Session 7Evaluation of the EU support to

decentralization & Local Governance (DLG)

Jorge Rodriguez Bilbao UNIT D2

“CIVIL SOCIETY & LOCAL AUTHORITIES” EUROPEAN COMMISSION- DG DEVCO

Regional Seminar with with Local Authorities from the ENP SouthTunis, 20 to 22 November 2012

The red thread of the presentation

MAIN LESSONS LEARNTKey lessons particularly relevant fot the

ENP South Region

THE FACTS

Overview of the history, nature and rationale for EC

involvement in decentralization process

around the world

Part I

Part 2

OVERVIEW OF THE KEY RECOMMENDATIONS

Part 3

STRATEGIC EU SUPPORT TO DECENTRALIZATION AND

LOCAL GOVERNANCE

Key issues & recommandations of the

Advanced seminar on decentralisation and local

Governance (40 participants of 25 EUD. July

2012)

Part 4

Part IOverview of the history, nature and rationale for

EU involvement in decentralization process

around the world

1996-2004: Progressive and spontaneous discovery of decentralization at field level (EUD)

in response to a growing demand (new wave of decentralization process alongside the democratic transitions of the early

1990s) ① Evolution of classical programs (micro-project, rural

development programs) that channelled funds through ministries or through NGOs and grassroots organisations by putting the LG in the driver's seat (1996-2000...)

② Progressively, growing demand to provide direct support to the decentralization process (2000…);

HELP!!

EUD staff discovered the complexity of decentralization as a political reform process involving a

multiple set of actors at different levels:

HQ steer the collective learning curve: how?

① Development of a policy framework has been inspired by/built up from field experiences:

One year of exchanges (electronic discussion involving more than 40 people)

One seminar in Brussels (2006) Regional seminars (Nicaragua, Mali…)

working, Quality Support…① Networking, Quality Support, collective learning with

other donors (DeLoG)…

The first "EU reference document "Supporting

decentralization and Local Governance (2007)”

Two main trends to keep in mind

① The absence of a policy framework did not prevent the EC from entering the decentralization arena in a growing number of countries across various regions;

② EUD followed a pragmatic approach: the prerequisites (legal framework, financial and human resources for LG, capacities at central level to steer the reforms) were turned into "building blocks" of a coherent mid-term strategy to support the formulation and implementation of a truly owned national reform agenda

Evolution of contracted amounts during the period 2002-2011

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Com

mitm

ents

in m

illio

n EU

R

Total LGvnt & LGvnce Policy

Category/ Year 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Grand Total (%)

Top down 9 8 19 51 40 48 42 5 47 28 296 36 %Bottom up 5 12 116 91 106 48 66 32 17 30 523 64%Grand Total 14 20 136 142 145 95 108 37 64 57 819

① Geographical breakdown: 74% (586 M€) to Africa; 10% (78 M€) to LA; 7% (56 M €) to ENPI SUD and 4% (33M€) to Asia

② Most of the resources were spent in a limited set of countries:, Madagascar (60 M€), Mali (72 m€), Tanzania (22,7M€)..

③ The EU contribution represented an average of only 2,5% of overall EU financial contributions;

Evolution of contracted amounts during the period 2002-2011

Part II

KEY LESSONS PARTICULARLY

RELEVANT FOR THE ENP SOUTH REGION

① EU support has been most effective in selected aspects of the decentralization reform:

Formulation of decentralization policies; Financial support to LG feeding into/contributing to the

development of national Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers (IFT);

Capacity building of LG staff in areas of planning and public financial management

Improving access to basic services at local levels;

② EU support has been most successful when undertaken as a comprehensive public sector reform

IMPACT OF EU SUPPORT TO DECENTRALIZATION AND LOCAL GOVERNANCE

Where was EU support most effective?

① Achieving deeper legal reforms (in particular the harmonisation of sector legislation);

② Decentralization of Human Resources Management; ③ Building Central capacities to steer the reform; ④ Increasing the degree of LG autonomy; ⑤ Quality of service delivery; ⑥ Accountabilty towards CS ans citizens

EC Support has been less effective in…..

A support that target only selected areas of reform, but with limited attention to the political

dimension of the reform

Part IIIKEY RECOMMENDATIONS

Overall process of state

ModernisationIncluding public sector reform

National developmentstrategies and

processes

Local development

strategies and processes

Democratisation and

wider governance

reforms

(elected) Local Governments

Municipal development

Local Democracy and Governance

Citizen participation

Support to Decentralisation

Process: Different entry

doors

① Clarify the EU's role in supporting to decentralization by anchoring that support within partner countries "wider reform agenda";

② Conduct a comprehensive country analysis with specific focus on the "politics of reforms";

③ Deepen country dialogue beyond the relevant lead ministry;

④ Strengthen capacities of local actors to analyse and influence reform process;

⑤ Identify relevant entry points for EC support;

⑥ Prioritise EU support to LG fiscal reforms ;

"The EC has a unique but largely unrealised potential for global

support to decentralization in partner countries"

AND ONE FINAL CONCLUSSION

In order to tap into that potential, the central recommendation invites the EU to develop "an explicit response strategy that

clearly embeds future support for decentralization reforms within a wider public sector reform agenda"

If you want to know the details of the evaluation report..http://capacity4dev.ec.europa.eu/article/perspectives-evaluation-ec-support-decentralisation-processes

Part IVFOLLOW UP

STRATEGIC EU SUPPORT TO DECENTRALIZATION AND LOCAL

GOVERNANCE More than 40 participants from EU Delegations in Latin America, Asia, Africa and ENPI countries, as well as HQ

staff, gathered in Brussels for a 4 days seminar (July 2012) to discuss EU support strategies to decentralisation and

local governance.

