1 Regional and Rural Development Planning School of Environment, Resources and Development Asian...
-
Upload
alexandrina-crawford -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
2
Transcript of 1 Regional and Rural Development Planning School of Environment, Resources and Development Asian...
Regional and Rural Development PlanningSchool of Environment, Resources and Development
Asian Institute of TechnologyBangkok, Thailand
May 2010
GOVERNANCE OF DECENTRALIZED COMMUNE DEVELOPMENT PLANNING IN CAMBODIA: CASE STUDIES OF COMMUNE
COUNCILS IN BATTAMBANG PROVINCE Presented by:
Young Sokphea
Governance Issue in Planning
Unclear legal framework and local
good governance (ADB,2000)
Ineffective Commune Development Plan
(CDPs)
• Lack of participation (Pellini and Ayres, 2007)
• Lack of participation in CDPs, and project M and E (Sotheary, 2006)
• Accountability in planning is weak (Rohdewohld and Porter, 2006:20)
• Lack of financial transparency of CCs• Collected fee are not recorded (NCSC, 2005)
• Project cost over estimated (Romeo and Pyckerelle, 2003)
1.1 Statement of the Problem
Specific objectives To study institutional framework and mechanism
of LGG for application in CDP; To examine the applications of LGG in the
implementation of CDP; To gain the perception and satisfaction of
commune council (CCs) members and local people on the application of LGG in the CDP;
To analyze facilitating and/or constraining factors in the application of LGG in the CDP and identify challenges and prospects; and
To suggest recommendations to strengthen LGG performance for effective implementation of the CDP and provide policy implications.
1.2 Research Objectives
General objective To study the application of LGG in the implementation of the CDPs performance by commune councils in Cambodia.
Effectiveness and Efficiency Resource utilization and optimization Matching resource with local problems and needs
Transparency Openly disseminated information Resource allocation
Rule of Law · Related laws, regulation, declaration and decision in planning
Participation In decision making In implement In Monitoring & Evaluation
Responsiveness Plans match with local needs Equity and avoid discrimination in selection of beneficiaries
Accountability Accountable to electorate Role of PBC, CCs
Local Good Governance in Decentralized
Commune Development Plan (CDP)
1.3 Conceptual Framework
5
2. Literature Review
Concept of Governance
Principles of Good Governance
Linkage of Decentralization and Governance
Local Governance/Decentralized Governance
in Asia
Governance Policy in Cambodia
Local Governance Performance
Governance Issue in Decentralized
Commune Development Planning in Cambodia
Conceptualized Definitions Operationalized Indicators
6
Local Good Governance Applied in Commune Development Planning Process in Cambodia
Stage 1: Plan
formulationStage 2:
Identification/Review
needs and problems
Stage 3: Select
Development Project Priority
Stage 4: District
Integration Workshop
Stage 5: Approval on Commune
Development Plan
Stage 6: Developmen
t Project Implementat
ion
Stage 7: Monitoring
and Evaluation
Conceptualized Definitions Operationalized Indicators
Rule of Law: Ratification of legislation and predominance of regular and
just law .
Application of rules, regulations, guidelines and law
in CDPs.
Participation: Public participation decision
making in various affairs.
Participation of both men and women in the process of
decision making
Accountability: Implementation of role, tasks
in the process of decision making.
The accountability of PBC, M&E, Procurement Committee, and
CCs in CDPs
Transparency: Decision-making processes
must be open to public scrutiny.
All information (budgeting, expenditure, bidding, concerning CDPs) are
disseminated
Responsiveness: Institutions and processes
that demonstrate their responsiveness
CDP addresses local needs and problems within time frame
Effectiveness and Efficiency: Best use of resources to
provide optimum benefits and to meet real needs.
Using resources in CDP to maximize viable benefits for
local people and their community within time frame
Participation AccountabilityTransparencyResponsivenessEffectiveness and Efficiency
Rule of Law, Accountability, Participation
Participation Accountability
Participation AccountabilityTransparency
Participation AccountabilityTransparency
Participation AccountabilityTransparency
Participation AccountabilityTransparency
(UNDP, 2003)
3. Research Design
Research Design
CCs & Committees Sampled
households Key
informants
Selection of the Study Area
Data Collection Methods and Data Sources
Data Analysis
Primary Data• Field observation • Key informants interview • Questionnaire Survey• FGDSecondary Data•NCDD•Theses•CDPs•Policies
Khnach Romeas commune with decentralization since 1996
Prey Khpos commune with decentralization after 2002.
