SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY SOURCEBOOK CHAPTER 4 SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND LOCAL
Transcription
SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY SOURCEBOOK CHAPTER 4 SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND LOCAL
SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY SOURCEBOOK CHAPTER 4 SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT HOW TO READ THIS DOCUMENT Welcome to the World Bank’s Sourcebook on “Social Accountability: Strengthening the Demand Side of Governance and Service Delivery”! There is growing recognition both among governments, donors and civil society that citizens and communities have an important role to play with regard to enhancing accountability of public officials, reducing corruption and leakage of funds and improving public service delivery. As a result, Social Accountability has become an attractive approach to both the public sector and civil society for improving governance processes, service delivery outcomes, and improving resource allocation decisions. Over the last decade, numerous examples have emerged that demonstrate how citizens can make their voice heard and effectively engage in making the public sector more responsive and accountable. In an effort to capture the diverse experiences from across the world and make them available in one single place, the World Bank began developing a Sourcebook in 2005 on these approaches for reference, familiarization and inspiration. Practitioners and decision makers in the World Bank and in client countries constitute the primary audience for the Sourcebook. The Sourcebook was originally developed as an interactive resource for use on-line or via CD-ROM. In order to cater for readers with limited web/ computer access “downloadable” file versions of the main Sourcebook chapters have been made available (http://www-esd.worldbank.org/sac/). This document is part of the larger Sourcebook on Social Accountability. It constitutes one of the main chapters of the Sourcebook, originally written as content of web pages and later converted into a comprehensive text. The entire Sourcebook is organized in several main chapters: A Conceptual Chapter (“Social Accountability: What Does it Mean for the World Bank?”) providing an analytical framework of social accountability, and an overview of the main concepts and definitions. Tools and Methods, that are most frequently used as part of social accountability approaches such as participatory budgeting, citizens report cards and social audits; Social Accountability in the Regions provides access to case examples of social accountability in different regions. Sectoral and Thematic Applications: Social accountability in Public Expenditure Management, Decentralization, Education and Health; Social Accountability in Bank Operations provides guidance, case examples and lessons learned from the implementation of social accountability in Bank operations, including investment and development policy loans. It also provides 1 guidance on how to conduct analytical work on social accountability and access to examples of analytical studies on the topic. Knowledge and Learning Resources provides access to knowledge and learning materials on social accountability, including case studies, publications, power point presentations, manuals, etc. 2 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................ 4 Relevance........................................................................................................................ 4 1.1 2 ENTRY POINTS AND SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISMS...................... 7 2.1 Local Planning and Budgeting........................................................................................ 7 2.1.1 Participatory Planning and Budgeting .................................................................... 8 2.1.2 Municipal Budget Analysis..................................................................................... 9 2.1.3 Public Hearings and Town Hall Meetings .............................................................. 9 2.2 Local Financial Management and Procurement ........................................................... 11 2.2.1 Monitoring Bidding and Contracting.................................................................... 11 2.2.2 Monitoring Public Works Implementation ........................................................... 12 2.2.3 Ex-Post Social Auditing of Government Accounts .............................................. 12 2.3 Local Service Provision ................................................................................................ 14 2.3.1 Participatory Service Performance Assessments .................................................. 15 2.3.2 Service Specific Accountability Institutions......................................................... 16 2.4 Institutional Oversight of Local Government ............................................................... 16 2.4.1 Citizen Oversight Bodies ...................................................................................... 17 2.4.2 Regulations that Empower Citizens...................................................................... 18 2.4.3 Participatory Institutional Assessment and Municipal Reform Instruments ........ 19 3 CRITICAL FACTORS AND ENABLING CONDITIONS............................................ 21 3.1 Supply Side Factors and Conditions ............................................................................. 21 3.1.1 Policy and Decentralization Legal Framework..................................................... 21 3.1.2 Transparency and Access to Information ............................................................. 22 3.1.3 Attitudes and Capacity of Local Government Officials ....................................... 24 3.2 Demand Side Factors and Conditions........................................................................... 25 3.2.1 The Role of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) ................................................. 25 3.2.2 Constraints to Citizen Participation in Social Accountability Initiatives ............. 26 3.2.3 Factors Enabling Citizen Participation in Social Accountability Initiatives ........ 27 4 GUIDANCE FOR OPERATIONAL WORK .................................................................. 29 5 ADDITIONAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................... 31 5.1 Case Studies .................................................................................................................. 31 5.1.1 Argentina, Municipality of Avellaneda, Public Hearing ...................................... 31 5.1.2 Developing a Transparency Initiative in Romanian Municipalities ..................... 33 5.1.3 Colombia, “Bogotá How are We Doing” (Bogotá Cómo Vamos)........................ 36 5.2 References..................................................................................................................... 41 5.3 Website Links to Resources and Case Studies ............................................................. 46 Social Accountability Sourcebook 3 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government INTRODUCTION 1 1 This chapter is about social accountability and local governments. The main objective is to illustrate, through case examples, the most common strategies that citizens2 employ to hold local governments accountable for the fulfillment of their public duties and for their performance, besides voting with ballots or “with their feet.” Of the three main types of decentralization, this chapter focuses on devolution to local governments, the transfer of authority for decision making, finance, and management to quasiautonomous units of local government. 3 Devolution provides the most enabling context for citizens’ demands for accountability to have an impact on government performance. While the other two forms of decentralization, deconcentration and delegation, transfer some authority to lower levels of government, the incentives of the latter are for upward rather than downward accountability. 4 The chapter is organized in four sections: 1.1 • It begins with a brief discussion of why it is important that citizens engage in demanding local government accountability. • The next section, which forms the core of the chapter, presents a simple framework for organizing the multiple entry points and mechanisms through which citizens have tried to influence local government accountability, and illustrates them with examples. • The third section identifies a set of structural factors and conditions, both on the supply (government) side and the demand (civil society) side, that are likely to influence the success of civic strategies for local government accountability. • The fourth section provides a short checklist of useful tips to bear in mind in operations that promote these kinds of social accountability strategies. Relevance Accountability is critical for successful decentralization. The core promise of decentralization is for local government services to be better aligned with local preferences. This is unlikely to 1 This document was prepared by Rodrigo Serrano (HDNSP). Comments were provided by Ani Dasgupta, Arsala Deane, Reiner Forster, Andre Herzog, Asmeen Khan, Kate Kuper, Kai Kaiser, Carmen Malena, Keith McLean, Mary McNeil, Kathrin Plangemann, and Uri Raich. 2 While the text refers to citizens as the actors of the social accountability initiatives, often they act through civic organizations, either membership-based community based organizations (CBOs) or third party organizations (NGOs). 3 Local governments refers only to elected local governments, statutorily or constitutionally defined, and corresponding to formal levels of sub-national administration. It does not refer to deconcentrated units of central or provincial governments. 4 Deconcentration grants increased responsibilities to branch offices of line ministries or territorial entities. Delegation assigns a specific function or program to a decentralized entity, for example, the administration of certain components of a national poverty targeting program can be delegated to local governments (Litvack et al 1998). Social Accountability Sourcebook 4 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government occur without the proper incentives and institutions to hold local government accountable to this promise. Conventional Approach. The conventional approach to ensure local government accountability has relied on two kinds of accountability mechanisms: • External mechanisms that rely on citizen’s votes or mobility. By narrowing the jurisdiction served by government (bringing it closer to the citizen) and the scope of activities for which government is responsible, decentralization is supposed to lower the barriers to citizens’ access to information about government’s performance. Citizens can use this information to hold local government accountable through: (i) local elections (voice) or the threat of voting officials out of office, and (ii) mobility (exit) or the threat of moving out of town and taking their revenues to another district. By facilitating access to information, then, decentralization itself is supposed to facilitate accountability. This explains why decentralization is often prescribed as a solution to government accountability deficits. • Internal mechanisms that rely only on government action to promote local government accountability. These include administrative and financial regulations, central government audits, and local legislative control over the executive branch. Limitations. While conventional mechanisms of accountability are necessary, often they are insufficient to ensure local government accountability. • Besides the structural limitations of electoral accountability, 5 local elections are subject to elite capture and other weaknesses of local political markets, weak media, etc. • Since it is too costly for citizens of developing countries to relocate in response to local government performance, mobility is not a realistic option. • Other common limitations for achieving more robust internal accountability mechanisms include: the weak capacity of local government, central government’s lack of resources to manage all local governments, and, insufficient balance of power between branches and levels of government. With the spread of decentralization throughout the world, these limitations have become more conspicuous. This has often been used to justify bypassing local governments, further undermining them, and compromising the sustainability of development interventions. One strategy to address this risk has been to improve conventional mechanisms of local government accountability, for example, by reforming local electoral systems to strengthen the link between 5 Some of the structural problems are: (a) elections only hold elected officials accountable, and not appointed bureaucrats, (b) elections cannot give clear accountability signals to individual office holders because voters have only one opportunity to punish or reward numerous governmental decisions and because we can never know whether they are enforcing prospective or retrospective controls, (c) voting is a decentralized strategic action— because it is hard for citizens to coordinate the orientation of their votes, the power of voting as a control mechanism is weakened. (Przeworski, Stokes, and Manin 1999; Ackerman, 2004). Social Accountability Sourcebook 5 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government politicians and voters (e.g., ward-based elections), and reforming financial management systems to introduce greater transparency. 6 Contribution of Social Accountability. A complementary strategy has been to introduce a range of citizen-based accountability mechanisms that compensate for the shortcomings of conventional mechanisms. Many of them have become enshrined in government regulations and institutions, further enriching and complementing the repertoire of instruments that governments have to deliver on the promise of decentralization. 7 Social accountability initiatives have been aimed at specific dimensions of local government work (see the next section on Entry Points) and the evidence of their potential added value is stimulating growing interest and continuous innovation. • By introducing participatory budgeting in Porto Alegre in the early 1990s, the local planning and budgeting process ceased being an instrument for political clientelism and patronage. Instead, it became a tool for responding to the needs of the poor and for citizen oversight. Empirical research of participatory budgeting across municipalities in Brazil showed that it systematically leads to pro-poor spending. 8 • By allowing citizens to oversee the bidding process for waste collection service, the municipality of Morón in Argentina saved $13 million, reversing a pattern of municipal corruption and lack of transparency that had seriously undermined its credibility with the local citizenry. 9 As a result, the national government created a national program called Citizen Audits (Auditorias Ciudadanas) which scaled up and expanded this and similar kinds of initiatives. 