A Users' Guide to Measuring Local Governance

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Figure 1: UGI Radar Chart for six in Sri Lanka Effectiveness Sub-Index 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 Accountability Sub-Index 0.20 0.00 -0.20 -0.40 -0.60 -0.80 -1.00 Participation Sub-Index Equity Sub-Index Colombo Kandy Kotte Moratuwa Matale Negombo Source: http://www.undp.org/oslocentre/docs05/cross/4.%20Creatiog%20Local%20governance%20Measurements%20-%20shipra%20Narang.ppt Gender focus Two indicators specifically address issues relating to gender: “proportion of women councillors” and “proportion of women in key positions”. Poverty focus The Global Campaign on Urban Governance aims explicitly at contributing to the eradication of poverty through improved urban governance. The UGI is a tool to further this goal. Two indicators under equity – “existence of a pro-poor pricing policy for water”, and “incentives for informal business” – explicitly focus on the poor. However, other indicators portray the general situation at the municipal level, without emphasising the situation of poor communities or citizens. Strengths • The UGI is a self-assessment tool that can be used to initiate a dialogue among key urban actors and stakeholders on development priorities. • By providing separate assessments for each sub-index as well as normalised values for each indicator, the UGI can be used to identify precise weaknesses in local governance, and determine policy reforms and capacity building needs in consultation with stakeholders. It can also be used to seek peer or donor assistance for improving specific aspects of governance. • The UGI does not need extensive financial resources or time to implement. A two-day stakeholder workshop can generate most of the questionnaire responses. However, it does require a core group of committed stakeholders who are willing to finalise the questionnaire, calculate the results, put together the narrative report and share it with sother actors. • The quantitative approach can help to objectively review and monitor progress over time. UN-HABITAT suggests that the UGI indicators be collected at regular intervals of two years, and be used as part of a city monitoring and evaluation framework. However, there is no evidence that this has happened in the cities where the Index has been applied. 58 UNDP Oslo Governance Centre
Weaknesses • While the UGI helps in assessing whether mechanisms and processes of participatory and equitable urban governance exist, it does not dig deeper to see how well these work, for instance, how effective the public consultations are, or how frequently citizens’ surveys are undertaken, etc. • Since the UGI uses complex formulas to normalise the results of each indicator (i.e. obtain a value between 0 and 1), it is not easy to change the indicators or develop contextspecific indicators. • The UGI only has two gender-focused indicators. These indicators measure gender representation, but fail to measure a broader range of gender inequality issues, particularly in terms of access to basic services. UN-HABITAT advocates further gender disaggregation when expanding and locally adapting the index. For instance, the indicator concerning the existence (yes/no) of public fora for consultation could include information on the percentage of female participants. Another example could be that the indicator concerning “customer satisfaction survey” also examines whether some questions of this survey are specially targeting women. Coverage The Urban Governance Index was field-tested in 24 cities around the world: Douala, Yaounde, Louga, Dakar, Ibadan and Enugu (Africa), Amman, Tanta, Ismailia (Arab States), Naga City, Colombo, Moratuwa, Negombo, Matale, Kandy, Kotte (Asia and Pacific), Pristina (Europe), Montreal, Vancouver (North America), Montevideo, Quito, Santo Andre, Bayamo, Guadalajara (Latin America and Caribbean). Since 2004, it has been applied in various cities in Zimbabwe, Somalia, Mongolia and Kosovo. Timeline Initiated in 2000. Field tested in 2003-04. Application ongoing. Where to find it http://ww2.unhabitat.org/campaigns/governance/activities_6.asp http://www.unhabitat.org/campaigns/governance Contact details Global Campaign on Urban Governance UN-HABITAT, P.O. Box 30030, Nairobi, Kenya Tel: +254-20-7623216, Fax: +254-20-7624264 E-mail: governance@unhabitat.org Supplementary tools/guidelines Urban Governance Index workshop and self-assessment guidelines: http://www.icnrd5-mongolia.mn/pdf/UGI%20self-assessment%20guidelines.doc http://www.unhabitat.org/downloads/docs/2232_55927_Addendum%20-%20Methodology%20Guidelines.doc UGI spreadsheet and calculation: http://www.unhabitat.org/downloads/docs/2232_24121_ugi-final-sheet%20may05.xls Other general information: http://www.unchs.org/downloads/docs/2232_80907_UGIndex.doc http://info.worldbank.org/etools/mdfdb/docs/WP_Janette1.pdf http://www.undp.org/oslocentre/docs05/cross/4.%20Creating%20Local%20Governance%20Measurements%20-% 20Shipra%20Narang.ppt http://ww2.unhabitat.org/campaigns/governance/documents/Pres2Index.pdf A Users’ Guide to Measuring Local Governance 59
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 65: Table 3: UGI sub-indices and indica
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?