Arab Region [www. group/aggrlocaldem.htm] 77 undp-pogar.org/] Fiscal Decentralization Initiative [http://www.oecd. Regional Project on Local Governance in Latin America org/document/59/0,3343,en_2649_34533_2675259_1_ 1_1_1,00.html] UN Governance Centre [www.ungc.org/] Institute for Housing and Urban Development Studies UNCDF local development programming [www.uncdf. [www.ihs.nl] org/english/local_development/index.php] The Institute of Local Government Studies (University of UN-HABITAT Global Campaign on Urban Governance Birmingham) [http://www.inlogov.bham.ac.uk/] [ww2.unhabitat.org/campaigns/governance] IRG [www.institut-gouvernance.org]
Local government associations OECD Directorate for Public Governance and Territo- Council of European Municipalities and Regions [www. rial Development [http://www.oecd.org/department/ ccre.org/] 0,3355,en_2649_33735_1_1_1_1_1,00.html]
Open Society Institute, Local Government and Public International City/County Management Association Service Reform Initiative [http://lgi.osi.hu/] [www.icma.org] Taubman Center for State and Local Government and International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University [www.iclei.org] [www.ksg.harvard.edu/taubmancenter]. Sister Cities International [www.sister-cities.org/] World Bank, Public Sector and Governance section UCLG [www.cities-localgovernments.org/uclg/index.asp] [http://web.worldbank.org/] EuropeAid. 2007. Supporting Decentralisation and Local References Governance in Third Countries. Brussels.
Executive Board of UNDP and UNFPA. 2006. “The For this publication evaluation policy of UNDP.” United Nations: New York.
Anti-Corruption Resource Centre. 2007. “Local Anti- Fox, William F. and Tami Gurly. 2006. “Will Consolidation Corruption Agencies: Pros and Cons.” A U4 Expert Improve Sub-National Governments?” World Bank Policy Answer. Research Working Paper 3913. World Bank: Washington, DC.
Beall, Jo. 1996. “Urban Governance: Why Gender Matters.” International Council on Human Rights Policy. 2005. Gender in Development Monograph Series #1. UNDP: Local Government and Human Rights: Doing Good Service. New York. Versoix, Switzerland.
Blair, Harry. 1998. “Spreading Power to the Periphery: An IULA. 1997. “Democratic Decentralization and Future Assessment of Local Governance.” USAID Program and Directions for Local Governance.” A discussion Operations Assessment Report No. 21. Washington, DC. document resulting from the 33rd World Congress of the International Union of Local Authorities in Mauritius. Boex, Jameson, Eunice Heredia-Ortiz, Jorge Martinez- Office for Research and Training, University of Delaware. Vazquez, Andrey Timofeev and Guevera Yao. 2005. “Fighting Poverty Through Fiscal Decentralization.” ———. 2001. “Local Governments Working for Gender USAID: Washington, DC. Equality.” The Hague.
Brixiova, Zuzana, Edward R. Gemayel and Mona Said. Institute of Social Sciences. 2007. The Role of Panchayats 2003. “Can Fiscal Decentralization Contribute to Poverty in Addressing Gender and HIV. UNIFEM South Asia Office: Reduction? Challenges Facing a Low Income Country.” New Delhi. 78 Topics in Middle Eastern and North African Economics, electronic journal, vol. 5. Middle East Economic Joy, Leonard. 2003. “Decentralization and Human Rights: Association and Loyola University: Chicago. A Systemic Approach.” UNDP: New York.