10 A word of caution. While reading this chapter it is important to keep in mind two messages: • First, social accountability tools provide incremental impact to the overall accountability framework. By themselves, social accountability tools are insufficient to make local governments accountable. The section on critical factors expands on this message. • Second, the cases are selected to illustrate the tools or arguments presented in the chapter rather than serving as examples of best practice. Some of these examples are pilots that have yet to face the challenges of scaling up. 6 See Schaeffer (2005), Schroeder (2002), and the World Bank decentralization website at http://wwwwbweb.worldbank.org/prem/prmps/publicsector/decentralization.cfm 7 See, for example, Andrews and Shah (2003), and Andrews (2003) 8 Baiocchi et al (2004) 9 http://www.transparency.org/toolkits/2001/ccinp_wastecol-argentina.html 10 For more information, see www.auditoriaciudadana.gov.ar Social Accountability Sourcebook 6 Chapter 4 2 Social Accountability and Local Government ENTRY POINTS AND SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISMS This section presents a simple framework for classifying the multiple entry points and mechanisms through which citizens have tried to influence local government accountability. These entry points are illustrated through country examples and a discussion of appropriate social accountability tools for the country context. Citizen-based initiatives to demand local government accountability have tended to cluster around four entry points. Broadly speaking, these entry points reflect key dimensions of local government accountability that citizens perceive they can do something about. • The lack of responsiveness and transparency in the allocation and prioritization of local resources have led citizens to demand accountability in local planning and budgeting. • Corruption and misuse of local revenues have led citizens to demand accountability in local financial management and procurement. • The quality and effectiveness of local government services have spurred initiatives to demand accountability in the performance of local service provision. • Poor local governance has encouraged citizens to demand accountability with respect to local government’s overall performance leading to a range of mechanisms for institutional oversight of local government. This is not a comprehensive classification of all the possible entry points. Rather, it aims to provide a framework for the examples found through the literature search. Given the limited nature of this search, it is desirable that new examples and new entry points are added in the future. Local revenue collection, for instance, is a critical local government function which is not discussed here due to the lack of available examples. 2.1 Local Planning and Budgeting Critics or skeptics of decentralization argue that local governments often allocate their resources in response to pressures from local powerful elites or their clients. Insulating local governments from society, however, would not be an adequate response to this problem since it can lead to technocratic and unresponsive choices. Instead, social accountability initiatives have tackled this challenge by: • reforming the way local governments plan and budget, and developing new instruments such as participatory planning and budgeting • conducting independent municipal budget analysis to pressure local governments to justify (and rectify) the priorities reflected in their budgets; and • relying on generic instruments for civic engagement such as public hearings. Social Accountability Sourcebook 7 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government This section briefly discusses the use of three mechanisms which employ civic engagement to increase local government accountability. They are often accompanied by supply side (government-initiated) interventions aimed at increasing transparency and access to information about the formulation of local plans and budgets (see section 3 on Critical Factors and Enabling Conditions). 2.1.1 Participatory Planning and Budgeting Participatory planning and budgeting enables citizens to participate in the decision-making process through which a local government formulates its plan and budget. By channeling citizens’ preferences on the allocation of local resources, local governments have incentives to be more responsive to local preferences. Participatory budgeting per se is not a social accountability mechanism. However, it can create favorable conditions for social accountability if: • by participating in the prioritization process, citizens become better informed about what the local government has committed to deliver; • by investing time and effort in the process, citizens also gain an extra motivation to better understand how the local government allocated resources; It becomes a social accountability mechanism if: • the formulation process includes specific mechanisms to allow citizens to review and ask questions on the implementation of the previous year’s plan; or • citizens’ committees that participated in the formulation process continue to function during the year and oversee the implementation of the plan. There are multiple methodologies for doing participatory planning and budgeting, and various strategies for incorporating them in local government practice. In some countries, such as Bolivia, the national or state government has made it a mandatory process for all local governments. In other countries, such as Brazil, it is a voluntary process in which each local government decides whether to adopt this methodology. 11 The World Bank, in turn, has promoted these methods through Development Policy Loans such as the Peru Programmatic Decentralization and Competitiveness Adjustment Loan, through local government investment operations such as the Mozambique Decentralized Planning and Finance Project, and through multi-sectoral community driven development operations, such as the Albania Second Community Works Project. Community driven development operations have often piloted participatory planning methodologies that were subsequently adapted and scaled up through local government support operations. The Indonesia Initiatives for Local Governance Reform Project is introducing participatory budgeting at the district level based on the lessons learned from the first two phases of the Indonesia Kecamatan Development Program (KDP). 12 11 Bolivia (Goudsmith and Blackburn, 2001), Brazil (Baiocchi et. al., 2005). Peru (World Bank 2003b), Mozambique (World Bank 2003c, Serrano 2002), Albania (World Bank 2003d), Indonesia (World Bank 2005c). 12 Social Accountability Sourcebook 8 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government A detailed discussion on how to do Participatory Budgeting can be found in the Methods and Tools Section (see chapter 3). 2.1.2 Municipal Budget Analysis Municipal budget analysis allows civil society organizations to analyze the content of a local government’s plan and budget, exposing possible biases or omissions, and demanding that local government explain and/or rectify them. They also aim to be awareness raising campaigns. A detailed discussion on budget analysis, sometimes referred to as independent budget analysis, can be found in the methods and tools section (see chapter 3). Most examples of independent budget analysis have occurred at the national or state levels. Two examples at the local government level fight gender discrimination in local government spending: • In South Korea, the NGO WomenLink, with the support of the Ministry of Government and Home Affairs, carried out a gender budget analysis of seven local governments and trained municipal staff and women’s groups to include a gender perspective in planning and budgeting. Annual gender budget analysis has been done since 2001. 13 • In Tanzania, a coalition of NGOs and women organizations launched the Gender Budgeting Initiative (GBI). Their work included pilot studies on gender budgets, lobbying and advocacy to influence local government budgets. 14 2.1.3 Public Hearings and Town Hall Meetings Public hearings and town hall meetings are probably the most common instruments through which citizens request explanations from or provide feedback to local government about planning and budgetary decisions. They are consultative, non binding measures for informing local government decisions. • In Armenia, since 2001, the NGO Communities Finance Officers Association has helped organize public hearings to provide citizen feedback on the draft budgets of local government (or Local Self-Administration Bodies). 15 Public hearings are useful deliberative mechanisms to deal with controversial issues. • In Argentina, the construction of a bridge in the municipality of Avellaneda generated significant conflict between two neighborhood groups. The World Bank, which was planning to finance the project as part of a municipal development project, proposed that the municipality convene a public hearing. An NGO facilitated the public hearing process 13 World Bank (2005a). WB (2005b). See also Budlender, 2000, p. 26, and http://tgnp.org/ 15 For more details, see http:/www.cfoa.am/ 14 Social Accountability Sourcebook 9 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government which produced two outcomes. First, the hearing improved the original project by introducing modifications that addressed the concerns of the residents who opposed the construction of the bridge. Second, the hearing reduced tensions within the local community. Many of the residents of the wealthier neighborhood continued to oppose the project, but they recognized that the hearing did address some of their concerns. 16 New information and communication technologies (ICT) are dramatically expanding the number of citizens that can participate in public hearings and the quality of their interactions with local government. • In the United States, a town hall meeting used innovative ICTs to facilitate participatory planning in the rebuilding of the World Trade Center site in New York City, called “Listening to the City” (see Box 1). Although this is a case from a highly developed city government, the technology can be applied in many different settings including most large cities in developing countries. Box 1. Rebuilding the World Trade Center, New York City On July 20, 2002, about 5,000 people representing different groups from Manhattan and the tri-state area participated in a town hall meeting called “Listening to the City”, to share their thoughts about six preliminary concepts for the Trade Center site, which the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation (LMDC) unveiled days before the forum. Many criticized them as too dense, too dull and too commercial. The poor reception of these concepts reflected disappointment with the plans and with their underlying premise, which seemed to produce not six different ideas but half a dozen variations on one idea. Shortly after “Listening to the City”, LMDC and the Port Authority announced that a new program would be developed. Listening to the City combined technology with face-to-face dialogue, using a format called “21st Century Town Meeting”. This format captured the full range of participants' ideas and allows these ideas to be heard and discussed not only by people at the same table, but by the entire assembly. Participants in Listening to the City held 10-to-12-person roundtable discussions, each led by a trained facilitator skilled in small-group dynamics. A network of laptop computers recorded the ideas presented during the discussions. Each table's input was instantly transmitted to a theme team composed of volunteers and AmericaSpeaks staff that identified the strongest concepts from the discussions and reported them back to all the participants. Based on the roundtable discussions, the theme team quickly developed a set of priorities and questions that were posted on large screens throughout the meeting hall, allowing people to get quick feedback about how their perspectives compared to the thinking of the larger group. Each participant used a wireless polling keypad to vote on these questions and the results were immediately displayed. This process allowed modification to the agenda to correspond more closely to the tenor of the discussions. Another key component of Listening to the City was a two-week online dialogue. Between July 29 and August 12, 2002, a total of 818 people exchanged ideas and expressed their preferences through this dialogue (Civic Alliance, 2002). 16 See the Annex for more information on this case. Social Accountability Sourcebook 10 Chapter 4 2.2 Social Accountability and Local Government Local Financial Management and Procurement Local financial administration and the contracting of goods and services are functions that suffer from high risks of corruption and mismanagement. Important financial accountability risks are the following: (i) expenditures from public funds are not used for authorized purposes, (ii) expenditures are used appropriately, but their execution is mismanaged (inefficiency, malfeasance, or corruption), and (iii) the collection and use of public funds are not completely and adequately accounted for and not presented to the local legislature and the mayor. A number of citizen-based initiatives have emerged to complement the internal government accountability mechanisms that manage these risks. They can be grouped under three categories: • monitoring bidding and contracting • monitoring public works implementation • ex-post social auditing of government accounts 2.2.1 Monitoring Bidding and Contracting A typical source of local government corruption and collusion involves drafting the tender documents in ways that unfairly benefit one contractor over others. One social accountability response to this problem has been to organize public consultations in which different parties get a chance to comment on the draft tender document before the start of the bidding process. In addition, independent outsiders can be involved in in-depth analysis of the tender document. • In Argentina, the Municipality of Morón, assisted by the local chapter of Transparency International, introduced two mechanisms to monitor the contracting of the waste collection service which had been widely criticized for alleged corruption during the previous administration. First, through a public hearing (extraordinary session of the City Council) attended by 500 people, participants discussed the draft tender document with the bidders. Second, through an integrity pact, the hearing helped establish mutual commitments between the local government and the bidders on issues such as sanctions for bribery, and public disclosure of the award decision. As a result of the hearing process, the contract for waste collection services was reduced from about $45 million to $32 million. 17 To increase greater transparency, citizens have also been involved in overseeing the opening and analysis of the bidding offers: 17 Transparency International (2001). The case is described in greater detail in http://www.transparency.org/toolkits/2001/ccinp_wastecol-argentina.html Social Accountability Sourcebook 11 Chapter 4 • 2.2.2 Social Accountability and Local Government The Nicaragua Social Investment Fund encouraged community organizations receiving investment projects from the municipality to be present during the opening and analysis of the bidding offers. 