M1 :Decentralisation is a fundamentally a political

process 1. Decentralization is about rethinking the scope and modalities of State Action to promote development

2. Decentralization is about state building/reform

3. Decentralization is a multi-level process of institutional (re-)construction

4. Decentralization can help to build new societal compromises (social contracts) based on endogenous funding

M2:Need to recognise the instrumentality of decentralization

with respect to development!!

M3: Why should EU support/be interested in decentralization?

① Decentralization processes and decentralizing environments are a reality in many countries;

② Recent policy evolutions at EU and international level call for an increasingly political approach to cooperation involving all actors, including local authorities.

③ Decentralization can be an effective tool for better development and governance outcomes;

EU should remain engaged even in hostile/transitionnal

environments!!

M4: The six building blocks of a EU strategic support to decentralization

① Start from decentralisation realities on the ground

Better understanding of the political drivers of reforms② Choose the right entry point!③ Avoid to adressing support primarly from the aid modality

perspective④ A focus on development outcomes (not just local governance)

and an appreciation of the role of local autonomy to promote it; ⑤ Moving beyond normative – technocratic concepts; ⑥ A greater attention to the demand side of the reform

process, and the ability of local authorities and their associations to articulate a vision of developmental local government

START FROM DECENTRALIZATION REALITIES ON THE GROUND

① The local context is the necessary starting point; ② There is a need for development partners to better understand the

interest, power structures, incentives and possible drivers of change Look with Political economy eyes!

Decentralization is driven by political motives, not by developmental goals;

Strong men’s desire to legitimate power and provide a legitimate basis (but no will to pursue fiscal and administrative reform) FROZEN DECENTRALIZATION PROCESS (decentralization without autonomy for LG) ;

③ Two key elements to look at: ① to which extent, reforms driven by politics may nevertheless result in

changes that open space for advancing governance and developmental goals;

② how the reforms may contribute to open or close space for State-society interaction to promote or impede genuine local development

Overall process of state

ModernisationIncluding public sector reform

National developmentstrategies and

processes

Local development

strategies and processes

Democratisation and

wider governance

reforms

(elected) Local Governments

Municipal development

Local Democracy and Governance

Citizen participation

Support to Decentralisation

Process: Different entry

doors

① Windows of opportunity – versus long-term strategy;

② Incremental and contextualised approach

③ Identify relevant entry points for EC support depending of country context setting;

④ Different levels of support: National framework; Intergovernmental

capacities; Service delivery and frontline

providers;⑤ Focus on linkages between

differents dimensions;

CHOOSE THE RIGHT ENTRY POINT!

STRENGHENING THE AUTONOMUS ACTION AND CAPACITY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

① Focus on development outcomes (not just local governance) and the role of local autonomy (by strengthening the institutional and financial space) to promote it;

② Local authorities to implement their dual mandate: Specific mandate’ in supporting the implementation of national

programmes; The ‘general mandate’ local authorities have (as a politically distinct

entity representing local constituencies) to develop their own local policies and programs.

Autonomy should be understood as local authorities’ ability to fulfil their ‘general mandate’, pushing forward their

agendas, priorities and programs while at the same time ensuring accountability to their citizens

FISCAL DECENTRALIZATION AS STRATEGIC POINT TO PROGRESSIVELY BUILD THE

ACCOUNTABILITY CULTURE FROM BELOWAutonomy and accountability as two sides of the same coin:

Higher levels of fiscal autonomy reinforce accountability.

Overreliance on transfers deprives downwards accountability of all substance since most issues are decided at central levels.

Local authorities are more directly accountable to their citizens with their own resources.

MOVE BEYOND NORMATIVE-TECHNOCRATIC CONCEPTS AND START FROM DECENTRALIZATION REALITIES ON THE

GROUND•

•

•

•

GREATER ATTENTION TO THE DEMAND SIDE OF THE REFORM PROCESS

Is there a “social demand” for DLG?• A fundamental paradox of most decentralization reforms is that they are

pushed from above rather than from below. They reflect a politically driven, and bureaucratically constrained, supply by the central Gov't.

• The extent to which they are actually influenced by an organized demand for authority, responsibilities and resources by the intended beneficiaries (LG and CSO) remains extremely limited or absent in much of Africa, ENPI and Asia. (Exceptions in Latin America)

• Crucial to building a social demand for decentralization is the development of forms of active citizenship and local State-CS partnerships for services delivery that go beyond more common forms of “popular participation” in local governance.

If you want to know the details of July seminar …

http://capacity4dev.ec.europa.eu/article/stepping-gear-deliver-smart-support-decentralisation

http://capacity4dev.ec.europa.eu/public-pub.sector-reform-decentralisation/blog/sharpening-our-understanding-decentralisation 

شكرا THANKS

MERCI