South Asia Regional Training on Social Accountability Tools September 18-20, Kathmandu, Nepal...
-
Upload
jonah-page -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
0
Transcript of South Asia Regional Training on Social Accountability Tools September 18-20, Kathmandu, Nepal...
South Asia Regional Training on Social Accountability Tools
September 18-20, Kathmandu, Nepal
Session on
An introduction to Governance & Accountability
2
About CUTS International
• Indian origin International Organization headquartered in Jaipur, India.
• Established in 1983, pursuing social justice and economic equity within and across borders.
• CUTS has five programme centre and six resource centers: seven in India, two in Africa (Lusaka & Nairobi), one in Geneva and one in Hanoi and have direct interventions in about 35 countries.
• Good Governance is one of the key programmatic area. Working in the area of promoting transparency and accountability at all levels of governance through increased people’s participation from its inception
• Details can be seen at: www.cuts-international.org
3
Year Sector Partner Agency Tools used
1999-2002
State Accountability Project (SAP) Ford Foundation
BudgetAnalysis
2003 Schemes and Programmes for Children Govt. of Rajasthan
BudgetAnalysis
2001-07 Power Sector Reforms FES, Germany CMC
2005-06 Measuring the Effectiveness of Mid Day Meal Scheme (MDMS)
World Bank, Washington DC
PETS & CRC
2006 India Budget Process IBP, WDC Peer Review
2007-08 Combating Corruption PTF, WDC RTI
2008-09 Assessing outputs of NREGS World Bank CRC/CSC/PETS
2008-10 Power Sector Reform in India, Bangladesh & Nepal
NORAD CRC
2009-10 Reforming Processing in Rural Development Dept., Rajasthan, India
PTF, WDC RTI
2009-10 Absenteeism & Service Delivery Monitoring in Health Sector (PATP)
R4D, WDC CMC & CRC
2010-12 Developing a culture of good governance ANSA-SAR CSC
2012 Community of Practice on Social Accountability ANSA-SAR
2012-13 MyCity: Improving quality of Urban Governance Asia Foundation CRC, PSI
SAc: Journey of CUTS
International Affiliations/Memberships• South Asia Social Accountability Network (SASANet)
• International Resource team on SAc of the WBI from 2007
• Communication for Governance and Accountability Program (CommGAP) of the World Bank
• Demand for Good Governance (DFGG) Learning Network
• Affiliated Network on Social Accountability – South Asia Region (ANSA-SAR)
• Freedom of Information Advocates Network (FOIANET)
• Governance Assessment Portal of UNDP Oslo Governance Centre
• In addition to India, hands on experience in working in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Vietnam and Nepal on SAc tools.
5
Framework for Accountability Relationships Making Services Workable for the Poor (WDR 2004)Making Services Workable for the Poor (WDR 2004)
Demand Side Approaches
Supply Side Approaches
Good Governance• Good governance is a term used to describe
how public institutions conduct public affairs and manage public
resources in order to guarantee the realization of human rights
and sustainable development.
• Governance describes "the process of decision-making, the
process by which decisions are implemented (or not
implemented) and the process by which power is exercised for
the optimum utilization of economic and social resources for
development“.
• The term governance can apply to corporate, international,
national, local governance
Governance & Key Elements
• Accountability can be defined as the obligation of power-
holders to account for their actions and behavior
• Transparency, when used in a social context, implies
openness, communication, and accountability
• Access to Information: Not piecemeal access to information,
but deliberately and systematically integrating information in the
debate on fundamental public issues to make the governance
transparent
8
Why Social Accountability
• Citizens have the right to demand accountability and the State
or the public actors have an obligation to be accountable to its
citizens.
• Fundamental principle of democracy
• Contract between the state and its citizens
• Breach of contract and failure of existing mechanisms to ensure
accountability, resulted in emergence of social accountability
What is SAc: Definition• Social accountability is an approach towards
building accountability that relies on civic engagement in which,
ordinary citizens and/or civil society organizations participate
directly or indirectly in exacting accountability
• SAc mechanisms refer to a broad range of actions (beyond
voting) that citizens, communities and civil society organizations
can use to hold government officials and bureaucrats
accountable.