Quantitative•Weighted Average Index (WAI) on Social Scaling•Pentagon •Descriptive Statistic •T-test Qualitative •Qualitative Statement •Case studies
Type of Research• Exploratory • Case Studies and Survey • Qualitative and Quantitative
Sampled Househo
ld
56 HHs in Khnach Romeas
54 HHs in Prey Khpos
110 HHs (50/50 M/F)
CCs & Committ
ees30
Respondents in Khnach Romeas
30 Respondents in Prey
Khpos
60 CCs and Committee
s (all)
Study Area
Findings of Objective 1: Framework/Mechanism for LGGs in CDP
National
National Committee for Sub-National Democratic Development (NCDD)
Institutional Framework Mechanism
Ministry of Interiors/Other ministries
NCDD Secretariat
NCDD at Provincial (PRDC & Excom)
Commune Councils
Villages
Provincial
Decentralized Level
• Decrees• Sub-decrees•Policies and development plan•Decelerations
• Organic Laws• Functions and roles transfer
• CCs Administrative Management Laws•Guideline on CDPs • LGG Hip Pocket for CCs Advisory
Linkage
Clear Guideline on Commune Development Plan, but very limited with Local Good Governance (LGG) in Commune Development Plan (CDPs)
CDPP Rule of Law Participation Accountability Transparency
Stage 1: Plan formulation
Similar: Guidelines
Similar : PBC and CCs for Decision
Similar: PBC took roles
N/A
Stage 2: Identification/Review needs and issues
N/A •Absent of PBC in Prey Khpos
Participation in needs and issues identification approach in Prey Khpos
Practiced by PBCs from both communes. Yet, PBCs in Prey Khpos did not performed well ask lacking of skill in facilitation
N/A
Stage 3: Select development project priority and prepare for DIW
N/A N/A Both communes applied accountability of PBC in preparing CDPs for DIW
Allocation project based on objectives and selecting priority project to be implement. Yet, Dissatisfaction in Prey Khp commune
Stage 4: District Integration Workshop
N/A Exchanging ideas between these communes were similar. Yet, different in exchanging idea endeavor of both communes.
PBCs were seen similarly in both communes.
Dissemination the CDPs through DIW
Findings of Objective 2: Applications of LGGs in CDPs
CDPP Participation Accountability
Transparency
Responsiveness
Effectiveness &
EfficiencyStage 5: Approval on commune development plan
Decision making was different between Prey Khpos and Khnach Romeas commune, because PBC member in Prey Khpos commune was regular absence
PBCs in preparing list of project for approval seen similarly by both communes
Prey Khpos commune fund was not allocated based on criteria as limited amount of fund, but CDP was available
N/A N/A
Stage 6: Development project implementation
• Khnach Romeas facilitated well, while Prey Khpos was not so satisfied in feasibility study and land acquisition as no compensation• Prey Khpos commune lack of mobilizing participation in CDPs.
N/A • Lack of participation in bidding of both communes.
N/A N/A
Stage 7: Monitoring and Evaluation
Participation: poor participation in M&E and also in operation and maintenance due to lack of responsibilities of M&E committee
• Poor responsibility of M&E committee in Prey Khpos
Prey Khpos: no financial report, irregular auditing, lack of CDPs evaluation, irregular monthly meeting among CCs and stakeholders
• Prey Khpos: needs and issues not addressed, as poor project output, and lack of participatory M&E, and also responsibilities of M&E
•Prey Khpos: delay in implementation, projects did not address objectives of CDPs.
Findings of Objective 2: Applications of LGGs in CDPs (cont)
Khnach Romeas commune had better applied LGG in overall than Prey Khpos commune. Rule of law and participation applied similarly in both communes.
Accountability, transparency and responsiveness were not seemed to be achieved by Prey Khpos commune as lack of responsibilities, willingness to take action of committees, lack of participation mobilization.
