A Users' Guide to Measuring Local Governance

Table 3:
UGI sub-indices and indicators
Effectiveness
1 Local government revenue per capita
2 Ratio of actual recurrent and capital budget
3 Local Government revenue transfers
4 Ratio of mandates to actual tax collection
5 Predictability of transfers in local government budget
6 Published performance standards
7 Customer satisfaction survey
8 Existence of a Vision statement
Participation
14 Elected council
15 Selection of Mayor
16 Voter turnout
17 Public forum
18 Civic Associations per 10,000 population
Equity
9 Citizens’ charter: right of access to basic services
10 Percentage of women councillors
11 Proportion of women in key positions
12 Pro-poor pricing policy for water
13 Incentives for informal business
Accountability
19 Formal publication of contracts, tenders, budget and accounts
20 Control by higher levels of government
21 Codes of conduct
22 Facility for citizen complaints
23 Anti-corruption commission
24 Disclosure of income and assets
25 Regular independent audit
Key actors/stakeholders
Key actors and stakeholders include municipal
leaders and officials, representatives of parastatal
organisations and service providing agencies, civil
society organisations, academic and research
institutions, private sector representatives,
informal sector representatives (such as the
informal traders’ associations, etc.).
UGI results can be used extensively by policy
makers – positive results can help build community
support, while negative results can be used to
channel resources into identified weaknesses. Civil
society and the media can use UGI results to
improve participation and build accountability.
Donors and other international agencies can use
the results to better target aid assistance, especially
in the area of governance.
Local government associations can play a key role
in piloting the UGI in a country and subsequently
replicating it in a larger group of cities, drawing
inter-city comparisons and organizing peerlearning
and exchange of good practices. This was
seen, for example, in Zimbabwe, where the urban
councils’ association played a pivotal role in
implementing the Index.
Results reporting format
Results can be presented in a tabular form, a radar
chart that graphically indicates the outputs on
different sub-indices, as well as in a narrative
report. In the radar chart, the results of each
sub-index are presented as a normalised measure
(on a scale of 0-1), thus facilitating comparison
between the four sub-indices. Proximity of the
values to 1 indicates a higher quality of
governance (or of a particular aspect of
governance, such as participation or effectiveness).
A radar chart can also be used very effectively for
inter-city comparison (see Figure 1 for an example
from Sri Lanka).
The narrative report explores in greater depth why
a certain aspect of governance is strong or weak in
that particular municipality, or the reasons why
some specific indicators have returned particularly
high or low values. It thus allows discussion and
contextual interpretation of the results, as well
as synthesis of the UGI data that can help in
identifying strengths, weaknesses, opportunities
and threats faced by the city. It also helps in
capturing the richness of stakeholder opinions and
ideas.
A Users’ Guide to Measuring Local Governance 57