18 Monitoring Public Works Implementation In these kinds of activities, citizens oversee the procurement and implementation process while it is actually taking place. Citizens are trained to oversee that investment funds are spent as budgeted and that physical construction meets the standards agreed to in the contract, e.g., the correct amount of cement, thickness of the walls, or depth of the well. • In El Salvador, the municipality of San Antonio del Monte entered into a partnership with the beneficiaries of a six kilometer local road. The beneficiaries formed a social audit committee which monitored the physical construction process, from the receipt and quality of the materials to their proper use. The committee interviewed the Mayor, the head of the Institutional Procurement and Contracts Unit, project technical staff, and the general public to ascertain the project’s budgetary characteristics, the quality and quantity of resources, timetable, and needs. Guided by the committee, the community conducted ongoing evaluation of the physical progress of the public works project, a task that required precise technical expertise. The committee reported to the Local Development Committee and the local government throughout the process. 19 Community-driven development (CDD) has been particularly powerful in empowering poor people to monitor implementation of small-scale infrastructure projects. • 2.2.3 The Honduras Social Investment Fund supports the creation of community-based maintenance organizations. They supervise local government managed projects and contribute to the operations and maintenance of the facility. These organizations are trained in simple construction techniques that allow them to oversee the building process effectively.20 Ex-Post Social Auditing of Government Accounts Other strategies emphasize ex-post social auditing of budget execution and review of local government accounts. Some initiatives have focused their efforts in making information about local finances available to the public to promote a dialogue with local government. • 18 19 20 In India, the PROOF (Public Record of Operations and Finance) campaign is a project launched in 2002 by four NGOs from Bangalore to pursue financial and performance accountability of the Municipal Corporation of Bangalore. PROOF follows three stages. Grun (2000). World Bank (2003a), Vidaurre (2003). Walker et al., (1999). For other countries see WB (2005d) Social Accountability Sourcebook 12 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government First, it obtains the quarterly financial statements submitted by the Municipal Corporation which comprise (i) revenue and expenditure statements compared to original budget figures, and (ii) an indicative balance sheet, with detailed information about current and long term assets in addition to short and long term liabilities. Second, the PROOF team develops performance indicators to assess municipal projects across the city in key areas of municipal responsibility (e.g., education, health). Third, the campaign promotes open discussion through radio programs and workshops about the municipality’s overall performance in financial management and service delivery. The campaign also conducts regular training sessions to enable citizens to read, understand and debate financial statements and performance indicators. 21 In other initiatives, citizens have performed physical and financial audits of the local government accounts. By comparing the written records with the actual outputs and discussing them in public venues, citizens have forced local government to answer the following kinds of questions. Has the local government spent its money on the goods and services that its accounting books say it has? Has it paid the market price to its providers and contractors? Have the purchased goods and services been delivered to their final destination in the quantity and quality that has been paid for? For more on social audits, see the Methods and Tools chapter. 21 22 • In the Philippines, a group of professionals in the northern state of Abra formed the NGO “the Concerned Citizens of Abra for Good Government” (CCAGG). From its inception in 1987, CCAGG worked with the local government authorities to monitor the implementation of the Community Employment and Development Programme (CEDP). CCAGG soon came across serious irregularities in the reporting of CEDP projects. While the Department of Public Works and Highways claimed that it had successfully completed 20 infrastructure projects in Abra, CCAGG documented that some of the projects had not even started and that others had been completed using sub-standard materials. As a consequence of CCAGG’s investigations, 11 officials were found guilty of misconduct and were dismissed. CCAGG has continued its vigilance after its first success and soon became synonymous with public vigilance. Public departments in Abra often ask each other if they have been “CCAGG’ed” recently, meaning if they have been made subject to a CCAGG audit. The organization received the Transparency International Integrity Award in 2000 for its successes in promoting public accountability. The same year, CCAGG entered an agreement with the Philippines Commission of Audit (COA) that members of CCAGG will participate in COA audit teams for audit engagements in the province of Abra. The partnership is seen to be highly beneficial for COA, as it strengthens their capacity and its ability to pursue corrective actions in the implementation of public works projects, in addition to the post-audits traditionally performed by COA. 22 • In India, the social audit of local government’s Public Work Programs in the state of Rajasthan provides one of the most compelling examples in this field (see Box 2). PROOF (2005). See also http://www.voicesforall.org/proof/, http://www.janaagraha.com/campaigns. Sundet (2004, p.7), WB (2005a, p.10). Social Accountability Sourcebook 13 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government Box 2. Social Audits of Local Government-Managed Public Works Programs in Rajasthan, India The Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS – the Workers and Farmers Power Society) in Rajasthan is a thousand-member informal union which has protested local government corruption for the past ten years. MKSS introduced participatory social auditing to compel panchayat (local government) leaders and government officials to account for development program expenditures. This involved initiating public hearings in which detailed accounts derived from official expenditure records and other supporting documentation are read aloud to assembled villagers. The meetings are organized independently and are presided over by a panel of respected people from inside and outside the area. Officials are invited to attend and local people are asked to give testimony, highlighting discrepancies between official records and their own experiences as laborers on public work projects, applicants for means-tested anti-poverty schemes, and consumers in ration shops. This has led to the exposure of misdeeds by local politicians, private engineers, and government contractors, leading to voluntary restitution in a number of cases. Accountability problem. MKSS’s initial focus was on the persistent denial of full wage payments to women working on government drought-relief public works programs. A substantial portion of women’s payments were routinely pocketed by the overseers of these projects, the junior engineers responsible for taking measurements of the amounts of earth moved in building a road or a bridge, and the local government politicians responsible for persuading rural development officials to locate a drought-relief program in the area. Other funds were regularly diverted by over-invoicing for building supplies and other forms of account-rigging. Social accountability response. MKSS addressed this problem by holding dramatic public hearings in which women testified about under or non-payment in front of officials. Officials’ protests that underpayment was not their fault, but was due to insufficient funds from the central government, was contradicted when local government accounts were read aloud in public, showing the receipt of proper funds for the project in question. Over-invoicing was exposed when local suppliers explained they had delivered only half or less of the amounts of sand, bricks, rocks, or cement that the accounts indicated had been purchased from them. Conditions that enabled this initiative. A serious obstacle to this method of exposing corruption was the lack of citizen rights to information about government spending. However, years of campaigning resulted in the promulgation of a state-wide right to information under the local government act of April 2000, enabling MKSS and other organizations to access official documents much more effectively. The willingness of women and poor men to engage in this struggle for justice comes from years of investment by MKSS in changing local attitudes towards domestic tyrants and towards the state, depending mainly upon inculcating the very modern view that in a democracy, the role of civil servants is to serve the public, making no distinctions between citizens. (Goetz 2003; Jenkins and Goetz 1999) 2.3 Local Service Provision From a citizens’ perspective, the most critical accountability dimension of local government is whether services under local government responsibility meet the standards that citizens expect. There are a number of strategies that citizens have used to address these issues. Some rely on participatory assessments and feedback surveys, and are often accompanied by agreements on the expected standards of services. Others rely more on public representation in service-specific institutions that channel citizens’ complaints and allow them regular oversight. Social Accountability Sourcebook 14 Chapter 4 2.3.1 Social Accountability and Local Government Participatory Service Performance Assessments One of the main innovations that drew attention to the potential of the social accountability approach was the experience of citizen report cards in Bangalore, India. 23 This initiative proved that a powerful way to improve local government services was by collecting citizens’ feedback about the performance of local services in a structured way, and using that assessment as a yardstick against which to measure future improvements. This basic concept has led to a proliferation of initiatives that use different types of participatory performance assessments to evaluate local government services. • In Uganda, the city of Kampala conducted its first citizen report card in early 2005. It provided the City Council and other basic public service providers with feedback on water and sanitation, health, education, roads and public transport, solid waste management, public toilets, the management of the city environment, maintenance of law and order, and management of city infrastructure. 24 • In Colombia, the project known as Bogotá Cómo Vamos (“Bogotá How Are We Doing”), is a citizen initiative that has been evaluating changes in the quality of life in Bogotá since 1998. Its evaluations are based on the impact of the municipal development plans, taking into account citizens’ opinions. For the last five years it has recorded the main variations in coverage, quality and public perception of basic services, gathered citizens’ opinions through an annual opinion survey, and created forums for debate on issues of well being in the nation’s capital district. It covers: education, health, economic development, public finances, public management, environment, transport, safety, and housing and public services. 25 • In Ukraine, the People’s Voice Project aimed to strengthen the capacities of citizens and local government officials to interact with one another via a combination of service delivery surveys, policy development training for public officials, support for public hearings, and media participation in four pilot cities. A 2002 final evaluation of the four city pilots found continuing active relationships between NGO coalition members, working groups and municipal officials. Municipal officials still seek citizen feedback and input through the use of public hearings, consultations. Municipalities have made plans to engage in further surveys. An increase in transparency of local government decision-making has been reflected by budget hearings and public hearings in education, transportation and housing issues. The pilot has been expanded into six additional cities. 26 23 Paul (2002). For more information, see www.pacindia.org. The website www.citizenreportcard.com has a citizen report card toolkit for improving local governance and service delivery. 24 Kampala City Council and Uganda Management Institute (2005). 25 Sanchez (2003a). See also: http://eltiempo.terra.com.co/PROYECTOS/RELCOM/RESCON/BOTCOM/home/ 26 http://www.pvp.org.ua/eng/news/chronology/ See also Monastyrski (2004). Social Accountability Sourcebook 15 Chapter 4 • Social Accountability and Local Government In Nicaragua, as part of the Monitoring of the Poverty Reduction Strategy, community score cards on municipal education were piloted in the Municipality of Malpaisillo. 27 A complementary strategy has been to develop citizens charters. These are pacts between the community and the service providers which spell out expectations and roles, enabling the citizens to interact more effectively with the municipality. They specify the expected standards of the services, identify who is responsible, and outline the procedures for the redress of complaints. For example, the Citizens’ Charter in the Municipality of Mumbai, India, covers detailed public services for each municipal department (Box 3). Box 3. The Citizens’ Charter in the municipality of Mumbai, India This Charter covers specific public services for each municipal department. For example, with regards to the Solid Waste Management Department it specifies such items as the disposal of dead animals, the authorized collection spots from where garbage is to be picked up, the maintenance of public toilets, the collection and transportation of garbage, the sweeping of roads, the cleaning of dustbins, and other sanitary measures. Citizens can lodge a complaint if the garbage disposal truck is not covered properly. They can demand a response from the municipal corporation within 24 hours from the time the complaint is filed. Other services included in the charter are: solid waste management, waterworks, sewerage, storm water drains, road maintenance, traffic, public health, licenses, environment sanitation, education, electricity, transport, building proposals, shops and establishments, gardens, and the Mumbai fire department. Sources: World Bank (2005a), http://www.mcgm.gov.in/Citizens's%20Charter/forward.html 2.3.2 Service Specific Accountability Institutions Other strategies have relied on the creation of new institutions to promote citizen oversight over a specific service provided by local government. Usually these are multi-stakeholder councils formed by different combinations of users, civil society organizations, government, and private sector representatives. They are developed in the sectoral chapters of the Sourcebook. 28 They include examples such as the Local School Councils in the Chicago 29 and Citizen Community Boards and School Management Committees in Pakistan. 