Good governance and a secure environment the key to a prosperous Free State Dr Ian Goldman African I

1
Good governance and a secure environment the
key to a prosperous Free StateDr Ian
GoldmanAfrican Institute for Community-Driven
Development(formerly Khanya-managing rural
change)
2
What is governance?

• The exercise of economic, political and
  administrative authority to manage a country's
  affairs at all levels. It comprises the
  mechanisms, processes and institutions through
  which citizens and groups articulate their
  interests, exercise their obligations and mediate
  their differences (UNDP)
• Governance refers to the process whereby elements
  in society wield power, authority, influence and
  enact policies and decisions concerning public
  life and economic and social development.
  Governance is a broader notion than 'government'
  (whose principal elements include the
  constitution, the legislature, the executive, and
  the judiciary).
• Governance involves interaction between these
  formal institutions and those of civil society.
• Governance has no automatic normative
  connotation. However, typical criteria for
  assessing governance in a particular context
  might include the degree of legitimacy,
  representativeness, popular accountability and
  efficiency with which public affairs are
  conducted. (International Institute of
  Administrative Sciences,1996).

3
Governance for what?

• Good governance is not value-neutral
• Governance for efficiency, and/or
• Governance for transformation
• What is transformation deracialisation? or
• Transformation of the economic and social aspects
  of peoples lives?
• So what is the burning platform which means we
  need to change?

4
The burning platform

• Much has been achieved since 1994 in terms of
  water, housing, access to electricity, free
  health care, access to education
• However, taking some statistics from Mangaungs
  IDP
• Around 40 of the population is unemployed
• 28.54 infected with HIV/AIDS

5
Burning platform 2
6
Burning platform 3

• So we have a major problem to transform peoples
  livelihoods
• We inherited design of government system
  developed to serve 20 of the population, and we
  are trying to use the same model for 100, in
  fact the other 80
• It doesnt work
• Eg model of agricultural extension in Department
  of Ag designed for 11 000 commercial farmers, who
  are well organised, well educated, well resourced
  August 1998 - 207 field staff/1300 staff
• Is that the right model for peri-urban people,
  farmworkers, new land reform clients
• S Korea poorer than Tanzania, Zambia and Ghana in
  1960. Now economy 100x that of Zambia

7
We need to rethink

• Not just to deracialise
• But to transform the nature of services, the
  power relations with clients, the attitude of old
  and new bureaucrats to clients, the expenditure
  on front-line services versus support services,
  the role of civil society, the balance of
  investment expenditure vs consumptive.

8
Large scale organisational transformation (Ferlie
et al, 1996)

• the extent of multiple, interrelated change
  across the system as a whole
• the creation of new organisational forms at a
  sector level
• the creation of changes in the services provided
  and their mode of delivery
• the reconfiguration of power relations (eg with
  clients)
• the creation of a new culture, ideology and
  organisational meaning.
• (Ferlie, E., Ashburner, L., Fitzgerald, L. and
  Pettigrew, A., (1996) The New Public Management
  in Action)

9

• So we have to change the nature of the
  institutions the structures, the modes of
  service delivery
• The relationship between government and the
  people moving away from dependancy, recognition
  of rights and responsibilities, mutual
  accountability
• We have to get beyond the rhetoric to the reality
  eg participation is talked about a lot how
  real is it?
• We have to make a substantial difference on
  peoples livelihoods, particularly the poor
• Sustainable livelihoods approach useful in terms
  of looking at what needs to be done and how

10
Institutional support for SLs

• 1999-2000 AICDD did research in Zimbabwe, Zambia
  and SA (Free State and E Cape) into what needed
  in terms of institutions to support SLs
• Used to develop Free State Poverty Strategy
• Key issue weakness of link between community
  level and that of local government or service
  management (micro-meso link)
• Developed set of 6 key governance issues

11
Sustainable Livelihoods Approach - principles

• people-focused
• strengths-based
• participatory and responsive
• (empowering of poor people)
• holistic
• micro-macro links (community-local
  gov-province-centre)
• partnerships
• sustainability (economic, environmental,
  institutional, social)
• dynamic (and flexible) so learning process
  approaches
• commitment to poverty reduction

12
6 governance requirements for SLs to be achieved

• Empowering communities
• people active and involved in managing their own
  development (partic disad)
• Active, dispersed and accountable network of
  local service providers (community based, private
  sector and government)
• Empowering local government and service
  management
• at local government level, services managed and
  coordinated effectively and responsively, and
  held accountable (includes district and lower
  offices of prov.)
• at prov/district, capacity to provide support and
  supervision and strategic planning
• Realigning the centre
• Centre/province providing holistic and strategic
  direction around poverty, redistribution, and
  oversight of development (macro)
• international level strengthening capacity
  in-country to address poverty
• and that the linkages are working effectively in
  both directions

13
Ward 19, Mangaung people prioritising the
outcomes they have generated
14
People active and involved in managing their own
development

