Citizens’ Demand for Citizens’ Demand for Better GovernanceBetter Governance

Lessons from Asia and theLessons from Asia and theBank’s Cambodia programBank’s Cambodia program

John Clark, John Clark, Oslo Governance ForumOslo Governance Forum

Governance is at root Governance is at root about Accountabilityabout Accountability

i.e. about obligation of Power-holders for:

– Their performance – Doing what they are supposed to do– Use of resources entrusted to them– For honesty, integrity, not abusing power

Two dimensions – upwards & downwards

Accountability – Accountability – supply-sidesupply-side

• To state servants acting for us– To managers and ministers– To audit officers, financial controllers– To Parliament (for implementing policies) – To judiciary– To Anti-corruption & oversight bodies

Accountability – Accountability – demand-sidedemand-side

• Most systems allow more direct accty.– Citizen complaints, ombudsmen– Collective lobbying of MPs etc – Protests; direct action– NGOs, consumers unions, PTAs

etc– Independent media– Think tanks and advice bureaus

How to enhance Accountability?How to enhance Accountability?

• Better Rules and Regulations – administrative procedures, audits …• Stronger Market Principles – privatization or contracting out … • Independent Agencies – ombudsman, vigilance commissions …• “Social Accountability” – make it

effective

There has been varying success with these. What

has been learnt is that success often depends on

direct participation of the people

What is What is Social AccountabilitySocial Accountability??

• Set of tools/activities that allow a rigorous analysis to be formed by aggregating grassroots perspectives → hard evidence

• Plural of “anecdote” is “data”• Citizens engaged - individually, or in CSOs• Driven from below, bottom-up messages• It complements formal accountability,

especially where that is ineffective

e.g.e.g. Textbook Watch, Philippines Textbook Watch, Philippines

• Parents concerned that schoolbooks weren’t delivered, were late, or were poor quality

• TAN did survey: 40% books shipped from center could not be accounted for at district level (not all corruption)

• Carefully tracked production and delivery of 15M books/year (+Boy Scouts) – found where errors occurred

• Now virtually no books go astray; time from production to school desk was cut from 24 to 12 months; most children now get their books by the start of the school year

• Cost per book has been cut by 55%• Educ. Secretary became a champion (then joined NGO)

Why Social Accountability is ImportantWhy Social Accountability is Important

Social Account’y

Better Services

Empower-ment

Good Govern’ce

Social Accountability ToolkitSocial Accountability Toolkit

• Report cards on services; opinion polls• Community score-cards• Budget analysis• Expenditure tracking• Corruption monitoring and surveys• Right to information campaigns• Demystifying govt. informationSome used by specialists; others with citizens; others by NGOs

FOLLOWING THE MONEYFOLLOWING THE MONEY:: Participatory Public Participatory Public Expenditure Management CycleExpenditure Management Cycle

Civic Engagement

Budget Formulation

Porto Alegre, Brazil

Performance Monitoring

Citizen Scorecards India and Philippines

Budget Review & Analysis

Gujarat, India

Expenditure Tracking

Uganda

Short and long routes of accountabilityShort and long routes of accountability

Conditions needed for S.AcConditions needed for S.Ac

• Enabling legal environment for civil society and its watchdog roles

• Tradition of freedom of information; citizens access to that information

• Independent media; free from persecution• Openness of public sector; willingness to

hear what constructive critics have to say

But needs from civil society tooBut needs from civil society too• Capacity to analyze policy issues, budgets • Credible parallel sources of information • Other capacity issues – management, research skills,

resources, communications skills • Objectivity; being constructive • Ability to generate confidence (media, MPs) • Support of citizens, media, donors etc • Connection with public institutions

Capacity …. Credible …. Connected …. Conscientious …. Constructive ….

SAc completes the Civil Society SAc completes the Civil Society SpectrumSpectrum

Charit

iesPub

lic S

ervic

e Con

tracto

rs

Develo

pmen

t NGOs

Advoc

acy G

roup

s

Inve

stiga

tive

journ

alists

Demon

strat

ors

Missing MiddleConstructive civic

engagement

Cooperative Hostile

Bridge-building skillsBridge-building skills

• Easier to criticize & try to stop something than to promote an alternative way of working; hard work, can be thankless