30 2.4 Institutional Oversight of Local Government Another entry point is to focus social accountability initiatives on local government as a whole, as an institution of local governance. The purpose of these initiatives is to embed citizen oversight in the practice and organization of local government affairs. Three alternative (and complementary) strategies for achieving this are: 27 http://www.crs.org/our_work/where_we_work/overseas/latin_america_and_the_caribbean/nicaragua/poverty_redu ction.cfm 28 See chapters on Education, and Health. See also Levy (2004) and Clert et. al. (2005). 29 Fung (2005). 30 ADB/DfID/World Bank (2004). Social Accountability Sourcebook 16 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government • creating or strengthening citizen oversight bodies • passing regulations that empower citizens to demand their rights • promoting participatory institutional assessment and municipal reform instruments. In addition, there are a number of transparency related initiatives that are discussed in the next section (on critical factors and enabling conditions) because they are either aim to make local government more accountable without relying on citizen initiatives or at facilitating social accountability without necessarily involving public demand for explanations (e.g., access to information laws). 2.4.1 Citizen Oversight Bodies Citizen oversight bodies are institutional structures formed by citizens to provide a direct channel for citizen oversight over local government work. These oversight bodies can be formed by all the citizens in the municipality (gram sabhas in India), several citizen representatives (Vigilance Committee in Bolivia), or one elected member (citizen ombudsman in Japan). 31 32 • In India, the 1993 decentralization reform created gram sabhas to increase the accountability of local government (gram panchayat) representatives to citizens. The gram sabha consists of all of the persons within a gram panchayat area (typically 10,000 people) and meets once per year in the month of December. At this meeting, elected gram panchayat representatives review the proposed budget for the following year and review the accomplishment (or lack thereof) of the previous year’s budget and action items. Similar meetings occur twice a year at an even more disaggregated level of panchayat governance. The purpose of the gram sabha is to provide villagers the opportunity to obtain clarification from their representatives on all aspects and activities of the gram panchayat. Research shows that most gram sabhas have had many difficulties in functioning as effective social accountability mechanisms. 31 • In Bolivia, the Law of Popular Participation created local vigilance committees to monitor the activities of elected local government bodies and participate in local planning and budget creation. Members of vigilance committees are selected from various traditional governance systems including peasant associations and indigenous communal institutions. The participation of non-elites is encouraged. Vigilance committees that suspect wrongdoing by local councils can invoke a legal complaints procedure in which a special committee of the Senate reviews the case and has the power to suspend funds to the local council if it is found to have acted inappropriately. 32 • In Japan, in response to the widespread perception of corruption in local governments in Japan, a civic movement began establishing citizen ombudsmen in several municipalities. The success of this initiative led to its spread throughout the country, the formation of a National Citizen Ombudsmen Liaison Council, and to the recognition of this mechanism See Alsop et al (2001); Sethi (2004); Rao (2005). See Blair (2000). Also: http://www.ispnet.org/Documents/bolivia.htm Social Accountability Sourcebook 17 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government in government statutes. In addition, the National Council developed a survey to rank the level of transparency of local governments, which was used as an additional source of pressure over local government to improve its performance. 33 2.4.2 Regulations that Empower Citizens Other initiatives have focused on introducing legal mechanisms that empower citizens for grievance redress or with the right to request explanations regarding municipal legislation. • • In Romania, a USAID project developed and implemented a Transparency Initiative which, among other things, piloted the following set of rules for social accountability in several municipalities (see the Annex for additional details):34 - Notice-and-comment rulemaking. The municipality must provide prior written notice of intended action on any normative act (ordinance or decision with general applicability) by publishing such notice at city hall and in the newspaper, and where relevant, on radio and TV. The notice must also be provided to any press organization or person who has filed a request. The published notice must contain a short explanation of the proposed enactment, the text of the enactment, and instructions on how comments may be proposed and a hearing requested. For a period of at least 30 days after publication, the public must be afforded the opportunity to submit written comments. The municipality must consider these comments before an act is adopted, and the adopted act itself must be formally published. - Public hearings. As part of the process of adopting normative acts, the municipality must hold a public hearing on the proposed act if at least 25 persons or an association having at least 25 members request it. - Public petitions. Any person or organization may petition the municipality to adopt, amend, or repeal a normative act, and the petition must be reviewed and responded to in writing. - Administrative complaints. The municipality must go beyond the minimal provisions of the country’s administrative appeals law by giving complainants an opportunity to be heard, and shifting the burden of justification to the government to prove that they followed rules and processes, as opposed to the complainant having to show that the government failed to do so. In Nepal, three municipalities, assisted by the local chapter of Transparency International, improved their transparency and accountability through the implementation of integrity pacts. These pacts established rules that promote transparency, an enabling environment 33 See http://www.transparency.org/toolkits/2001/monitor_ombudsman-japan.html 34 Russell-Einhorn (2003). Social Accountability Sourcebook 18 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government for integrity, a procurement system that follows prevailing rules, a public grievance mechanism, and a monitoring system. 35 2.4.3 Participatory Institutional Assessment and Municipal Reform Instruments Other strategies to improve the accountability of local government have relied on participatory exercises through which citizens assess local government institutional performance. These assessments cover local government planning, financial management, and service provision, identifying areas where citizens demand better performance and propose mechanisms through which local government can address issues. • In Venezuela, a World Bank supported project in the municipality of Campo Elias showed that engaging citizens in designing municipal accountability reforms can improve the credibility and performance of local governments (see Box 4). Box 4. Improving Local Governance in the Municipality of Campo Elias, Venezuela A participatory diagnosis of development constraints in Campo Elias identified poor governance, characterized by generally unresponsive and corrupt public administration, as a barrier to achieving better public services and more dynamic private sector growth. In response, a multi-faceted program of action was undertaken to reduce corruption and improve public management. The Campo Elias Action Plan, formulated by a social control board comprised of four civil society representatives that worked directly with the municipal mayor and council, included three pillars: greater participation, increased transparency, and procedural reform. Participatory municipal planning and budgeting were introduced to enhance citizen involvement and influence in local affairs Citizen oversight bodies monitored expenditures, procurement, and service delivery. Public hearings and dissemination of public documents (including audits) were introduced to increase the transparency of local governance, complemented by media initiatives and community-based information campaigns. Administrative procedures for business licensing, civil registry, obtaining access to public services, and collection of taxes and fees were simplified and broadly disseminated. All of these measures were closely coordinated between municipal authorities and the agencies of central government at the local level. Their implementation was monitored by citizens groups and local business associations, with the support of the central government and technical assistance providers. As a result of these efforts to improve local governance, performance monitoring and surveys of local citizens and businesses indicate that the accessibility, effectiveness and efficiency of regulatory action and public service delivery increased significantly while lack of information and corruption were visibly reduced. By addressing the information and administrative constraints on public sector performance, the stakeholders of Campo Elias demonstrated the potential of improving governance to contribute to local development. Source: World Bank (2000) 35 Transparency International (2001). The case is in: http://www.transparency.org/toolkits/2001/ccinp_ip-nepal.html Social Accountability Sourcebook 19 Chapter 4 • Social Accountability and Local Government In Bangladesh, as part of the Local Governance Development Project, the Ministry of Local Government has implemented participatory performance assessments in 81 Union Parishads (UP) – the lowest tier of local government – in the Sirajganj district. Using a public scorecard, the participatory performance assessment reveals the strengths and weaknesses of the union parishads. Citizens use the score cards to grade their officials, assess their financial management, service delivery, and determine the level of female participation in decision making, assess transparency, accountability and overall governance. The assessments are done once a year with the participation of the community representatives, UP bodies, and local government officials. Around 100-300 persons attend the assessment sessions. UP representatives facilitate these assessments. The scorecards are posted on a board, and the participants provide their scores. Based on the assessment, the UP develops a capacity building plan. It also gets access to bonus funds. 36 In Nigeria, as part of the preparation of the LEEMP project, the World Bank developed a local governance scorecard to enable citizens to assess local government performance. 37 36 37 WORLD BANKI (2005a); UNDP (2005) See Esmail et. al. (2004) for a copy of the tool. Social Accountability Sourcebook 20 Chapter 4 3 Social Accountability and Local Government CRITICAL FACTORS AND ENABLING CONDITIONS Even the best designed social accountability mechanisms and institutions will have little impact on downward accountability of local governments if critical factors and enabling conditions are not in place. The specific factors and conditions will vary depending on the national and local context. Generally, issues are on the supply (government) side or demand (citizens/civil society) side of the social accountability equation. 3.1 Supply Side Factors and Conditions There are two sets of factors related to government that influence the capacity of citizens to demand accountability and of local government to respond. These are: (1) the policy and decentralization legal framework, including the regulatory framework with regards to access to information, and (2) the attitudes and capacities of local government officials with regards to social accountability. 3.1.1 Policy and Decentralization Legal Framework An incomplete decentralization framework is likely to greatly impede social accountability approaches. Many countries have devolved responsibilities to local governments without the resources to match them. In some cases, central government has retained control over some of the inputs that are critical for good performance. This makes it difficult to hold local government accountable. For instance, although Pakistan has devolved responsibility for education to the districts, school teachers remain employees of the provincial government. The district nazim or elected executive has little authority over the hiring, firing, evaluation, or placement of teachers. 38 Clarity of functional assignments. Public service functions and responsibilities should be clearly assigned among levels of government so citizens know what level of government they should hold accountable. Overlapping and unclear assignments is one of the most common conditions hindering downward accountability of local government. Budget size. The size of the local government budget needs to be large enough so that citizens perceive local governments as relevant actors for local development and worthy of oversight. Research in India shows that despite dissatisfaction with local government (gram panchayats) and despite the existence of certain social accountability institutions (gram sabhas, vigilance committees, etc) citizens had little interest in demanding accountability. One reason is that citizens perceive gram panchayats to be ineffective due to the small budgets they control. 39 Budget flexibility and autonomy. The use of local revenues should allow local governments to exert some discretion over their inter-sectoral allocation so that they can respond to citizen 38 39 ADB et. al. (2004) Alsop et. al. (2001); Raich (2005). Social Accountability Sourcebook 21 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government preferences. Local governments should also have budget autonomy. Having higher level government determine local budgets/priorities often impedes social accountability mechanisms. Hard budget constraints or letting poorly governed local governments fail. One of the most important incentives for local accountability is establishing clear rules that avoid systematic bailouts of local governments by regional or central government when they encounter financial problems caused by mismanagement and corruption. This is particularly serious in those countries where sub-national credit guarantees have led local government to access credit markets in an uncontrolled manner. Access to capital markets with no concern for financial solvency creates the opportunity and propensity for corrupt behavior. Bailouts provide the wrong incentives. Instead, the failure of local government to meet its obligations should be seen as an opportunity for reform. 40 Fiscal autonomy. The greater the share of local revenues that come from own sources (local taxes and fees) and the greater the autonomy of local government with respect to those sources, the greater the incentive for local citizens to demand accountability from local governments. Overdependence of local governments on central transfers undermines local government accountability to its constituency. This facilitates local governments shifting the blame for breakdowns in service delivery to upper tiers of government. 