Canadian International Development Agency. 1998. “An Kaiser, Kai. N.d. “Decentralization Reforms.” World Bank: Urbanizing World: Statement on Sustainable Cities.” Hull, Washington, DC. Canada. Korten, David C. 1996. “Civic Engagement to Create Just Center for Science in the Earth System (The Climate and Sustainable Societies for the 21st Century.” A paper Impacts Group). 2007. Preparing for Climate Change: A prepared for the UN Habitat II Conference. The People- Guidebook for Local, Regional and State Governments. King Centered Development Forum: New York. County, Washington, United States. Kulgman, Jeni. 1994. “Decentralization: A Survey of Council of Europe. 1985. “European Charter of Local Self- Literature from a Human Development Perspective.” Government.” Strasbourg. Human Development Report Office Occasional Papers. UNDP: New York. Creative Associates International. N.d. “Tool Category E: Political Development and Governance, Decentralization Litvack, Jennie, Junaid Ahmad and Richard Bird. 1998. of Power.” “Rethinking Decentralization in Developing Countries.” The World Bank Sector Studies Series. World Bank: Davey, Kenneth J. 1993. “Elements of Urban Washington, DC. Management.” Urban Management Programme Discussion Paper No.11. UNCHS/World Bank. Manor, James. N.d. “The Political Economy of Decentralization.” Draft. ———. 1997. “The Promise and Limitations of ———. 2002b. Human Development Report 2002: Decentralization.” Paper for the Technical Consultation Deepening Democracy in a Fragmented World. Oxford on Decentralization, Food and Agriculture Organization, University Press: New York and Oxford. Rome, 16-18 December. ———. 2003. Generating Good Urban Governance: The Montiel, Lenni. 2006. “The Institutional Development TUGI Report Cards Users’ Manual. The Urban Governance of Local Government in Less Developed Countries: A Initiative: Kuala Lumpur. Literature Review.” Office of the National Assembly and UNDP: Hanoi. ———. 2004a. “Access to Justice.” Practice note. New York.
Mumtaz, Babar and Emiel Wegelin. 2001. “Guiding Cities.” ———. 2004b. “Decentralised Governance for The UNDP/UNCHS/World Bank Urban Management Development: A Combined Practice Note on Programme. Decentralisation, Local Governance and Urban/Rural Development.” New York. OECD. 2004. “Decentralization and Poverty in Development Countries: Exploring the Impact.” Paris. ———. 2004c. Human Development Report 2004: Cultural Liberty in Today’s Diverse World. Oxford University Press: OECD-DAC. 2004. Lessons Learned on Donor Support to New York and Oxford. Decentralisation and Local Governance. DAC Evaluation Series. Paris. ———. 2005a. “District Planning and Implementation Strategy Note and Guide.” Bureau for Development OECD Informal Donor Working Group on Local Policy, HIV/AIDS Group. New York. Governance and Decentralisation. 2006. “Survey on Support to Local Governance and Decentralisation.” Paris. ———. 2005b. “Fiscal Decentralization in Transition Economies: Case Studies from the Balkans and Caucasus. Prud’homme, Remy. 1994. “On the Dangers of Bratislava. 79 Decentralization.” Policy Research Working Paper no. 1252. World Bank: Washington, DC. ———. 2005c. A Handbook on Working with Political Parties. New York. Scott, Tim. 2006. “Decentralization and Human Development: Findings and Recommendations From a ———. 2005d. “Human Rights in UNDP.” Practice note. Review of National Human Development Reports.” NHDR New York. Occasional Paper 6. Human Development Report Office, UNDP: New York. ———. 2006. Human Development Report 2006: Beyond Scarcity: Power, Poverty and the Global Water Crisis. New UCLG. 2006. “Local Policies for Cultural Diversity.” A York. study commissioned by UNESCO and conducted by the Working Group on Culture chaired by the Barcelona City ———. 2007a. “Comparing Local Government Responses Council. to HIV/AIDS and Accountability in the North and the South.” Paper for the UNDP and University of Warwick UNDP. 2000. Governance: A Global Matrix of Experiences. Conference: “The Governance of AIDS Responses,” 5-7 Bureau for Development Policy. New York. November. Bureau for Development Policy. New York.
———. 2002a. “How to Make Local Development Work: ———. 2007b. “Supporting Capacities for Integrated Selected Practices from Europe and the CIS.” Bratislava. Local Development.” Practice note. New York.