• Govt. can see it as meddling• Other CSOs can see it as selling out• But that is inherent in building a bridge …• Engineers know bridge building is all

about managing stresses and tensions

Parallel with Consumers MovementParallel with Consumers Movement

• Independent, reliable product information

• Rating user views • Comparison of

products• Value for money audits• Producer integrity• Impartial grievance

channels• Class action suits

• Community-level research on services

• Public Opinion Polls• Citizen / community

report cards• Tracking expenditures• Dialogue with Govt.• Citizen ombudsman,

campaigns• Taking cases to MPs

Response of the public sectorResponse of the public sector• Some see SAc as meddling, when there are

“checks and balances inherent in the state• But for most clients there isn’t the separation of

state powers, nor the real will to be clean• They often don’t want real checks & balances• Remember: the Private Sector is strongest in

countries with strongest Consumer Movements• GAC strategies need the citizen demand-side• Is problem institutional failure, or intent failure?

e.g. 1) e.g. 1) Budget analysis; Budget analysis; Gujarat, IndiaGujarat, India

• More funds directed to priority sectors• Reduced errors in State accts (was ~ 600/yr) • Professionalized scrutiny by State legislature• Media publicity; public awareness• Better flow of information among ministries• DISHA model replicated in 12 other Indian states• National budget now analyzed similarly

e.g. 2) e.g. 2) Participatory budgeting, Participatory budgeting, Porto AlegrePorto Alegre

• Partic. budgeting helps balance the books • Tax revenues ↑ 50% (people more motivated to pay taxes)

• Number of children in public schools doubled• 1989-96 HHs accessing water rose 80 → 98%• Over 80 Brazilian cities now follow the Porto

Alegre model

e.g. 3) e.g. 3) Public expenditure tracking; Public expenditure tracking; UgandaUganda

• After survey govt. required district grants to be published monthly in newspapers and on radio

• Primary schools and district authorities required to post notices on all inflows of funds

• Schools and parents now have access to info needed to understand and monitor budgets

• Share of funds reaching schools ↑ 20%–80% • Primary enrollment 3.6M → 6.9 M from 1996–01

e.g. 4) e.g. 4) Citizens report cards; Citizens report cards; BangaloreBangalore

• Public agencies now respond to citizen concerns • “Worst” agency overhauled systems for service

delivery and introduced public forums to consult• Electric Board initiated dialogue with residence

associations to redress grievances• Public awareness on service quality rose greatly • Report cards enhanced CSO activism and

citizen monitoring in Bangalore • Tool has been replicated in Indian and many

countries (from Philippines to USA)

e.g. 5) e.g. 5) Lobbying on Corruption; Lobbying on Corruption; IndonesiaIndonesia

• FITRA analyzed local spending in range of provinces

• Debated in local and national parliaments• Identified better ways to monitor corruption• Citizens action enhanced formal accountability• FITRA head - now Dep. Speaker in Upper House

CambodiaCambodia

• Well known problems of Corruption and governance failure; INT case, scandals

• WB prepared a “Governance CAS”• Govt is not monolithic; some we can work with• Reformers seek to promote change• RGC’s Rectangular Strategy puts reform of

governance at the center• Many CSOs prepared to help win reforms• But no tradition of or forums for constructive

engagement

CambodiaCambodia - environment for SAc - environment for SAc

• Vibrant democracy; many parties, but weak Parl.• Policy environment relatively enabling for CSOs,

independent media, professional assocs• But govt./PM unpredictable, hate criticism, brutal• Laws ambiguous or absent; odd laws used oddly• No FOI law, and no practice of sharing info • Civil Society capacity low, polarized in capital,

unreliable with data/research, not strongly connected with grassroots, new to skills of SAc

• Wild cards: High growth, discovery of oil, China

Citizens' priority interests w ith regard to public information

33.9

41.448.149.2

54.7

71.775.3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Publicsecurity

Health Livelihoodknow ledge(e.g. agri-culture)

Community/village life

Governmentactivities

Localdevelopment

activities

NGOactivities

%

INFORMATION

People mostly interested in local issues that affect them

INFORMATIONINFORMATION

Sources of information

8.318.4

32.132.840.8

78.279.8

0

20

40

60

80

100

Radio TV Village chief Communechief

Relatives,friends,

neighbors

Newspaper NGO

%

… but mostly get their info from national radio and TV

VOICEVOICECitizens have little confidence their voice can effect change – but seen NGOs as powerful influencers

Who is able to protect people from paying informal fees to authorities

21

7.3

13

17.6

21.923.2

27.8

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Nobody Centralgovernment

Authoritiesof higher

levels

NGOintervention

Pow erfulpersons

Collectiveresistance

Don't know

%

Rely heavily on local level leaders/authorities, & NGOsRely heavily on local level leaders/authorities, & NGOs

ASSOCIATION

If you are dissatisf ied w ith public service in your commune to w hom do you turn for resolution?