• Issues
• dependency of communities in relation to
  government but people self-reliant in the (most)
  areas where they have no support from government
• empowerment is an end as well as a route to more
  effective services
• difficulty of getting effective legitimate and
  representative structures and systems
• Reluctance to put real power in the hands of
  communities and paternalistic attitude
• Participation is often rhetoric and not reality
• School Governing Boards are examples of real
  community involvement in services
• Wards are large as participatory structures and
  in rural areas cover many villages

15
Ways forward

• community-based planning understanding
  communities, getting them to plan for their area
  piloted in MLM, MAP, extend through Free State
• Get funds into communities hands to promote
  community action (real empowerment), eg with CBP,
  also with CPFSP, process funds and participatory
  budgeting
• Build capacity of ward committees and ensure they
  have a ward plan and resources. Ensure
  accountable to public and to local government
• Refine role of CDWs to support ward committees,
  key CBP facilitators
• Use of accountability structures eg School Gov
  Boards
• Ensure ME systems and feedback wiorking both
  upwards and downwards to communities

16
Table 2.1.3.1 Organisations and projects in Ward
2 (Mangaung township) and their perceived
importance and accessibility
Ward 2 Mangaung view on services

1 Anglican, Methodist, Catholic, NGK, United,
AME, ZCC, Ethiopian etc 2 Includes tuck shops,
butchery, photographic studio, funeral parlours,
MTN shop, filling station, spare parts shop, 4
hair salons
17
2 Active and dispersed network of local service
providers

• Issue
• Currently few services reach into communities,
  primary schools widespread, sometimes a clinic.
  Especially problematic in rural areas
• Services often generic and do not add enough
  value, eg extension
• Absence of key services, eg business advisors in
  2001 FSDP
• Services providing most value often locally
  provided, eg HBC, trad healers, local creches,
  burial societies, stokvels etc
• So
• Resources are being captured by institutions but
  not reaching clients.
• Services needed frequently should be provided
  locally
• Need to change the model if going to address
  poverty, but must be cost-effective and
  sustainable community-based services often the
  answer to reach every neighbourhood and to
  provide livelihoods.

18
Ways forward

• Model of burial societies and stokvels note
  Grameen Bank voluntary savings and loan schemes
  eg CARE OVC project
• Use of community-based worker models in Free
  State eg home based care, new project to start
  with farmer facilitators in T Nch. Kenya also
  use of community-based animal health workers,
  pump attendants could be extended widely
• Payment of stipends for HBC workers extend
  model to community-based VCT, paralegals, CB Veg
  workers, CB small stock, support for creches, CB
  literacy workers,
• farmer-farmer mentoring systems eg Free State
  farmers being used in Lesotho possibility of
  extended these models
• Increase proportion of frontline workers in all
  delivery depts
• Use of MPCCs to integrate services
• Build accountability of these workers to local
  community

19
3 Effective, well-managed, coordinated and
accountable services delivered from local
government level

• Issue
• critical level where up-flow from communities can
  meet down-flow of policy
• Local government has very limited functions
  compared to say Uganda
• Province delivers many key services, but too
  remote and unaccountable
• services dont distinguish differences between
  clients livelihoods designed accordingly
• Too much is spent on support services and not
  enough on frontline delivery
• Agencies are competing not collaborating, eg
  province-district-local egos too strong few
  real partnerships.
• Coordination poor IDP important but weak and
  methodology too complex. No carrots or sticks for
  people to participate ends up essentially
  municipal plan rather than plan for area and
  doesnt reflect real conditions (eg Naledi
  priority sanitation).
• Corruption is ongoing problem and need to
  maximise transparency to minimise
• local economic development critical to complement
  social focus focus on investment rather than
  consumption

20
Ways forward

• Establish development committee at local
  municipality level which includes prov depts,
  NGOs, which develops IDP and meets to monitor
• Link IDPs to CBP so really based on community
  views eg Naledi
• Strengthen linkage to budget in IDPs and include
  other stakeholder contributions
• Make prov depts report on progress to Council
  subcommittees as Ghana
• Capacity-building for LGs eg Project Consolidate
• Massive increase needed in focus on economic
  development looking at formal and informal
  economy, and livelihoods as well as jobs
• Move as many service delivery functions to local
  government, with staff, budgets and admin
  support. Can be seconded in interim
• Strongly encourage partnerships where shared
  competencies, eg economic development of Mangaung
  Local, district, province (viz Mangaung
  Compact)
• Use livelihoods based market research for Depts
  to define services needed (eg AICDD work in
  Uganda)
• All provincial departments need accountability
  structures with real power at subdistrict level
  as remote and unaccountable need to change
  service culture
• Redesign services to support community-based and
  local delivery approaches, especially for
  services in frequent need.