———. 2007c. “UNDP Contribution to Development Outcomes in 2004-2006 Through Selected Initiatives in the Service Line 2.6 ‘Decentralization and Local Governance (DLG)’: An Overview.” New York. ———. 2007d. “UNDP Strategic Plan: 2008-2011: Wollman, Helmut. 1999. “Legislative Aspects Accelerating global progress on human development.” of Decentralization.” Paper for the conference DP/2007/43. New York. “Decentralization: Conditions of Success” in Yerevan, Armenia, 26-28 April. UN Department of Economic and ———. 2007e. “Workshop on Local Government in Social Affairs. Post-Conflict Situations: Challenges for Improving Local Decision Making and Service Delivery Capacities.” Oslo, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. 2003. 28-29 November. Event summary of the conference “Decentralization and the Politics of Urban Development in West Africa,” Dakar, ———. N.d. “Governance of HIV/AIDS Responses: Issues Senegal [www.wilsoncenter.org]. and Outlook.” New York. Work, Robertson. N.d. “Innovations Linking UNDP and the Government of Germany. 2000. The UNDP Decentralized Governance and Human Development.” Role in Decentralization and Local Governance. New York. Draft paper for UNDP, UNCDF, UNDESA and the World Bank Institute. UNDP, UNCDF, UNV Working Group on Local Development. N.d. “Strategy Statement on Local The World Bank. 1995. Remy Prud’homme, “The Dangers Development.” New York. of Decentralization,” and Charles E. McLure Jr., “Comment on Prud’homme.” Point-Counterpoint in The World Bank UNESCAP. 2001. “Women in Local Government in Asia Research Observer: 10 (20). and the Pacific: A Comparative Analysis of Thirteen Countries.” Bangkok. ———. 2001. “Making Local Government Transparent in Eastern Europe: Anti-Corruption Workshop in Riga.” UNESCO. 2006. Local Policies for Cultural Diversity. A In Beyond Transition: The Newsletter About Reforming study commissioned for the Institute for Culture of the Economies, online summary. Barcelona City Council as the Chair of UCLG’s Working 80 Group on Culture.
UN-HABITAT. 2003. “Slums of the World: The Face of Additional information Urban Poverty in the New Millennium?” Working paper Commonwealth Local Government Forum. 2005. on monitoring MDG target 11. Nairobi. “Time for Local Democracy—The Aberdeen Agenda: Commonwealth Principles on Good Practice for Local ———. 2006a. “Localising the Millennium Development Democracy and Good Governance.” London. Goals: A Guide for Municipalities and Local Partners.” Nairobi. ———. N.d. “Meeting the Challenges of the Aberdeen Agenda—an assessment of local governance and ———. 2006b. State of the World’s Cities Report 2006/7. democracy in Uganda.” Nairobi. Commonwealth Secretariat. 2005. “Make it local, make ———. 2007a. Global Report on Human Settlements 2007. it democratic: The Case for Local Democracy.” Part of the Nairobi. series “Taking Democracy Seriously.” London.
———. 2007b. “Guidelines on Decentralisation and the Government of the United Kingdom, Department for Strengthening of Local Authorities.” Nairobi. Communities and Local Government. 2006. “Research on capacity-building needs: final report.” London. USAID. 2000. Decentralization and Democratic Local Governance Programming Handbook. Center for Inter-Parliamentary Union. 1997. “Universal Declaration Democracy and Governance. Washington, DC. on Democracy.” Adopted at the 161st session, Cairo [www.ipu.org/cnl-e/161-dem.htm]. IULA. 1993. “IULA Worldwide Declaration of Local Self- Government.” Toronto.
———. 1998. “IULA Worldwide Declaration on Women in Local Government.” Harare.
UN Conference on the Environment and Development. 1992. Agenda 21, Chapter 37, “National Mechanisms and International Cooperation for Capacity-Building in Developing Countries.” [www.un.org/esa/sustdev/ documents/agenda21/english/agenda21chapter37.htm.]
UN Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II). 1996. The Habitat Agenda Goals and Principles, Commitment and the Global Plan of Action. Istanbul [www.unhabitat. org/declarations/habitat_agenda.htm].
———. 1996. Istanbul Declaration on Human Settlements. [www.unhabitat.org/declarations/ist-dec. htm.]
UN General Assembly. 2001. “Declaration on Cities and Other Human Settlements in the New Millennium.” Resolution S-25/2, 16 August, New York.
UN-HABITAT. 2008. “International Guidelines on Access to 81 Basic Services for All.” Draft. Nairobi.
Wakely, Patrick. N.d. “Capacity Building for Better Cities.” University College London [www.gdrc.org/uem/wakely].
World Urban Forum. 2006. “The Third Session of the World Urban Forum Networking Event Report.” Vancouver. United Nations Development Programme Democratic Governance Group Bureau for Development Policy 304 east 45th Street, 10th Floor, New York, NY 10017, USA www.undp.org
United Nations Capital Development Fund U.N. Plaza, DC2, 26th Floor, New York, NY 10017, USA www.uncdf.org
United Nations Human Settlements Programme P.O. Box 30030, GPO, Nairobi, 00100, Kenya www.unhabitat.org
United Cities and Local Governments Carrer Avinyó, 15 08002 Barcelona, Spain www.cities-localgovernments.org