55.1

50.7

26.4

13.2

13.2

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Village chief

Commune chief

Nobody

NGO

Neighbors

%

Citizens attend Citizens attend commune councilcommune council meetings meetings but participation is passive and unorganized.but participation is passive and unorganized.

Participation & Constructive Dialogue

Participation in commune council meeting

88%

12%

As individual

As representative of agroup / organization

Activities during commune council meeting

9.3

81.4

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Just listening Makingcomments

Raisingproblems

Askingquestions

Demandingaction

%

Who do you think can solve land issues?Who do you think can solve land issues?Net Confidence

Hun Sen 50The King 47NGOs 43CPP 37Government 18Sam Rainsy 15SRP 13National Assembly 8National Committee for Resolving Land Issues 8Senate 6Prince Ranariddh 0Foreign countries -3FUNCINPEC -6Judiciary -17

ConclusionsConclusions

• Very weak connection between citizens and decision-makers

• Short-route of accountability - in bad repair• Scant info about issues people care about• Hierarchical society, little social capital• Weak CSO presence at local levels• Little space or confidence for negotiation • Much to learn from Soc. Acct. elsewhere

DFGG Project – $20M IDA grant + + Concepts:

MONITOR • Participatory

monitoring• Budget analysis and

tracking• Formal oversight

PROMOTE • Disclosure,

Demystification and Dissemination of information

• Collective action

MEDIATE • Feedback• Consultation• Dispute resolution

DFGG

RESPOND• Service delivery

innovations• Performance

rewards and incentives

• Participatory action plans

1.1. Window OneWindow One: State Institutions ($12 million)

DFGG Project Components

2. Window Two2. Window Two: Non-state Actors ($4.5 million).

2a Parallel CS Program: 2a Parallel CS Program: CS Capacity Build. ($2 million)

3.Window Three:3.Window Three: Coord. & learning ($2 million)

1.1. Min. of National Assembly & Senate Relations Min. of National Assembly & Senate Relations Promotion: dissemination of laws & entitlements

2.2. Min of Information – Radio National KampuchiaMin of Information – Radio National KampuchiaPromotion: outreach of govt. progs / policiesMediation: “Talk Back Radio”

3.3. Min. of Labor – Arbitration CouncilMin. of Labor – Arbitration CouncilMediation: of worker/boss conflicts (garments)Response: clear decisions based on law

4.4. Ministry of Interior – Ministry of Interior – “One Window Service”“One Window Service”Response: provision of quality service delivery Mediation: grievance redress mechanism

Window One: Support to State Institutions

Window Two: Support to Non-State Institutions

1. Small grants (up to $15K) which For small CSOs to try Social Accountability

tools that have worked elsewhere2. Devel. Marketplace competition (up to $150K)

Larger grants for more established actors Support for Networks & Coalitions

3. Partnership Grants CSO progs developed with state institutions

Window 2a: Program to Enhance Capacity in Social Accountability - PECSA

– Training, exchange visits, study tours– Mentoring by experienced NGO in Asia– Seed funds to test new SAc approaches– Networking and resource center– Monitoring, evaluation and learning

Support to State Institutions

Support to Non-State Institutions

Coordination, Coordination, Learning, and Ripple Learning, and Ripple

effecteffect

Pillar-1 Pillar-2

Pillar-3

Building partner-

ships

Promoting ‘learning by

doing’Creating a

‘ripple effect’ for

others

Window 3: Coordination & learningCoordination & learning

Lessons on Social Accountability - 1Lessons on Social Accountability - 1

• We’re new at it; don’t kid ourselves we know how to do it (“maindreaming”); work + others

• Boundaries betw. Supply and Demand sides are fuzzy; both need each other

• GAC isn’t a technical problem needing technical solutions; calls for political will & citizen demand

• Build capacities (academe, CS, media) generally – as nat. institutions, not just around WB projects; DFGG itself should be demand-driven

• Great leaps forward need pretext or catalyst (scandal, polit change, discovery of oil …)

Lessons on Social Accountability - 2Lessons on Social Accountability - 2

• Don’t just develop 2-3 yr WB SAc projects• Entails working in new areas for WB: political

analysis; rights law; capacities of CS, media, think tanks etc. Long term; New tools

• Our projects – esp. participatory ones – can be foundaries where the new tools are forged

• In time they can foster the new institutions needed for checks & balances, but need time

• So we must work together in WB X-discipline (COSU, PREM, SocD etc) to innovate, iterate & learn – hence idea of the Bangkok hub.