A Users' Guide to Measuring Local Governance

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 14: Democratic Governance Profile of Province X Province X: Overall Governance Index: 4.4 Index Areas Participation Fairness Accountability Transparency Efficiency Effectiveness Government 3.9 5.5 2.6 5.4 2.8 3.3 4.4 Bureaucracy 4.0 5.3 5.3 1.0 2.5 5.7 6.8 Civil Society 5.4 4.0 7.0 7.0 3.9 5.8 4.9 Economic Society 4.5 5.5 4.0 5.5 5.5 1.0 5.5 Key actors/stakeholders Each provincial assessment was facilitated by an independent researcher from Kemitraan- Partnership, which was responsible for conducting interviews, collecting secondary data, and preparing a “provincial profile” to be shared and discussed in a local consultative forum. The methodology package lists the 32 well-informed persons to be interviewed (e.g. one officer working in the provincial secretariat, one officer from each of the 3 parliamentarian commissionx on people’s welfare, on the economy/industry/trade, on the local budget and expenditure, one journalist from the most prominent media in the province, one academic who is a resource person for the local government, one representative from the provincial chamber of commerce, one CSO representative who has participated in a consultation with the local government, etc.) Results reporting format The final Index is expressed in the form of Democratic Governance Profile as shown in the following table, with scores between 1 and 10: Gender focus Minimal.Within the area “government”, an indicator assesses the level of women’s political participation in the provincial parliament by measuring the proportion of female parliamentarians. Poverty focus While the overall aim of the assessment framework is to measure the quality and fairness of policy formulation and policy implementation processes (as a proxy of quality and equitable development outcomes), indicators do not have an explicit pro-poor dimension. Strengths • Very comprehensive methodology combining both objective and subjective data sources, with detailed instructions for users and ready-made data collection instruments (e.g. data collection forms with scoring criteria, guiding questions for interviews, etc.) • Very actionable indicators generating data that can easily used by local policymakers, pointing to specific dysfunctions in local governance processes • Draws from an extensive range of objective data sources from government and administrative sources which are readily available but rarely used in other local governance assessments Weaknesses • Detailed methodology drawing from multiple data sources and informants, while ensuring methodological rigor, requires a significant amount of time and in-depth research • Requires country adaptation, as several indicators refer to institutions and practices specific to Indonesia Coverage All Indonesian provinces. Timeline 2008. On-going. 84 UNDP Oslo Governance Centre
Where to find it The initiative is not yet available online. A copy of the draft methodology can be found on the Governance Assessment Portal (www.gaportal.org) or else the UNDP Oslo Governance Centre can be contacted directly (oslo.governance. centre@undp.org). Contact details Kemitraan Partnership Jl. Brawijaya VIII No. 7 Kebayoran Baru, Jakarta 12160 Phone: +62-21-727 99566 Fax: +62-21-722 5667 Email : info@kemitraan.or.id A Users’ Guide to Measuring Local Governance 85
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 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: Table 12: Example of form for colle
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?