41 Control over the local civil service. Often local governments do not have control over the local civil service, limiting their capacity to demand accountability from civil servants. This is particularly the case in countries where strong deconcentration schemes coexist with devolutionary policies. The role of the legislature. The municipal legislature has a critical role in overseeing the local executive branch. The way in which local councilors are elected influences their accountability to the electorate. When local party lists are decided locally rather than by the national party, local legislative representatives have more incentives to be accountable to their constituents. Ward systems (or electing councilors from within subdivisions of the local territory) helps to avoid urban bias in the councils representation. The size of the local government. Small-size local governments tend to be more accountable, but they are also more likely to be resource-constrained and thus more dependent on central government transfers which reduce local accountability. 42 3.1.2 Transparency and Access to Information Improving access to local government information is a critical enabling condition for social accountability. Some of the initiatives in this area include: 40 Vergara (1999). There is a large literature on this topic. See Raich (2005) for a review. 42 Rowland (2001), Bird and Rodriguez (1999) 41 Social Accountability Sourcebook 22 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government Passing legislation with regards to access to information in local government (several states in India have passed access to information laws) Reforming local government financial administrative systems to make them more transparent, easy to understand, and publicly accessible. In Peru, the Ministry of Finance developed an integrated financial administration system which is accessible by the public through the internet and allows citizens access to a wide range of local government financial information. Making transparency a condition for accessing fiscal transfers. In the World Bank Tanzania Local Government Project, one of the conditions for accessing capital investment funds is ensuring a minimum level of transparency in local government. 43 Building Transparency in Budgeting and Public Procurement. The local chapter of Transparency International piloted a reform program in Serbian municipalities to increase transparency and accountability in budgeting practices and public procurement in three municipalities.44 It is important that the level and detail of the information publicly provided is sufficient to hold the government accountable for the sources and uses of funds for efficient production of services by the local government. The information should also enable effective monitoring of corruption. As a rule of thumb the following information needs to be publicly available in user friendly formats: (i) executed and programmed annual budget, (ii) roster of all employees with total salaries including bonus, (iii) disclosure of assets by upper management, council members and the mayor, (iv) data on the open tendering procedures, (v) mandated unitary costs and standards of public works, (vi) monthly or quarterly financial reports, and, (vii) performance indicators for the delivery of key services. 45 • In La Paz, Bolivia the mayor ordered that all municipal rates for services be painted on visible walls throughout the municipality. This in turn prevented municipal employees from overcharging for services. • In San Marcos, Guatemala the mayor ordered that the municipal accounts be painted on a wall in the town square, thus informing the public on how funds were spent. There are many instruments to measure municipal transparency. • In Colombia, the Colombian Federation of Municipalities, the National Planning Council, and the local chapter of Transparency International have launched a municipal transparency index which covers four areas: (i) information about the development plan, budget, investment projects, administration of human resources, procurement, etc; (ii) compliance with norms regarding expenditure laws, internal accounting systems, procurement, etc; (iii) accountability to citizens regarding the execution of the municipal 43 World Bank (2004). http://web.worldbank.org/external/projects/main?pagePK=104231&piPK=73230&theSitePK=40941&menuPK=228 424&Projectid=P070736 44 Transparency International (2002, p.221). 45 Vergara (1999) Social Accountability Sourcebook 23 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government development plan and national social assistance programs; and the (iv) promotion of civic participation in planning, budgeting, monitoring public services, etc. 46 • 3.1.3 Toolkits to promote local transparency are available for public use, such the Tools to Support Transparency in Local Governance Toolkit developed by UN-HABITAT and Transparency International. 47 Attitudes and Capacity of Local Government Officials The attitudes and values of local government officials towards social accountability greatly affect the possibility for social accountability to take place and influence choices about the kinds of social accountability tools to adopt. For instance, officials that are more sympathetic to citizens’ oversight will lower the costs for citizens to pursue social accountability while those that are more reticent will do the opposite. Many capacity building efforts have focused on influencing the values, perceptions and skills of local government officials to engage with citizens in a more participatory manner. 46 47 • WBI is implementing a program on “Radio Capacity Building on Municipal Participatory Budgeting in Africa” The program aims to produce and deliver high quality and engaging didactic material on participatory budgeting building on the oral tradition of African community learning. The transmission of the learning materials, complemented by workbooks and manuals, is expected to motivate reform minded local governments and their community leaders to establish more effective and equitable definition of public budgets at the local level. At the conclusion of the program the expected outcome is to establish a network of reform minded local governments willing to open their budgetary process to the public with a special focus on vulnerable and underrepresented members of their community. • In Bolivia, the central government and many NGOs have trained local officials in methods and approaches for participatory and accountable governance. • In India, where local government slots have been allocated for women and lower caste representatives, considerable work goes into training these newly elected representatives, many of whom have no previous leadership experience in formal politics. Training, networking and village-to-village peer education and support methods strengthen these leaders’ capacities to be more effective in being accountable to the disenfranchised groups they represent. http://www.transparenciacolombia.org.co/new//transparencia/publico/indicedeintegridad/indicemunicipal.html UN-HABITAT and TI (2004). http://www.unhabitat.org/publication/TOOLKITGOVERNANCE.pdf Social Accountability Sourcebook 24 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government 3.2 Demand Side Factors and Conditions 3.2.1 The Role of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) CSOs are often an important ally in passing and monitoring decentralization policies which enable local governments to be accountable. • In India, Lok Satta, a national NGO, launched the Campaign for the Empowerment of Local Governments: an unprecedented effort to collect signatures from 10 million people in Andhra Pradesh in support of local government empowerment. The campaign succeeded in mobilizing the state government to approve a series of resolutions that adopted many of Lok Satta’s proposals on devolution. 48 • In Ghana, a group of civil society organizations led by the Integrated Social Development Centre, 49 conducted a study to track the disbursement of the District Assemblies Common Fund (DACF). The DACF is a constitutional provision which reserves 5 percent of national tax revenue to fund development activities by districts, allocated to districts according to a formula. It is the largest single source of development funding for many districts. The study was carried out in four District Assemblies in collaboration and with financial support from DFID and the World Bank. The objectives of the study were to examine the method of allocation to local authorities, actual amounts and uses of the allocations, guidelines and compliance for utilization, and identification of the weaknesses of the Fund’s administration. The findings of the study demonstrated that although the District Authorities followed established procedures for the use of the funds, the administration of the fund itself was quite problematic. These problems included delays in the releases of the DACF, discrepancies in the amounts allocated, disbursed, and received, and, misuse and discrimination in the selection of projects, award of contracts, cost and quality of projects. The study made recommendations to improve awareness and public education on DACF processes, and identified ways to minimize political interference and institutionalize tracking of DACF using participatory methods. 50 • In Peru, a consortium of local and international NGOs called Participa Peru has established the Decentralization’s Civic Vigilance System. This system gathers, analyzes and disseminates government information about the implementation of the decentralization process. This information then is presented and debated in different public fora. The information includes budgetary allocation and execution, progress in the normative framework, transparency and access to information, and the functioning of participation mechanisms and civic-government decision making institutions. 51 48 For more information: http://www.loksatta.org/ For details, refer to http://www.isodec.org.gh/ 50 King et al (2003).The report is in: http://www.isodec.org.gh/Papers/monitoringDACF.pdf 51 http://www.participaperu.org.pe/n-vigilaperu.shtml/ 49 Social Accountability Sourcebook 25 Chapter 4 3.2.2 Social Accountability and Local Government Constraints to Citizen Participation in Social Accountability Initiatives It is common to see many districts where despite strong dissatisfaction with the way the local government operate, citizens do not hold local government accountable. While some of the reasons for this have to do with supply side context, others have to do with the characteristics of the local civil society. 52 Some of these characteristics are: Cost of participation. Preoccupation with daily subsistence makes it difficult for many poor people to invest time in demanding accountability. Dependency on local relationships (both social and economic) for access to critical local goods and services. Dependency means that poor people can pay a high cost if their demands for accountability offend those on whom they depend. In extreme situations, this could lead to social exclusion from the community. Perceptions about the effectiveness of the social accountability mechanism. Villagers will take into account the success of previous efforts in social accountability in their calculation about whether or not to engage in social accountability. Unresponsive or corrupt local officials, who are often allied with the local elite, tend to dissuade citizens from engaging in social accountability mechanisms. Awareness of citizen’s rights. One of the most important capacities that citizens need is the awareness of the very basic notion of citizenship. As citizens in a democracy, they are entitled to demand accountability from civil servants. The difficulty of instilling this notion this in many local settings is graphically illustrated by Anne-Marie Goetz’ analysis of the auditing of a public works programs managed by local government in Rajasthan: “For poor rural women to stand up in front of local officials and politicians and accuse them of lying and theft is an extraordinary achievement in a traditional, some say feudal society like rural Rajasthan. These same officials and politicians may be their neighbors, may be their employers or landlords, may control access to key state resources, like a land ownership certificate, a marriage or birth certificate, or the right to participate in another drought-relief program. They may be higher caste members of the local community, in a position to make life impossible for lower caste villagers, excluding them from access to key resources like water. The willingness of women and poor men to engage in this struggle for justice comes from years of investment by the MKSS in changing local attitudes towards domestic tyrants and towards the state, depending mainly upon inculcating the very modern view that in a democracy, the role of civil servants is to serve the public, making no distinctions between citizens.” 53 52 53 Alsop et al (2001, p. 12-14). Goetz (2003). Social Accountability Sourcebook 26 Chapter 4 3.2.3 Social Accountability and Local Government Factors Enabling Citizen Participation in Social Accountability Initiatives Social capital, social mobilization, and networking. Citizens will have a better chance of demanding accountability if they interact with local government through representative organizations than if they engage in social accountability mechanisms individually. The larger the number of citizens represented in an organization, the greater the leverage in their interaction with local government. Citizens need to be organized before they interact with local governments. Many community driven development (CDD) programs have justified their contribution to local governance precisely by strengthening the capacities of citizens to act collectively and engage government through their organizations. Some CDD operations have focused in particular on strengthening federations of poor people. Donors such as USAID have also supported activities to strengthen networks of civic organizations. Two examples that illustrate these trends are: • In India, the Andhra Pradesh District Poverty Initiatives Program and the follow-up AP Rural Poverty Reduction Program have empowered the rural poor, especially rural women, by working with over 450,000 self-managed grassroots savings and credit mobilization groups and over 800 federations of such groups representing more than 4.5 million people. These groups have cumulatively saved more than $20 million and mobilized more than $150 million of bank credit annually. These groups and federations represent communities with economic self-help and provide them with greater leverage vis-à-vis local governments and public service providers. For example, CBO federations have worked with local health officials to improve the quality of health services by implementing community scorecards, and are currently doing the same with panchayats (local governments). This network of self-help groups not only facilitates the mobilization and training of poor people to participate in these assessments but also provides the capacity to propose innovative solutions to community problems. 54 • In Ghana, the GAIT (Government Accountability Improves Trust) Program, implemented by the Cooperative League of the USA (CLUSA) with support from USAID, aims to promote partnerships between district assemblies and civil society. The cornerstone of CLUSA’s activity has been the selection of facilitators for each target district and support for the establishment of civic unions which unite primary civil society organizations at the district level. These unions appear to be effective both in channeling demands to District Assemblies and in mobilizing citizens to collaborate in co-production of local services. 