Presentation 4.1c Citizens' engagement


Published on

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Successful in Indian context can lead to a rush to do elsewhere.
    But – very professional led “extractive”
    Requires good computational skills for market research element
    So, whose data is it?
    Also requires independent and challenging media environment
    But excellent in the “right” context
  • Examples where WA carried this out: Nigeria, Bangladesh, Ghana –
    Difference from RCs is that CSs are DIRECT, RCs are done on behalf and advocated through media
    So this limits size of area but increases directness of engagement
    successes gained –
    Lessons much to do with ensuring voice across all community sections (esp women and poorest)
    Also how to gain trust of LAs to get involved – ensure inclusion from start
    Also – local politicians can get jealous – this is our role beinmg stolen from us, they may think – include them as context requires
  • Examples
    Waterpoint mapping in Malawi, Tanzania – hard for officials etc to question the visible evidence – so very effective
    Question – how to keep info up to date? Who does so, who pays etc?
    Slum mapping – bought into WASH sector from slum dwellers mapping in Mumbai etc.
    Done in Kampala to good effect,
    Great way of making communities VISIBLE
  • Appropriate where culture and political environment is conducive...
  • So - as said on slide – requires numeracy – so some external support often needed
    But as problem is often not budgetting but actual disbursement... this can be a v effective tool where this is the main issue
    Is an excellent learning process for local people in the processes of local government finance – so provides basis for ongoing engagement
  • A significant development – do-able only where previous processes have paved the way for such a deep engagement level
  • Presentation 4.1c Citizens' engagement

    1. 1. Module 4 Taking Action Session 4.1 Building accountability through citizens’ engagement ACRA training workshop, Nov 2010 Strengthening transparency, integrity and accountability: preventing corruption in water and natural resources projects IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre
    2. 2. Accountability routes Source – “Making services work for poor people” the World Development Report, World Bank, 2004
    3. 3. Objectives • To introduce a range of tools • To highlight examples – Which can be used singly or in combination • Key point – there are many methods known but probably as many which are not • Set scene for discussion
    4. 4. Raising citizens voice • Low feedback: low performance • Empowers citizens to give feedback and seek improvements • Build capacity, analyse performance, understand entitlements, dialogue with providers Objective: structured, institutionalised dialogue & engagement of communities and providers
    5. 5. Tools Citizens voice – Report cards – Community scorecards – Access mapping – Expenditure/performance tracking & monitoring – Participatory budgeting – Public hearings – Freedom of Information (covered later today)
    6. 6. Citizens’ needs Seeking Accountability • Community wide picture of current service levels • Understanding of what it should be • Who is responsible? • Then – people are in position to ask why, seek solutions Information needs • Regular reports and accounts • But often not produced, or accessible • Key indicators e.g. no. of connections, charges, response to complaints • Simple summaries of key information can be more widely distributed • Using utility bills, media...
    7. 7. Report cards • Public Affairs Centre (PAC), Bangalore • Rank performance of public service agencies (including water) • Monitored through survey research (equiv: polling): – Satisfaction with staff, – Quality of service, – Information provision, – Corruption. • Revealed: Low levels of public satisfaction, Agencies not citizen friendly, lacked customer orientation, Corruption: serious problem.
    8. 8. Report cards (2) • Report cards influenced key officials in understanding perceptions of ordinary citizens • Public agencies launched reforms to improve the infrastructure and services • Government agencies showed greater transparency and more responsiveness • RCs acted as a catalyst in the transformation of services in Bangalore • Role of strong media • Extractive data capture
    9. 9. Community scorecards • Community members decide on service aspects to incorporate • Input tracking matrix developed (understanding of entitlements, budgets, constraints etc) • Discuss and then score aspects of service • Service providers encouraged to do the same • “Interface meeting” held (District Forum?) • Low score items addressed and action plan produced • Directness of approach valued, rural setting more appropriate?
    10. 10. Mapping Access • Valuable, visual tool: • Rural waterpoints Unequal distribution – skewed funding... – Officials confronted by inequity, corruption • Slum enumeration & mapping – Poor on the map for the first time – Corrupt reporting, – practices identified...
    11. 11. Public hearings/meetings • A normal function of government • Provide information and solicit views • Flow of information • Enables scrutiny • Use collective power against vested interest • Better relationships • People’s Juries one example – from India • Locally generated info to plug gaps • Basis for discussion, planning
    12. 12. Public expenditure tracking • Tracks flow of funds • Do public funds end up where they are supposed to? • Compare central disbursement of funds with local expenditure • Requires: – high level of literacy, – independent research capacity • Example in Bangladesh showed subsidy capture by elite – Entailed diversion to “connected” people • CBOs motivated to learn to do it themselves – Process developed to participatory budgeting 12
    13. 13. Participatory budgeting • A further step….giving communities specific control over some budgets • Involve citizens in investment setting and oversight of expenditure • In Belo Horizonte, 40% investment now spent this way – resulted in shift towards sanitation and basic infrastructure (roads)
    14. 14. Thanks!
    15. 15. Participants’ experiences • Participants – what are your experience(s)? • This can be citizen or regulator led • Experience from other sectors welcome too