A Users' Guide to Measuring Local Governance

More documents

Recommendations

Info

How to use the Source Guide The following Guide includes 22 assessment methodologies for decentralised governance. These methodologies have been compiled to provide users with a resource to draw on for developing new assessment tools or for adapting existing assessment approaches to specific contexts. The sources are grouped into three categories: 1 Comprehensive local governance assessment approaches based on multiple stakeholder perspectives 2 Local governance assessments based on citizen (or single stakeholder) perspectives 3 Local governance and performance self-assessments by local government institutions The matrix below summarizes the main features of each tool, and can be used to narrow down a subset of tools offering the best ‘fit’ for a given assessment context. This selection process can proceed in three steps: 1 First, users need to clarify the scope of their assessment and select one of the three categories of tools listed above. For instance, in settings with a poor functioning democracy at the local level or in a context in which the decentralisation process has only recently started, users may want to focus on the third category of tools assessing local government performance, instead of registering low scores on almost all aspects of local democracy measured by tools of the first category.The point here is that not all democratic governance deficits can be addressed simultaneously therefore it is important to identify priority areas to focus on, and select a tool accordingly. 2 Second, users can refine their search within any of the three categories of tools by examining various features of each tool (such as financial and time investments required, specific purpose served by the tool, data sources used by the tool, main stakeholders involved, and poverty/gender focus). Based on these features, users can identify the two or three tools which seem to be most appropriate to their assessment needs and to the local context. 3 Users can then flip directly to the more detailed profiles of these shortlisted tools and make their final selection. The summary matrix has a column on “cost/benefit analysis” to help users select a tool that is appropriate for the capacity level of local stakeholders and that matches the timeframe and financial resources available for the assessment. Every instrument can be used more or less intensively including more or less primary data collection, while more primary data collection might be required in “data-poor” settings. Nevertheless certain methodologies will be more expensive and time consuming than others (but likely to generate more reliable results), while others will be quicker and less costly (but generating results that are more ‘indicative’.) The purpose of the assessment will also influence the choice of instrument: is the objective of the assessment to inform policy makers, or is it also (or mainly) meant to serve as a learning/capacity development effort contributing to an improved dialogue between local government and citizens? The summary matrix has a “purpose” column which distinguishes between 1) “diagnostic” to inform policymaking and priority-setting, and 2) capacity development to facilitate engagement of citizens in governance processes. 46 UNDP Oslo Governance Centre
The summary matrix also indicates what type of data sources is used by each tool (objective and/or subjective), which actors should lead the application of the tool (internal vs. external to local government), and the extent to which the methodology is sensitive to women and to poor and marginalized groups (merely disaggregating indicators by income/sex vs. proposing indicators that are ‘specific to the poor/women’). We will now briefly describe each one of the three categories of tools featured in the Source Guide. 1 Comprehensive local governance assessment approaches based on multiple stakeholder perspectives This category is distinguished by its emphasis on applying a comprehensive framework for capturing the principal dimensions and determinants of governance at the local level such as the local political system (i.e. elections, human rights, rule of law, civil society, freedom of information), institutional issues (i.e. corruption, public administration, financial management, public procurement), social and cross-cutting issues (i.e. the policy process, the budget process, revenue mobilization, service delivery, gender, environmental sustainability) and market governance (i.e. the business/trade environment). In this category, the source guide includes the following: 1 Urban Governance Index (UN-HABITAT) 2 Local Governance Barometer (Impact Alliance) 3 Good Governance for Local Development – GOFORGOLD Index (Afghanistan) 4 Local Democracy Assessment Guide (International IDEA) 5 Indicators of Local Democratic Governance (Tocqueville Research Centre & OSI) 6 Methodological Guidelines for Local Governance Analysis (UNDP) 7 Governance Index (Indonesia, Kemitraan – Partnership) 8 Measuring Municipal Performance – MIDAMOS (Paraguay) 9 Observatory of Democracy in Central America: System of Legal and Institutional Governance Indicators for Central America (Centro Estudios para el Futuro) 10 Desde lo Local – Strategic Decentralization for Local Development (Mexico) 11 Council of Europe’s Guide to Developing Well-Being & Progress Indicators with Citizens – Application of the Governance Module in Timisoara (Romania) 2 Local governance assessments based on citizen (or single stakeholder) perspectives This category is distinguished by its emphasis on citizens’ perceptions and experiences based on an assumption that the quality of local governance is determined by local stakeholders.The identification of expectations, experiences and perceptions is carried out by different data collection methods including direct surveying and focus groups. The most often cited instruments and approaches are Citizen Report Cards originally developed in Bangalore, India. In this category, the source guide includes the following: 12 Citizen Report Cards (Public Affairs Centre, India) 13 Social Audit of Local Governance (Bosnia and Herzegovina) 14 Social Audit of governance and delivery of public services (Pakistan) 15 Local Governance Self-Assessment (Bangladesh) 3 Local governance and performance self-assessments by local government institutions This category is distinguished by its emphasis on outputs or results achieved by local governments in service delivery, income and expenditure. Along those lines, measuring municipal performance means assessing how well a municipality performs when delivering goods and services to the public. The performance measures often include the volume, quality, efficiency and outcomes of providing these goods and services. They might also include measures focused on the institutional, financial and human resource capacities to develop, implement and monitor/evaluate its policies and programmes. Most of A Users’ Guide to Measuring Local Governance 47
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: Source Guide
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?