55 Technical capacities. Poor people need to have the skills to interpret a municipal budget, to understand the different sources of local revenue and their respective conditionalities, and decipher the information contained in municipal financial records, etc. For example, one of the main limitations of the vigilance committees in Bolivia is the difficulty for most peasants to understand the functioning of a local government. To remedy this and enable the majority of peasant communities to assess local government performance, 3,600 peasant families from the 54 55 World Bank (2003e), Helling et. al. (2005). Appiah (2003). Social Accountability Sourcebook 27 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government municipality of Totora have elected a representative to receive three days of training per month on social monitoring of local government. This peasant delegate, in turn, provides culturally and linguistically appropriate training to men and women from each peasant community. 56 Transparency and the local media. Local media organizations have a critical role to play in enhancing the voice relationship between citizens and local government. It gives citizens a channel to educate themselves about local government performance and publicize their views on concerns about performance. It also gives local government a channel to disseminate information about their activities, and respond to criticisms. The most important media outlet for poor people is the radio, and community radios have been a key strategy for improving access to information. The World Bank is increasingly supporting these strategies. • WBI is implementing a grassroots media development for empowerment and social accountability initiative. This global capacity building project’s objective is to promote the use of grassroots media as a means to broaden civic engagement in major public decisions, track the performance of government offices delivering social services, and monitor budgetary processes at all government levels. The project, which targets local governments, supports innovations launched in Timor-Leste, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Malawi, and Benin. 57 • An investment loan in Ecuador—the Poverty Reduction and Local Rural Development Project (PROLOCAL)—is supporting community radios with the view to disseminating information about the budget to local communities (in Spanish and other languages). 58 56 Lopez (2003). http://www.worldbank.org/wbi/partnership/bnpp/resources/proposal_reuben.pdf 58 Pichon et al (2004). 57 Social Accountability Sourcebook 28 Chapter 4 4 Social Accountability and Local Government GUIDANCE FOR OPERATIONAL WORK While conducting operational work that involves building social accountability mechanisms around local government, it may be useful to keep the following points in mind: 1. If the decentralization framework does not provide the right incentives for local government accountability (if it is incomplete or has conflicting incentives), civic based strategies will be limited in their ability to achieve accountability 2. It is important to work simultaneously on both the supply and the demand sides of the accountability equation. Social accountability mechanisms should strengthen and complement the oversight role of conventional mechanisms rather than undermine or replace them. Introducing social audits, for example, should be combined with efforts to strengthen the central government’s auditing functions and initiatives to make accounting and procurement systems more transparent. 3. Social accountability mechanisms should be used as a strategy to improve the performance of local governments, rather than a way to punish local officials. The critical message for both central and local governments is that social accountability mechanisms are an important public management tool to improve performance. They provide feedback on areas where performance unsatisfactory, put pressure on local officials to fulfill their obligations, and create opportunities for citizens to engage in problem solving. 4. Other incentives may convince local governments of the benefits of adopting social accountability mechanisms. An important incentive for local governments to engage in social accountability is that it could help attract local economic investments, and help increase local revenue mobilization. In Indonesia, a national newspaper and the Gadjah Mada University carried out several surveys on local governance. Results were widely distributed and attracted local investments to better performing districts and cities. 59 Other types of incentives include facilitating access to additional central government transfers which can be conditional based on local governments meeting minimum criteria for transparency (such as in the case of Tanzania mentioned earlier). 5. Social accountability is often about operationalizing existing provisions and mechanisms in national legislation, not adding new ones. Many social accountability tools are already built into the national legislation on subnational government. The problem is that these tools are not operationalized. Examples include legal provisions on public hearings and town hall meetings or citizen oversight bodies such as the gram sabhas in India. 6. A good understanding of the implementation context is critical for introducing social accountability mechanisms. The disposition of local government authorities towards social accountability (their attitudes, values, and receptivity) will influence the selection of the entry point and the mechanism for social accountability. If the government is 59 Communication with Asmeen Khan. Social Accountability Sourcebook 29 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government suspicious of citizen oversight, it is probably better to start with mechanisms that are less confrontational (such as Participatory Budgeting). In contrast, the more receptive the local government is towards public scrutiny, the greater the opportunities to introduce deeper social accountability measures (e.g., social audits). It is not recommended to introduce social accountability shortly before local elections.. 7. Institutionalization strategy. It is important to start with local governments that have a minimum level of commitment to act upon the input provided by social accountability initiatives so that citizens see that there is a pay-off to their efforts. If well publicized, there can be a significant demonstration effect of pilot activities. Pilot activities conducted by civil society organizations in more adversarial contexts are also of great value in promoting policy reform. While the MKSS experience exposing corruption in local governments in Rajasthan was conducted in only a few local governments, the publicity of its success has been an important factor in the adoption of freedom of access to information laws in about 16 states in India. Social Accountability Sourcebook 30 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government 5 ADDITIONAL RESOURCES 5.1 Case Studies 5.1.1 Argentina, Municipality of Avellaneda, Public Hearing 60 Background Beginning in 1999, a project to construct the La Serna Bridge generated conflict between two neighborhoods in the municipality of Avellaneda, a suburb of Buenos Aires. The residents of Villa Modelo, a low-income neighborhood, lobbied for the construction of a bridge that the municipality had promised, with or without financing from the World Bank. For these residents, the benefits of the construction of the La Serna Bridge were considerable, in particular, greater accessibility from their neighborhood to the city of Buenos Aires. A small, but well-organized and well-advised, group representing residents of La Serna Park, a high-income neighborhood, strongly opposed the project. According to these residents, the new bridge would have only negative impacts on their neighborhood. Objectives The municipal government’s two previous efforts to consult residents had failed to reduce tensions between the two neighborhood groups. Faced with escalating conflict between these groups, the Bank proposed to the municipality that it convene a consultation in the form of a public hearing. Process The municipal government used an external partner, Citizen’s Power, to organize a public consultation on this contentious issue. Citizen’s Power operated as the Argentinean chapter of Transparency International. This CSO had organized previous public hearings and had credibility among local citizens. Its past experience was an important factor because time was limited by construction deadlines, and a decision on bridge construction had to be reached within 20 days. Citizen’s Power designed a two-stage strategy for the public hearing. During the first stage, a training workshop was held for municipal officials in charge of registering participants for the public hearing and conducting the hearing itself. Following the training workshop, the public was invited to the hearing. Citizen’s Power used the two principal national newspapers and local media (radio, graphic media, television and other public media) to announce and convene the hearing. In addition, to ensure greater participation, Citizen’s Power made personal contact and extended invitations by telephone to representatives of the neighborhood groups involved in the conflict. Citizen’s Power opened an office to respond to the public and register participants. Background information and studies on the construction of the bridge were made available in this office. A poster in the office directed people with questions, complaints and suggestions to Citizen’s Power. 60 Adapted by Sera (2004) from Cesilini (1999). Social Accountability Sourcebook 31 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government Citizen’s Power organized two additional workshops, one with each group of residents involved in the conflict, to explain the rules and procedures that would govern the public hearing. These activities ensured the participation of both groups and facilitated an orderly hearing process. The second stage of the strategy consisted of the public hearing itself, attended by more than 450 local residents, the mayor, and senior officials from the Secretariat of Transportation and the World Bank. For the participants, the presence and participation of the mayor as the president of the public hearing confirmed the commitment of local authorities to address the neighborhood conflict despite the initial reluctance to support the consultation process. Participants During the 20 days that preceded the hearing, a list of speakers was compiled to maintain an orderly, informative, and balanced process. More than 60 speakers participated in a public hearing that lasted more than four hours. While most of the neighbors who attended the meeting supported the construction of the bridge, speakers represented both supporters and opponents of the project. The hearing also served as a forum for the Secretary of Transportation’s technical team, allowing the team to explain the improvements that had been made to the original project such as the use of noise reduction panels, the incorporation of a bicycle lane, the restriction of heavy vehicle transit and the protection of green spaces. In addition, the team shared the results of feasibility and environmental impact studies. A World Bank representative spoke about environmental standards and citizen participation in these types of projects. During the public hearing, Citizen’s Power measured the opinions of the participants through the use of a self-administered poll: 77 percent of those polled claimed to be highly pleased with the public hearing process, 57 percent indicated that the organization of the public hearing was very good, and 76 percent stated that the public hearing had allowed them to look at the issue from a new perspective. Outcomes The public hearing produced two outcomes. First, the hearing improved the original project. Several modifications were introduced to address the concerns of the residents who opposed the construction of the bridge. The modifications included redesigning the bridge to improve vehicle movement, reducing the number of trees to be removed, establishing protection for green spaces, and prohibiting truck traffic. For most of the actors involved in the process, these modifications improved the original project and addressed objections by the bridge opponents. Second, this public hearing reduced the tensions within the local community. The hearing did not completely resolve the conflict, however. Many of the residents of La Serna Park continue to oppose the project, but they recognized that the hearing did address some of their concerns. Social Accountability Sourcebook 32 Chapter 4 5.1.2 Social Accountability and Local Government Developing a Transparency Initiative in Romanian Municipalities 61 This initiative originated with a business regulatory reform project in Romania from 1999-2002 underwritten by USAID and implemented by the Center for Institutional Reform in the Informal and processes on business registration, licensing, and operation are interpreted and implemented at the municipal level, although their parameters are set by national legislation. One of the advantages of a project working at the local level is its ability to implement a number of regulatory and procedural reforms that did not require changes to national legislation. In different municipalities, the project was able to focus on simplifying a wide range of administrative processes and making more information available to the public about such processes. As such, the project had a significant anticorruption focus. The project—working through a task force of business, government, and citizen representatives—established a component, the Transparency Initiative, which had potential appeal to both businesses and citizen groups such as tenants associations. The initiative was drafted with both national and local legislative changes in mind, but in the latter case, was packaged primarily as a vehicle for strengthening domestic and foreign investor confidence in municipalities and counties. To provide additional incentives, the initiative was made an explicit part of a larger, local government competition. The competition, open to all Romanian municipalities, offered to bestow the status of “five star city”— a designation signaling an attractive business locale—upon any municipality that implemented a series of transparency and business deregulation reforms. The project worked with the US and other governments to provide successful municipalities with special access to trade delegations and other foreign business groups. The Transparency Initiative contained the following components: 61 • Notice-and-comment rulemaking. The municipality must provide prior written notice of intended action on any normative act (ordinance or decision with general applicability) by publishing such notice at city hall and in the newspaper, and where relevant, on radio and TV. The notice must also be provided to any press organization or person who has requested it. The published notice must contain a short explanation of the proposed enactment, the text of the enactment, and instructions on how comments may be proposed and a hearing requested. The public must be allowed to