21
4 Province/district providing support and
supervision

• Issue
• local service delivery usually needs support, and
  local government needs supervision and this is
  often best provided as a regional level eg
  district/province.
• While this level conceptually should be a support
  level, in fact very limited decentralisation in
  SA means service delivery being managed at too
  high a level
• Overlap between these levels causing problems,
  duplication and wastage of resources. Needs to be
  rationalised.
• need for strategic planning (eg PGDS) and for
  regional initiatives, eg around tourism, where
  better planned at regional level, but
• Be careful of PGDS driving IDPs must be
  influence in both directions

22
Ways forward

• Differentiate roles of local municipality,
  district and province. Concentrate service
  delivery at LG level except for specialist
  services where limited resources or economies of
  scale (eg specialist hospitals)
• Increase delegation of provincial roles to LGs as
  Sports has done as intermediate step to fuller
  decentralisation. Consider assignment of
  functions
• Strengthen support, supervision and regional
  planning roles of district/province rather than
  service delivery roles
• Promote cluster working at provincial level
• PGDS should provide strategic direction to IDPs
  (eg not all municipalities have to commission
  economic strategy) but should also be informed by
  bottom-up info from IDPs (and CBP)

23
reminder
24
6 governance requirements for SLs to be achieved

• Empowering communities
• people active and involved in managing their own
  development (partic disad)
• Active, dispersed and accountable network of
  local service providers (community based, private
  sector and government)
• Empowering local government and service
  management
• at local government level, services managed and
  coordinated effectively and responsively, and
  held accountable (includes district and lower
  offices of prov.)
• at prov/district, capacity to provide support and
  supervision and strategic planning
• Realigning the centre
• Centre/province providing holistic and strategic
  direction around poverty, redistribution, and
  oversight of development (macro)
• international level strengthening capacity
  in-country to address poverty
• and that the linkages are working effectively in
  both directions

25
Conclusions

• We have made significant progress but have a lot
  farther to go we will lose at least one quarter
  of 18-64 year olds from HIV
• We need to transform systems in terms of how they
  operate, are accountable etc
• 6 governance issues provides a useful framework
• We do have a number of models and experience to
  draw on
• Much stronger community participation and role
  required, eg CBP and promotion of community
  action, funds to communities, ward committees
• Much more focus needed at level of client
  contact, through community-based services,
  increasing investment ratio of frontline workers,
  mentoring systems
• Coordination and partnership are critical need
  to reduce overlaps and duplication, and prov
  departments should report to Council portfolio
  committees

26
(No Transcript)
27
What is a livelihood?

• A livelihood is
• The capabilities, assets and activities required
  for a means of living. A livelihood is
  sustainable when it can cope with and recover
  from stresses and shocks and maintain or enhance
  its capabilities and assets both now and in the
  future, while not undermining the natural
  resource base
• (Carney,1998)

28
External environment
Formal, informal
Impact on institutions
Policies, institutions, processes
Macro Meso Micro
Capital assets
Natural
Vulnerability to stresses and shocks
Opport-unities
Human
Social
Financial
Physical
influence
influence
Livelihood outcomes desired
Impact on vulnerability
Livelihood strategies chosen
Implementation
Increasing opportunities
Impact on livelihoods
29
Need for viable strategy for economic livelihoods

• need to consider opportunities, so included in SL
  framework
• agriculture and natural resources must be a prime
  mover in rural areas - but importance often no
  longer recognised
• a vision for local economic development (LED) and
  not just macro-economic balance, including
  diversification
• need for integration of environment into
  consideration of LED opportunities - but
  difficult
• need to help with managing risks and not just
  creating income
• consider how liberalisation affects subsistence
  sector and avoid creating welfare dependents
• support for SMMEs and active role of private
  sector to support

30
International-national linkages strengthening
national capacity to support poor

• Issues
• globalisation causing loss of sovereignty and
  decision-making capacity
• liberalisation not distinguishing small-scale
  production causing massive impacts on poverty, eg
  Zambia
• net outflow from Africa to developed world
  (aidltdebt payments)
• lack of access to DCs markets for LDCs, eg in
  agriculture
• international agreements also causing strains on
  institutional capacity
• in many cases institutional destruction is
  happening from donor programmes
• Some positive examples
• Uganda taking control of PRSP process
• Botswana SRL Programme handing management of the
  programme over to Botswana

31
(No Transcript)
32

• Need to ensure that peoples livelihoods do
  improve (content) and so poverty reduce.
• How do we translate the principles into actions
  that we do differently, whether at local level,
  local government level, national level, or
  internationally?

33
Analysis

• framework developed in DFID-funded research by
  Khanya in SA, Zimbabwe and Zambia on
  Institutional Support for SLs in Southern Africa
  (using vertical transects from village to centre)
• reports at back and available at
  www.khanya-mrc.co.za
• subsequently refined based on work in 10 other
  countries in Africa, applying the SLA in
  development planning, project/programme design
  and evaluation, development of Poverty
  Strategies, project facilitation
• now leading DFID-funded action-research on
  community-based planning in Uganda, Ghana,
  Zimbabwe and SA
• we have taken the principles and applied what
  needs to happen at each level

34
Micro-meso-macro