A Users' Guide to Measuring Local Governance

More documents

Recommendations

Info

overview of the scope of local governance issues, their level of capacity, and their potentially more independent posture. However, it was argued that assessments led by local government associations are most effective when these have sufficient influence over and credibility amongst local and national authorities. International organizations and other external actors also have an important role to play in promoting, advising and actively supporting local governance assessments. This is especially true of those organizations continually present on the ground and/or those with large international and regional networks (e.g. the United Cities and Local Governments and the world and regional networks of Local Governments Associations). Good practice checklist • Identify ‘champions’ who create enthusiasm and commitment for the assessment. The champion is the engine behind the whole exercise and s/he has to be able to work with all different actors and keep them committed to the original purpose of the assessment, so preventing anyone “going astray”. • Pay sufficient attention to targeting political leaders to ensure the political will and support for the success of an assessment. • Promote active participation by assigning particular roles and responsibilities to each group of stakeholders involved. • Be as inclusive as possible by including all relevant organizations and individuals – even those that might not be the usual partners in governance assessments (e.g. religious and youth organizations, foreign investors, the media). • The lack of adequate understanding of the purpose of the assessment and lack of shared norms related to local governance are often major impediments to stakeholder involvement so invest time and resources in awareness raising and capacity development of targeted groups through appropriate communication strategies. 2.6 Incentives and sustainability Many of those interviewed considered that financial and capacity development incentives were a sine qua non for a successful assessment because they have a major influence in ensuring both the launch of an assessment and the active involvement of key stakeholders. Without incentives geared towards the needs and interests of particular stakeholders, it is difficult to ensure buy-in, support and ownership. Such incentives may include financial support, development support and capacity development programmes. However, others considered that there is already so many financial and capacity development offers (particularly in large cities) that finance and development assistance no longer really represent major incentives. The commitment of political and civil society leaders has been greatest in those cases in which there has been a powerful demonstration of practical, tangible results and a clear political value of an assessment. Hence, it was suggested that a genuine understanding of the purpose and the method of assessment is the most critical incentivizing factor. Assessments should certainly not be initiated only as a result of donordriven pressure or as another “check-mark or shopping list”. All interviewees agree that there needs to be at least a minimum continuity and that the periodicity with which assessments take place should be determined on the basis of the specificities of particular aspects of governance being analyzed. If the result of an assessment is expected to induce immediate changes, subsequent exercises should be more regular and integrated into monitoring and evaluation systems. Developing local capacities from the outset is crucial for ensuring that the assessment is repeated (to enable monitoring over time) and for ensuring its institutionalization. Capacity development should be integrated into the methodology even in the case of externally conducted assessments. It was recommended that concrete practical actions should take place during 30 UNDP Oslo Governance Centre
the assessment – in terms of social mobilization, policy-making and consensus building – to ensure sustainability. Moreover, broad inclusion of local actors yield shared ownership which is a key driver for ensuring uptake of the assessment results. Upon the finalization of an assessment, a concrete and widely shared reform agenda should be based on a consensus of all those involved and broadly promoted in the local community. At the same time, information on the results of the assessment and the proposal for a follow-up should be disseminated to the largest number of stakeholders. Good practice checklist • Ensure that incentives to stakeholders are positive, transparent and strong enough to mobilize engagement. • Take care to ensure that any external assistance does not undermine the credibility of the results and that it does not impede the local ownership of the process. • Ensure a sustained focus on developing local capacities. A Users’ Guide to Measuring Local Governance 31
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: governments, and representatives of
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 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 and 154:
Figure 6: 2008 Scorecard Summary: L
Page 155 and 156:
Table 43: Two examples of questions
Page 157:
Where to find it Users’ Guide & s
show all

A Users' Guide to Measuring Local Governance

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?