submit written comments for a period of at least 30 days after publication. The municipality must consider these comments before an act is adopted, and the adopted act itself must be formally published. • Public hearings. As part of the process of adopting normative acts, the municipality must hold a public hearing on the proposed act if at least 25 persons or an association having at least 25 members requests it. Extracted from Russell-Einhorn (2003). Social Accountability Sourcebook 33 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government • Regulatory impact analysis. The municipality must perform a rudimentary cost-benefit analysis that summarizes the likely legal and economic effects and the costs of implementation and compliance of the proposed act, where feasible. • Public petitions. Any person or organization may petition the municipality to adopt, amend, or repeal a normative act, and the petition must be reviewed and responded to in writing. • Administrative complaints. The municipality must go beyond the minimal provisions of the country’s administrative appeals law by giving complainants an opportunity to be heard, and shifting the burden of justification to the government to prove that they followed rules and processes, as opposed to the complainant having to show that the government failed to do so. The project paired these transparency provisions—which were designed primarily to reduce or eliminate the secrecy and unpredictability surrounding the adoption of new rules and procedures—with two significant business licensing reform provisions. One, involving business licensing, was that a public authority must provide prior written notice before revoking a license. The other provided that if a license renewal has been sought, the current license is valid until the application has been acted upon. Notably, the Transparency Initiative’s provisions were made subject to judicial appeal in the event of noncompliance. The project built support for the initiative in a variety of ways. The project held a series of town meetings and roundtables in which a number of people spoke, including business and legal experts. The media was courted, and publicity—through press conferences and press releases— was steady. City council members, with whom the project was working on related business regulatory reforms, were lobbied vigorously. Once the initiative was passed in a few locations, city officials agreed to attend other town meetings and conferences to speak out in favor of the concept. After passage of the initiative, the project provided training to the respective city or county governments. Several jurisdictions acted upon the Transparency Initiative in late 2001 and 2002. One municipality, Giurgiu, adopted the full reform package. Three others—Timisoara, Oradea, and Brasov—adopted the notice-and-comment rulemaking and public hearing provisions, while slightly weakening the other three provisions (Timisoara and Oradea) or rejecting them (Brasov). Two counties, Sibiu and Timis, also adopted the notice-and-comment and public hearing provisions with respect to legislation produced by their governing councils, and Sibiu posted its legislative proposals on its web site. Giurgiu garnered considerable publicity for its adoption of the initiative and won a special award from the UNDP. Local council members from Giurgiu were also invited to a number of international conferences on local government management and development. Based in part on this favorable publicity, certain legislators in the Parliament began to take an interest in the legislative package, together with the Romanian Ministry of Public Information and the World Bank. The Bank required a transparency law for its second Public Sector Adjustment Loan to Romania. NATO representatives took an interest in the draft legislation. Although the Parliament stripped away all but the notice-and-comment and public hearing provisions from the bill, a national Transparency Law passed in January 2003, becoming Social Accountability Sourcebook 34 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government the national law and preempting similar local legislation including the transparency legislation adopted by the four municipalities and the two counties during the previous year. It is too early to tell how actively the national, county, and local governments in Romania are using the new Transparency Law, but a quick review of Girgiu’s experience with its own, shortlived notice-and-comment procedure (prior to adoption of the national Transparency Law) showed that it did indeed provide the public with important opportunities to comment on, and make changes to, proposed policy. In one case, a local sustainable development plan was presented and, following submission of written comments and a hearing, was modified to reflect citizen and business suggestions. In another case, tenants associations presented comments and attended a hearing on budget shortfalls with respect to the local heating supply. To close the budget gap, the associations agreed to give up heat several weeks early in the spring. In yet other cases involving proposed bus fares, water and sewer tariffs, and taxes on officiated marriages, the public made suggestions that resulted in changes to proposed decisions. In each of the relevant jurisdictions, the project found that the bundling of multiple components into a single legislative package under the label of a Transparency Law made it more politically potent and harder for most jurisdictions to reject outright. While business support for the proposal was helpful, the major impetus for adoption of the proposal in most of jurisdictions came from politicians. This contradicts the widely held view that open business advocacy represents a potent force in transition countries. In Romania, at least, most businesses were politically quite passive and reluctant to stake out positions that might upset existing or future relations with government officials. In at least one case, political maneuvering for public support by a mutually suspicious mayor and city council seemed to draw them together to support the proposal. In another municipality, an ambitious deputy mayor saw an opportunity to make a name for himself by brokering passage of the proposal under a similar set of circumstances. Elsewhere, adoption of the proposal seemed to depend principally on the shared perception of county and municipal councils that their jurisdictions should publicly embrace transparency as a means of enhancing their reputation with foreign donors and investors. Each of these cases seems to affirm the general theory that administrative law-type mechanisms will find support either in instances where political contestation is high or where key external incentives promote their adoption. Social Accountability Sourcebook 35 Chapter 4 5.1.3 Social Accountability and Local Government Colombia, “Bogotá How are We Doing” (Bogotá Cómo Vamos) 62 Background Bogotá Cómo Vamos was created during the 1997 election campaign, based on the 1991 Constitution’s mandate calling for citizens to exercise oversight of public administration. It was a response to the absence of a citizen-based accountability mechanism to monitor fulfillment of the campaign promises made by the candidate and mayor elect, and their impact on the quality of life in the city. In view of the changes experienced in the city since 1994, civil society developed an educational monitoring strategy to hold the district administration accountable and, at the same time, to present clear and concise evaluation reports to inform the public. In this way, citizens could assume an increasingly active role in the development of the city. To develop this initiative, El Tiempo Publishing House, the Corona Foundation, and the Bogotá Chamber of Commerce forged a strategic alliance to develop evaluation and communication tools, field test them through focus groups with experts and citizens from different socioeconomic strata, and ensure the political viability of the project through the mayor and his team. Thus, Bogotá Como Vamos was launched and has emerged as a forum for debate on city issues due to its acceptance by experts, students, citizens and the district government. Objective Evaluate changes in quality of life and wellbeing in Bogotá based on compliance with the District Administration’s Development Plan. Who The Bogotá Cómo Vamos project is made up of a coordinating team that includes an expert in evaluation and local government and an assistant. Its work—on data collection from the District Administration, preliminary analysis of findings, drafting of evaluation reports, consultation with experts, and the commissioning of an annual opinion survey—is supported by the Technical Committee and the Steering Committee. The latter is made up of El Tiempo, the Corona Foundation, and the Bogotá Chamber of Commerce. The evaluation process involves the district administration through the mayor, secretaries and directors of city government offices who periodically submit information. Experts and research centers have a role in analyzing sector-based evaluations, and the general public participates as a source of information on city problems and as the target audience for the dissemination of evaluation findings through the mass media. The main beneficiaries are the citizens. The final evaluations are targeted toward citizens in order to make more information available to them concerning changes in the quality of life. The city administration likewise benefits from the evaluation findings which can be used to adjust its 62 Extracted from Sánchez (2003) Social Accountability Sourcebook 36 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government strategies and provide access to information on the views of experts and, most importantly, the citizens themselves. What Bogotá Cómo Vamos is mainly engaged in examining and disseminating evaluation findings. It requests information from district offices every six months based on a series of outcome indicators and prepares evaluation reports. The process is supported by working meetings with experts and findings of the annual survey of public perceptions. Project evaluations cover health, education, housing and utilities, environment, public areas, traffic, citizen responsibility, citizen security, public management, public finances, and economic development. Project coordinators consult a group of experts, hold focus groups comprising citizens representing six socio-economic strata, and hold meetings with the heads of District offices, in order to identify these areas and design the indicators. How The main evaluation tool is the series of outcome, technical, and public perception indicators designed for each sector. The technical variables are based on information submitted by the district offices every six months. The public perception variables are based on the project’s annual public perception survey of 1,500 individuals representing various zones and social strata. Sector evaluations are based on a preliminary report prepared by the project coordinators. This report is presented to a group of experts for in-depth analysis and to develop conclusions and recommendations. It is also discussed at seminars or debates to which public officials and citizens involved in the issue are invited. In addition, the project sponsors other types of forums and debates on specific issues related to quality of life in the city. These initiatives have focused on issues such as street people, people who have been displaced by violence, and political reforms in the city. While these issues are not directly related to a particular evaluation area, they are considered germane to the project’s main objective. The mass media were chosen as the vehicle for disseminating evaluation findings. El Tiempo was particularly important as the newspaper with the largest circulation in the city and nationwide—reaching 1.4 million people daily, and 3 million on Sunday—as was the local television station City TV with an audience of 2.9 million people. Other strategies adopted included publishing a quarterly bulletin with 3,000 copies for distribution to grassroots citizen organizations, and distributing other publications such as reports from seminars and forums to experts, libraries, research and documentation centers, universities, and high schools in order to strengthen institutional memory. In addition to publishing them in El Tiempo, a press release is sent to about 25 radio and TV stations and the print media. The findings are also posted on the project’s web page which was recently created in order to reach more people. Social Accountability Sourcebook 37 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government Since 1999, the project has compiled additional information on the city including a series of monthly statistics on accidents, security, health, citizen conduct, cultural activities and sports, economic statistics, and environment. Some of these statistics are published daily in El Tiempo and the information is updated each month on the web page. Costs and Funding The total cost of the project is about $75,000, of which 47% is used to pay personnel costs (coordinator and assistant); 24% is for supplementary activities to the evaluation including roundtables, forums and seminars, and the annual commissioning of the survey; 20% is for communications such as the Quarterly Bulletin and forum reports; and 9% is for overhead costs. Funding for the project’s activities each year comes from a contribution of $22,026 from each of the sponsoring offices, for a total of $66,078, or 88% of total funding. The remaining 12% comes from funds left over from the previous year and interest generated from the investment of contributions. Outcomes The project’s most significant outcome is the diffusion of knowledge based on evaluations of the performance of the administrations of Mayor Enrique Peñalosa and Mayor Antanas Mockus. Prior to this, the only information available pertained to the most important projects and works, but lacked a synthesis of the impact of such activities on the coverage and quality of basic goods and services. The district administration has submitted to a process of accountability by agreeing to collaborate with, and provide information to, Bogotá Cómo Vamos. Previously, the administration published a book at the end of its term detailing its most important accomplishments with an emphasis on management and process. Now it presents indicators on coverage and quality that have more to do with outcomes and impact. District offices have improved the quality, relevance and timeliness of their information on service coverage and quality in fulfillment of agreements signed with the project. Before Bogotá Cómo Vamos, the information provided by these entities tended to describe their many activities rather than the outcomes of those activities. For example, while previously they reported the number of housing units built, currently they provide information on changes in the shortage of housing units. Some district offices are using information from the annual public perception survey as core performance indicators. The Secretariat of Education posts this information on its web page: www.sedbogota.edu.co and public service providers design their service delivery indicators based on this information. The General Secretariat of the Mayor’s Office also uses it to monitor the administration’s overall