A Users' Guide to Measuring Local Governance

More documents

Recommendations

Info

22 Methodology for the Assessment of Capacity of Municipalities in Turkey and the Western Balkans to Deliver Services Producer UNDP – Capacity Development Practice, Bratislava Regional Centre History This capacity assessment methodology has been developed in response to a need identified by EU member states, and EU candidate and potential candidate countries to enhance the capacities of the two latter to achieve development goals. It responds, in particular, to the need for improved local capacities of local administrative structures in the Western Balkans and Turkey in order to provide services effectively, especially following the recent fiscal, planning and operational decentralisation that has transferred much responsibility to local governments. Objectives This capacity assessment it is intended to identify and address strategic issues within each country that will have the most impact overall on the delivery of five basic services in each country, taking into account the limited resources available for capacity development responses: drinking water supply, liquid waste management, solid waste management, basic healthcare and primary education. In particular, the results of capacity assessment are intended to be used jointly by central, regional, and local stakeholders in each country to: • Identify and prioritise capacity gaps; • Identify, design, implement, and review appropriate capacity development responses; • Support capacity development funding requests by demonstrating a clear link between capacity development project proposals and real, evidence-based needs that are well defined and documented. Applicability While it is expected that UNDP country offices will initially play a prominent facilitating role in implementing the methodology and translating the results into follow-on actions, the idea is to develop and embed sustainable capacity in Turkey and each country belonging to the Western Balkans to carry out subsequent rounds of capacity assessment in other thematic areas, relying increasingly on national expertise and resources, systems, processes, and procedures, and less on external support. Eventually, the process is intended to be owned and steered by national stakeholders, including central, regional, and local authorities, NGOs, and local citizens. Types and sources of data used Data are mainly obtained through a questionnaire and the information collected is both subjective and objective.The verification of survey results can be undertaken through focus groups and/or follow-up interviews. Methodology The capacity assessment exercise consists of several steps: the capacity assessment survey undertaken through a questionnaire, the analysis and interpretation of the survey feedback, the verification of the survey results (e.g. by means of focus groups and/or follow-up interviews), the benchmarking, the gap identification and prioritisation (mainly at the national level). The capacity assessment exercise is supposed to be followed by the identification and the design of capacity development responses. The questionnaire consists of three parts. • Part 1 covers background information about the municipality (14 questions). • Part 2 covers services that are the sole responsibility of the municipality (22 questions). • Part 3 covers services where responsibility is shared by the municipality with one or more other service delivery organisations (6 questions). The following table provides two examples of questions belonging to the Part 2: 146 UNDP Oslo Governance Centre
Table 43: Two examples of questions belonging to the Part 2 Question 26: To what extent are specialist gender and human rights staff, departments, and other bodies (e.g. councils and committees) involved in policy, strategy, and service development activities for the five services? Frequently Sometimes Rarely Never Not sure Drinking water Liquid waste management Solid waste management Basic healthcare Primary education Example 2: Overall, how do you rate the capacity of the municipal administration to translate the findings of monitoring and evaluation into service improvements for the following groups? Strong Moderate Weak No capacity Not sure The general public Women Minorities People with disabilities People with low income Other typically socially excluded groups 17 additional and optional questions can be added in Part 3 and 125 in part 2, organised into 5 categories: Mobilizing, informing, and involving stakeholders in service delivery; Analysing statistics and issues affecting service delivery; Policy and strategy formulation for effective service delivery; Financial resources, budgeting, and managing implementation of service delivery; Monitoring and evaluation of service delivery. Questionnaires should be circulated to municipalities through a national body, such as an association of municipalities, or relevant government ministry. The questionnaires should be completed by mayors and/or their municipal administrations, and signed by the mayor after her/his review of the answers to ensure the correctness of the responses. Key actors/stakeholders A steering group should be established in order to provide consultative inputs, act as a channel of communication with a wider