Khnach Romeas commune had done better on these elements
Findings of Objective 2: Applications of LGGs in CDPs (cont)
Participation
Accountability
Transparency
Effectiveness and effeciency 0
0.5
1
0.660000000000007
0.720000000000001
0.710000000000001
0.91
0.79
0.840000000000001
0.820000000000001
0.9
Prey Khpos Khnach Romeas
Findings of Objective 3: Perception Satisfaction of LGG in CDPs
Note: Extracted items only those having statistically differences either at 95% and 99% of confident level between two study communes
CCs and Committees Sampled Households
Rule of law
Similar satisfaction Similar satisfaction
Participation
•People's participation in project M&E*
•Performance of PBC members*•Performance of M and E committee members**• In project implement activities**• In M&E**
Transparency
•Participatory annual budgeting planning of PBC**
• Distribution of project to all village **
Accountability
• Decision making of CCs during project implementation*
• Lower satisfaction in Prey Khpos commune
Responsiveness
Better satisfaction in Khnach Romeas
Addressed issues and needs **
Effectiveness and Efficiency
•Satisfaction on project output** •Satisfaction on project output**
Participation
Accountability
Transparency
Effectiveness and Effeciency 0
1
2
1.01
1.20
0.990.34
1.3
1.39
1.21
0.870000000000005
Prey Khpos Khnach Romeas
CCs and Committee Satisfaction
Participation
Transparency
Responsiveness
Effectiveness and Effeciency 0.00
1.00
2.00
0.57
0.17
0.90
0.42
0.95
0.52
1.19
1.20
Prey Khpos Khnach Romeas
HHs Satisfaction
Triangulation Approach
Key Informant Interview
(NGOs, UNDP advisor)
Survey Finding (CCs,
Committee, Local People)
Methodology to Identify Facilitating and Constraining Factors of LGG in CDPs
Findings of Objective 4: Facilitating/Constraining Factors of LGG in CDPs
Researcher
Institutional Economic Social
•Rule and regulation•People’s participation•Coaching, mentoring, and on the job training•NGOs fund for LGG•Line agencies fund•Training on LGG•Sharing experience on LGG
•Fund allocation criteria•Financial audit and CDP evaluation
•Public awareness •CCs leadership to generate fund•Monthly meeting
•Lower education level•Multi-responsibilities of CCs and PBCs •Lack of small scale infrastructure knowledge
•Inadequate Amount of Commune Fund •Irregular financial auditing and CPD evaluation •Low Incentive and Motivation
•Dissatisfaction of local people on land compensation •Limited local people participation in CDPs •Replacement, mandatory of PBC and CCs•Lack of participation in decision making•Limitation of participation in bidding process•Inadequate of public information disclosing
Facilit
ati
ng
C
on
str
ain
ing
Factors
Bett
er
LG
G
in C
DP
sLow
er
LG
G in
C
DP
s
Findings of Objective 4: Facilitating/Constraining Factors of LGG in CDPs (cont)
Conclusions• Extensive guidelines on CDPs planning and implementation manuals but very limited guidelines on applications of LGG in CDPs.
There were different practices in the applications of LGG in CDPs between the two communes.
Khnach Romeas commune having longer experience in the CDPs, thus, better overall performance in the LGG in CDPs as experience through education and understanding to modify LGG in CDPs. Better LGG Performance in CDPs are in participation and rule of law in Prey Khpos commune. With better performance in LGG in CDPs brought higher satisfaction of CCs and HHs in Khnach Romeas than Prey Khpos communes.
Among various LGG elements, communes performed well in rule of law, participation and not so well in accountability, transparency, responsiveness, and effectiveness and efficiency
Areas for improvements in Prey Khpos communes are focused on accountability, transparency, responsiveness and effectiveness and efficiency. Areas for improvements should be considered how to make better achievements in LGG by each step of CDP and consider related planning and policy implications.
CDPP Description PK
KR
Sate 2: Identification
•Participation: problem tree analysis, FGD, vulnerable group discussion, skill on facilitation skills •Accountability: responsibilities according to the assigned tasks
Stage 3: Selection the project (prepare for DIW)
•Transparency in terms of allocation of fund based on criteria, and based on participation from all PBC
Stage 4: DIW • Responsiveness in terms of mobilizing fund to support the projects of CDPs• Participation in exchanging idea with donor to seek support
Stage 5: CDPs approval
•Participation decision among PBC, inform before meeting day •Transparency in fund allocation based on criteria by participatory decision making
Stage 6: Implementation
•Compensation on the properties which affected by projects•Participation conduct bidding at commune level to increase participation
Stage 7: M&E •Participation in M&E•Transparency in financial report, monthly meeting, project signboards (PK,KR), impose regular auditing, and evaluation •Effectiveness and efficiency: time frame, address objectives (participation in M&E), intervention from provincial on contractors •Responsiveness: conduct regular participatory M&E
Recommendations to Strengthen LGG in CDPP
Recommendations Planning and Policy Implications for LGG in local Planninga) Capacity building • Training on LGG and planning based on TNA, learning by doing
approach, practicing LGG elements in CDPs • M&E in practicing in real field work • Basis technical knowledge on infrastructure (planning, design,
calculation)
b) Incentive for commune councils • Award to individual CCs and also as commune fund for commune
with better governance performance • Policy support from Ministries of Interior and Planning
c) Promote transparency in various aspects of local planning
• Financial transparency through monthly financial report, regular auditing on expenditure in CDPs preparation and implementation
d) Developing local good governance framework and measurement
• Rule of law, participation, transparency, accountability, responsiveness, and effectiveness and efficiency.
• Measure Quantitative and qualitative techniques of indicator in line with CDPs performance to reduce different interpretation of CCs