progress (see the table of indicators below). The project played an active role in the 2000 election campaign to elect Enrique Peñalosa’s successor. It published its evaluation findings in two documents, “Basis for a Government Social Accountability Sourcebook 38 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government Program for Bogotá” and “The Citizens’ Agenda,” in order to frame the most important issues for the city. These materials were used for special pieces in El Tiempo, a special bulletin containing a voters’ guide, meetings with candidates, and televised debates on City TV. Bogotá Cómo Vamos has been recognized among the Best Citizen Practices for Improving Quality of Life by the UNDP-Habitat Dubai International Award for Best Practices in 2000 and 2002. This recognition led Harvard University to contact the program with a request for more information. Four hundred people have attended the course it offers, entitled “Bogotá: Public Policy,” in conjunction the National University of Colombia’s Bogotá Network (Red Bogotá). One of the project’s most significant accomplishments is the “Concejo Como Vamos” Project, launched in 2002, to evaluate the performance of the Bogotá City Council with the support of Bogotá Cómo Vamos promoters. Replication of this project currently is under study for other interested cities such as Medellín, Cúcuta, Cali, Barranquilla, and Bucaramanga, as well as the central government. Constraints and Opportunities One of the project’s constraints has been the difficulty some district offices have had in producing relevant data that measure outcomes rather than processes, although this has gradually improved. In the area of dissemination, the project hopes to reach more citizens from each social stratum so that they have access to more information about the city. To this end, the project is seeking to involve radio stations in its activities. In terms of opportunities, the project is viewed as a forum for debate through which strategic issues affecting the city can be examined and debated. It is important to strengthen it technically and financially so that, in the medium and long term, it can serve as a barometer for quality of life in the city. This entails further strengthening project links to experts and research centers so that they can make better use of the information produced. More funding also translates into increased dissemination and sustainability. Indicator Education INDICATORS FOR BOGOTA COMO VAMOS What it Measures Indicators changes in coverage, quality • net coverage rates and public perception of the • average scores on educational performance tests service • percentage of knowledge of values • citizen scoring of the service Health changes in coverage, quality, and public perception of the service • • • • health system coverage rate maternal mortality rate mortality rate for children under 5 citizen scoring of the service Housing and Services changes in shortages of priority housing, coverage of potable water and sanitation services, and public perception of services • • • • deficit in priority housing aqueduct coverage rate rate of coverage of sewage and drainage system citizen scoring of the services Social Accountability Sourcebook 39 Chapter 4 Indicator Environment Social Accountability and Local Government INDICATORS FOR BOGOTA COMO VAMOS what it measures indicators changes in pollution levels • number of figures that exceed legal levels of each air and public perception pollutant • percentage of water treated by industry • level of reforestation and green areas • citizen perception of pollution Traffic changes in traffic delays and public perception • • average time spent in traffic citizen perception of changes in traffic, quality of the service, road conditions, and traffic management Public Space changes in the per capita quantity of public pedestrian space and in the coverage of roadways in good condition and public perception changes in homicide rates, victimization, and public perception of insecurity • • • percentage of roadways in good condition coverage of rail service/tracks coverage of bicycle paths • • • • homicide rate victimization rate rate of non-reporting citizen perception of insecurity • • • • • accident rate number of summons issued alcohol related deaths evasion rates citizen perception of responsibility and solidarity • citizen perception of the image, management, trust of the district’s public entities • • rates of capacity to pay and sustainability of the debt Duff and Phelps, Fitch, and Standard and Poors indicators • • GDP growth rate employment, underemployment, and unemployment rates export growth rates citizen perception of the family economic situation Citizen Security Citizen Responsibility changes in citizen behavior measured by rates and consequences of infractions of the law Public Management Public Finances Economic Development changes in perception about public administration, public servants, and local mayors’ offices changes in financial health indicators and international credit risk scores changes in productivity, competitiveness, and job market • • Social Accountability Sourcebook 40 Chapter 4 5.2 Social Accountability and Local Government References Ackerman, John (2004). “Co-Governance for Accountability: Beyond ‘Exit’ and ‘Voice’,” World Development, 32 (3), pp.447-463. Asian Development Bank/Department for International Development/World Bank (2004). Devolution in Pakistan. ADB/DFID/ World Bank. Alsop, R., A. Krishna, and D. Sjoblom. (2001). Inclusion and Local Elected Government: The Panchayat Raj System in India. Washington, DC: World Bank. Andrews, M. and A. Shah (2003). "Towards Citizen Centered Local-level Budgets in Developing Countries" in A. Shah, ed., Handbook on Public Sector Performance Reviews, vol. 3. Washington DC: World Bank. Andrews, M. (2003). "Voice Mechanism and Local Government Fiscal Outcomes: How does Civic Pressure and Participation Influence Public Accountability?" in A. Shah, ed., Handbook on Public Sector Performance Reviews, vol. 3. Washington, DC: World Bank. Appiah et. al. (2003). “Assessment Report: Government Accountability Improves Trust” (GAIT) Baiocchi, G. et. al. (2004). Evaluating Empowerment: Participatory Budgeting in Brazilian Municipalities (Draft). Washington, DC: World Bank. Bird and Rodriguez (1999). Blair, H. (2000). "Participation and Accountability at the Periphery: Democratic Local Governance in Six Countries." World Development, 28, 21-39. Budlender, D. (2000). Review of Gender Budget Initiatives (report): Community Agency for Social Enquiry. http://www.internationalbudget.org/resources/library/GenderBudget.pdf Civic Alliance. (2002). Listening to the City: Report of the Proceedings. New York: Civic Alliance. Cesilini, S. (1999). “Managing Conflict through Citizens’ Participation: The Case of the La Serna Bridge Project in Argentina” in Thinking Out Loud. Washington, DC: World Bank. Clert, C. et. al. (2005). Changing the Way Our Services are Governed? Bottom-up Governance and Service Delivery in Moldova (draft). Washington, DC: World Bank. Esmail, T., N. Manning, J. Orac, and G. Schechter (2004). "Bottom-Up Administrative Reform: Designing Indicators for a Local Governance Scorecard in Nigeria." Africa Region Working Paper Series, No. 47. Washington, DC: World Bank. Social Accountability Sourcebook 41 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government Fung, A. (2004). Empowered Participation: Reinventing Urban Democracy. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Goetz, A. M. (2003). "Reinventing Accountability: Making Democracy Work for All." Presentation given at the launching of the Community of Practice on Social Accountability.. Washington, DC: World Bank. Gole, J. (1999). The Role of Civil Society in Containing Corruption at the Municipal Level: Proceedings from the Regional Conference of Transparency International Representatives. Discussion Paper No. 10, Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative. Open Society Institute. Goudsmit, I. and J. Blackburn (2001). “Participatory Municipal Planning in Bolivia: an Ambiguous Experience,” Development in Practice, 11 (5): 587-596. Grun, S. (2000). Evaluacion del Componente Desarrollo Municipal del FISE. Managua. Helling, L., R. Serrano, and D. Warren. (2005). Linking Community Empowerment, Decentralized Governance, and Public Service Provision Through a Local Development Framework. SP Discussion Paper No. 535. Washington, DC: World Bank. Jenkins R. and A.M. Goetz (1999). "Constraints on Civil Society's Capacity to Curb Corruption: Lessons from the Indian Experience." IDS Bulletin, 30 (4). Kampala City Council and Uganda Management Institute (2005). The First Kampala Citizens' Report Card: Measuring Citizens' Satisfaction with Key Public Services. Kampala. King, R. et. al. (2003). Tracking of the District Assemblies Common Fund: A Pilot Study of Four District Assemblies. Accra: ISODEC. http://www.isodec.org.gh/Papers/monitoringDACF.pdf Levy, B. (2004). Governance of Service Delivery in ECA. Processed. Washington, DC: World Bank. Litvack, J. et. al. (1998). Rethinking Decentralization in Developing Countries. Washington, DC: World Bank: Lopez, J. (2003). "A Traditional Peasant Organization Engaged in Social Monitoring in the Municipality of Totora, Carrasco Province, Cohabamba Department, Bolivia" in World Bank, Voice, Eyes and Ears: Social Accountability in Latin America. Washington, DC: World Bank. Monastyrski, T. (2004). Ukraine: Better Governance in Ukraine through Public Participation the People's Voice Project. Kiev: People's Voice Project. Paul, S. (2002). Holding the State to Account: Citizen Monitoring in Action. Bangalore: Books for Change. Social Accountability Sourcebook 42 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government Pichon, F., E. Santi, and M. Rueda (2004). "Empowerment through Communication: The Case of Community Radio in Ecuador" in World Bank, En breve. Washington, DC: The World Bank. PROOF (2005). Public Record of Operation and Finance, Access Audit (Newsletter). Bangalore: PROOF. Przeworski, Adam, Susan C. Stokes, and Bernard Manin, eds. (1999). Democracy, Accountability, and Representation. New York: Cambridge University Press. Raich, U. (2005). Fiscal Determinants of Empowerment. Washington, DC: World Bank. Rao, V. (2005). The Political Economy of Gram Panchayats in South India: Results and Policy Conclusions from a Research Project. Washington, DC: World Bank. Rowland, A. (2001). "Population as a Determinant of Local Outcomes under Decentralization: Illustrations from Small Municipalities in Bolivia and Mexico." World Development, 20 (8), pp. 1373-1389. Russell-Einhorn, M. (2003). “Creating and Implementing Local Transparency Initiatives” in Local Government Brief (Summer) pp. 31-39. Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative. http://lgi.osi.hu/publications/2003/241/31-39.pdf Sanchez (2003). "Evaluation of Changes in the Quality of Life in Bogota, Colombia from a Civil Society Perspective: Bogotá Cómo Vamos." in World Bank, Voice, Eyes, and Ears: Social Accountability in Latin America. Washington, DC: World Bank. Schaeffer, M. (2005). Local Government Accountability: Challenges and Strategies. Washington, DC: World Bank. Schroeder, L. (2002). “Mechanisms for Strengthening Local Accountability.” Syracuse University. Sendet (2004). Sera, Y. (2004). Consultations with Civil Society: A Sourcebook. Washington, DC: World Bank. Serrano, R. (2002). Participation, Transparency, and Downward Accountability in District Planning in Mozambique. Processed. Washington, DC: World Bank. Sethi, G. (2004). Fiscal Decentralization to Rural Government in India. Washington, DC: World Bank Transparency International (2001). The Corruption Fighters' Toolkit: Civil Society Experiences and Emerging Strategies. Berlin: Transparency International. UNDP. (2005). "The Power of People. Local Governance for Development." UNDP Factsheet. Social Accountability Sourcebook 43 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government UN-HABITAT and Transparency International (2004). Tools to Support Transparency in Local Governance. Nairobi, Berlin: UNHABITAT, TI http://www.unhabitat.org/publication/TOOLKITGOVERNANCE.pdf Vergara, V. (1999). Local Integrity Systems and Fiscal, Political and Functional Decentralization: An Overview to Making Local Government Credible and Effective. Washington, DC: World Bank Institute. Vidaurre, O. E. (2003). Social Audit Program for the Local Road Construction Project, San Antonio del Monte Municipality, Sonsonate, El Salvador. CREA. Walker, I., R. del Cid, F. Ordonez, and F. Rodriguez (1999). Ex-Post Evaluation of the Homduras Social Investment Fund. Washington, DC: World Bank. World Bank (2000). "Reducing Corruption: Lessons from Venezuela." PREM Notes No 39. Washington, DC: World Bank. __________(2003a). Voice, Eyes and Ears: Social Accountability in Latin America. Washington, DC: World Bank. __________(2003b). Project Appraisal Document for Peru First Programmatic Decentralization and Competitiveness Structural Adjustment Loan. Washington, DC: World Bank. __________(2003c). Project Appraisal Document for Mozambique Decentralized Planning and Finance Project, Washington, DC: World Bank. __________(2003d). Project Appraisal Document for Albania Second Community Works Project, Washington, DC: World Bank. __________(2003e). Project Appraisal Document for Andhra Pradesh Rural Poverty Reduction Project. Washington, DC: World Bank. __________(2004). Project Appraisal Document for Tanzania- Local Government Support Project. Washington, DC: World Bank. __________(2005a). Social Accountability Stocktaking Exercise for South and East Asia. Washington, DC: World Bank Institute. __________(2005b). Social Accountability Stocktaking Exercise for Africa. World Bank Institute. __________(2005c). Project Appraisal Document for Indonesia Initiatives for Local Governance Reform Project. Washington, DC: World Bank. Social Accountability Sourcebook 44 Chapter 4 Social Accountability and Local Government __________(2005d). Empowering the Poor: The Kalahi-CIDSS Community-Driven Development Project. Washington, DC: World Bank. http://lnweb18.worldbank.org/ESSD/sdvext.nsf/09ByDocName/EmpoweringthePoorTheKALA HI-CIDSSCDDProject/$FILE/KalahiToolkit.pdf). Social Accountability Sourcebook 45 Chapter 4 5.3 Social Accountability and Local Government Website Links to Resources and Case Studies Argentina waste collection case study: www.auditoriaciudadana.gov.ar and http://www.transparency.org/toolkits/2001/ccinp_wastecol-argentina.html Citizen Report Cards: www.citizenreportcard.com Communities Finance Officers Association (Armenia): http://www.cfoa.am/ ISODEC (Ghana): http://www.isodec.org.gh/ Japan Ombudsman: http://www.transparency.org/toolkits/2001/monitor_ombudsman-japan.html Lok Satta (India): http://www.loksatta.org/ People’s Voice Project (Ukraine): http://www.pvp.org.ua/eng/news/chronology/ Public Affairs Centre (India): http://ww.pacindia.org/ Public Record of Operations and Finance (India): http://www.voicesforall.org/proof/, http://www.janaagraha.com/campaigns Tanzania Gender Budgeting Initiative: http://tgnp.org/ Tools to Support Transparency in Local Governance Toolkit developed by UN-HABITAT and Transparency International: http://www.unhabitat.org/publication/TOOLKITGOVERNANCE.pdf World Bank decentralization website: http://www-wbweb.worldbank.org/prem/prmps/publicsector/decentralization.cfm Social Accountability Sourcebook 46