range of stakeholders and as a driving force to assure the follow-up of the assessment. It should be composed by central government ministries; regional development agencies; regional, provincial and district authorities; association of municipalities; grouping of other relevant public and private sector service delivery organisations; NGO sector (including groups representing the interest of marginalised population). These key stakeholders are supposed to be included throughout the assessment process, in order to ensure the relevance of the exercise, to gain their trust, ensure their ownership and thus commitment to subsequent capacity development responses. The target audience for this user guide is primarily staff of UNDP country offices in Turkey and the Western Balkans who are currently involved, or may become involved, in the assessment of municipal capacities. The guide is also intended for other parties that have a role or interest in any assessment of municipal capacities in EU candidate and potential candidate countries, and these will include, among others: Central, regional, and provincial authorities; Associations of municipalities; Groupings of other public and private sector service delivery organisations; Local and national non-governmental organisations (NGO); Citizens’ representatives; European Commission Delegations. Results reporting format Not yet available as the tool is currently being piloted. A Users’ Guide to Measuring Local Governance 147
Page 1:
A Users’ Guide to Measuring Local
Page 5 and 6:
Contents Acknowledgements Acronyms
Page 7 and 8:
Acknowledgements AUTHORS Alexandra
Page 9 and 10:
Introduction This Guide is intended
Page 11:
1 Assessments of Local Governance
Page 14 and 15:
Decentralized governance for develo
Page 16 and 17:
and local specificity. In order to
Page 18 and 19:
A critical step in developing an as
Page 20 and 21:
Box 5. Key phases in a governance a
Page 22 and 23:
achieve the results. These can incl
Page 24 and 25:
Gender-sensitivity in governance is
Page 26 and 27:
1.11 Key contextual factors influen
Page 28 and 29:
findings of the assessment in ways
Page 30 and 31:
for union parishads (UPs) comprise
Page 32 and 33:
Box 14. Short-, Medium- and Long-Te
Page 35 and 36:
Voices from the Trenches 2 2.1 Choo
Page 37 and 38:
governments, and representatives of
Page 39:
the assessment - in terms of social
Page 43 and 44:
Case Studies 3 The following four f
Page 45 and 46:
Case Study 2: Moving from governmen
Page 47 and 48:
Case Study 3: Balancing comparabili
Page 49 and 50:
Case Study 4: Ensuring uptake of as
Page 51 and 52:
References • Aberbach, J.D. and R
Page 53 and 54:
Source Guide
Page 55 and 56:
The summary matrix also indicates w
Page 57 and 58:
Summary matrix: Main features of to
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Table 3: UGI sub-indices and indica
Page 67 and 68:
Weaknesses • While the UGI helps
Page 69 and 70:
Table 4: Local Governance Barometer
Page 71 and 72:
Table 5: Scale to assess local gove
Page 73 and 74:
Jean-Michel Dufils, PACT (Madagasca
Page 75 and 76:
Table 6: Principles and indicators
Page 77 and 78:
Where to find it The initiative is
Page 79 and 80:
Table 7: Local Democracy Assessment
Page 81 and 82:
Poverty focus Not explicit. The onl
Page 83 and 84:
Local governance performance measur
Page 85 and 86:
Europe. They have first been used i
Page 87 and 88:
Table 9: Methodological Guidelines
Page 89 and 90:
7 Governance Index (Indonesia) Prod
Page 91 and 92:
Table 12: Example of form for colle
Page 93 and 94:
Where to find it The initiative is
Page 95 and 96:
Table 15: MIDAMOS’s themes, indic
Page 97 and 98:
Table 17: Grading System Qualificat
Page 99 and 100:
Table 18: Framework of module on
Page 101 and 102:
Key actors/stakeholders The initial
Page 103 and 104: Table 20: Indicators belonging to t
Page 105 and 106: y the State and the municipality as
Page 107 and 108: 11 Council of Europe’s Guide to D
Page 109 and 110: Table 25: Evaluation and comments f
Page 111 and 112: 12 Citizen Report Cards (CRC) Produ
Page 113 and 114: Box 5: Citizen Report Card applicat
Page 115 and 116: 13 Social Audit of Local Governance
Page 117 and 118: Box 7: Sample indicators for Social
Page 119 and 120: 14 Social Audit of Governance and D
Page 121 and 122: Box 8: Report extract - The Social
Page 123 and 124: Table 26: Themes and issues analyse
Page 125 and 126: 15 Local Governance Self-Assessment
Page 127 and 128: Table 27: EXAMPLES OF KEY ISSUES FR
Page 129 and 130: 16 Governance for Local Development
Page 131 and 132: Coverage Following the pilot testin
Page 133 and 134: Table 32: PBGS in Uganda, Tanzania
Page 135 and 136: Table 34: Nepal - Summary of the st
Page 137 and 138: Manual for assessment of Minimum Co
Page 139 and 140: Table 35: LGPMS - perfofrmance them
Page 141 and 142: Coverage The LGPMS was field-tested
Page 143 and 144: 19 Index of Responsibility, Transpa
Page 145 and 146: Gender focus Not explicit. Poverty
Page 147 and 148: Table 39: Dimensions for the standa
Page 149 and 150: 21 Local Integrity Initiative Produ
Page 151 and 152: Table 42: Integrity Indicator score
Page 153: Figure 6: 2008 Scorecard Summary: L
Page 157: Where to find it Users’ Guide & s
show all

A Users' Guide to Measuring Local Governance

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?