• SAc mechanisms can be initiated and supported by the state,
citizens or both. But very often they are demand-driven and
operate from the bottom up
• Information & Transparency (Right to Information, Websites, Community Radio, information sharing)– Promote and create two-way-communication between government and citizens through access, disclosure, and dissemination of information and transparency norms• Participation & Consultation (Participatory Budgeting)– Encourage and mediate opportunities to build multi-stakeholder coalitions that combine public and political will for policies, public spending and project planning• Monitoring & Oversight (CRCs, CSC, PETS, Social Audits)– Empower and encourage citizens, civil society and the media to enact their rights to supervise and oversee policies, programs, projects, and services• Capacity Building (WB, ANSA, CUTS)– Educate and enable civil society, authorities, and the media to effectively participate in a multi-stakeholder debate of policies, programs, projects, and services
SAc Mechanisms-various aspects
12
Change in Approaches
• FromFrom ‘Screaming’ ‘Screaming’ toto collectivecollective ‘VOICES’ ‘VOICES’ by Citizensby Citizens
• FromFrom ‘Shouting’ ‘Shouting’ toto ‘Counting’ ‘Counting’ - quantify voice and
feedback
• FromFrom Reaction Reaction (demonstration)(demonstration) toto Informed Action Informed Action
• FromFrom Episodic Episodic (broken up)(broken up) toto Organized Action Organized Action
• FromFrom Confrontational Confrontational toto “Win-Win” situations “Win-Win” situations
13
Public Expenditure Management• Resources allocated fail to reach the intended beneficiaries• Lack of Accountability: Inefficiency, ineffectiveness and lack of
transparency in the process, resulting in week delivery and poor quality of services.
Unlimited
funding????
Leakages/corruption/Absenteeism
week delivery mechanism/
poor spending
14
PARTICIPATORY PUBLIC PARTICIPATORY PUBLIC EXPENDITURE MANAGEMENTEXPENDITURE MANAGEMENT
4 STAGE PROCESS4 STAGE PROCESS Budget FormulationBudget Formulation
How public resources are allocated Budget ReviewBudget Review
Diagnosing the implications of the budget
when formed Expenditure TrackingExpenditure Tracking
Seeing where the money goes Performance Monitoring Performance Monitoring
After the money is spent, see how the
output/service is performing
Each of these stages
can be carried out in
a participatory manner. That
is PPEM.
151515
Governance & Corruption
The manner in which the StateStateacquires and exercises itsauthority to provide public goods and services
Using publicpublic office for privateprivate gain
Corruption is an outcome – a consequence of ‘break downs’ in the governance system
Governance
Corruption
16
Existing SAc tools?
• Budget Analysis
• Participatory Budgeting
• Social Audi
• Right to Information
• Public Expenditure Tracking Survey (PETS)
• Citizen's Charter
• Public Hearing
• Citizens’ Juries
• Citizens Report Card (CRC)
• Community Score Card (CSC)
• Integrating Social Accountability aspects in design of supply side institutions and service delivery approaches toinstitutionalize them with required budgetary support
• Providing Demand-side stimulus for accountability and goodgovernance for involving users and local service providers ingiving feedback and exacting accountability
• Critical mass of in-country demand side practitioners andnetworks
Key Challenges
Improving Outcomes through Feedback
Education Service Provider
District Administration/ Government
State Government
Feedback
Accountability
Services
Redesign Programs
Reallocate Resources
Improved Quality of Service Delivery
Feedback
SAc Approaches Outcomes
Citizen Report CardsCommunity Score Cards
Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys
Right to Information (RTI) Compliance
Development Outcomes• Improved Quality of Service Delivery • Program Redesign and Resource Reallocation to Improve Program Effectiveness and Public Expenditure Efficiency • Improved Governance through Demand Side Approaches in Governance
Institutional Outcomes• Institutionalization of continuous user feedback mechanisms • Formation of community-Govt.-NGO partnerships for implementation of development programs•Stronger linkages between local governments and civil society