Participation, transparency, and downward accountability in district planning in Mozambique

 71282 FINAL REPORT August 2002 Participation, Transparency, and Downward Accountability in District Planning in Mozambique Rodrigo Serrano (consultant) Report prepared as an input for the design of the ―Decentralized Planning and Finance Project.‖ Commissioned by the Water and Urban Group 1, Eastern and Southern Africa, World Bank.  1 CONTENTS List of Acronyms Executive Summary I. Introduction II. Analytical Framework 1. Key Definitions 2. A Participation and Accountability Perspective of a District Plan III. The Institutional Context for Local Governance 1. Government 1.1. Government Structure 1.2. Policy Framework 1.3. Statutory Framework 2. Civil Society 2.1. Social Capital 2.2. Local Democratic Culture IV. The Decentralized Financing and Planning Program (DFPP) in Nampula— Strengths and Limitations 1. The Program in a Nutshell 2. Strengths & Limitations V. Issues, Options, & Mechanisms for Improved Local Governance 1. Organizing Communities 1.1. Principles for Creating Community Organizations 1.2. Models of Community Organizing 1.3. The Recommended Model 1.4. Who Should Promote Organizing and How? 1.5. Incentives 1.6. Risks and Mitigating Measures 1.7. Minimum Standards 2. Structuring the Local Dialogue 2.1. Organizational Structure 2.2. The Content of the Dialogue 2.3. Risks and Mitigating Measures 2.4. Minimum Standards 3. Executing the Action Plan 3.1. Contracting 3.2. Building 3.3. Operation and Maintenance 4. Accountability about Plan Implementation 4.1. Organizational Infrastructure  2 4.2. Transparency & Communication 4.3. Rewards & Sanctions 5. Capacity Building and Training 5.1.Principles for Effective Capacity Building 5.2. Provincial Administration 5.3. District Administration 5.4. Civil Society VI. Conclusions and Recommendations 1. The Institutional Context for Local Governance 2. Strengths and Limitations of the Nampula Project 3. Issues, Options, and Mechanisms for Improved Local Governance VII. Annexes 1. Terms of Reference 2. List of People Interviewed/Met 3. Bibliographical References  3 List of Acronyms AD Administrador Distrital CE Conselho Executivo CCD Conselho Consultivo Distrital CCPA Conselho Consultivo do Posto Administrativo CDL Comissão de Desenvolvimento Local DDP District Development Plan DPFP District Planning and Finance Program ET Equipa Técnica FL Fórum da Localidade GOM Government of Mozambique IG Interest Group LDF/DDF Local Development Fund/District Development Fund MAE Ministério de Administração Estatal MAMM Moma, Angoche, Mogincual, and Mogovolas MPF Ministério de Plano e Finanças NGO Non Government Organization PIP Public Investment Program PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal PTIP Plano Trienal de Investimento Publico SNV Netherlands Development Organization UNCDF United Nations Capital Development Fund WB World Bank  4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY1 INTRODUCTION 1. The purpose of this report is to provide diagnostic elements to assist in the design of the participation and downward accountability system of the District Planning and Financing Program that the World Bank and the Government of Mozambique are negotiating for implementation in four provinces of the center region of the country. 2. The report is based on a three-week mission in Mozambique and the review of secondary sources. During the mission I interviewed a broad range of stakeholders which included government officials at the national, provincial, and district levels, donor agencies, consultants, and civil society representatives from communities and NGOs. In addition, I visited three experiences (UNCDF/UNDP‘s in Nampula, Concern‘s in Machaze, and ADEL‘s in Buzi) and reviewed written materials. ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK In this section I define three core concepts (participation, accountability, and community) and present a framework for analyzing participation and downward accountability in district planning. The framework is divided in four components, which correspond to the four stages of the planning process:  First, the rules and processes government applies during the diagnostic stage to gather community preferences regarding local development priorities.  Second, the rules and processes government uses during plan preparation to translate community input into a district development plan. Important principles here are  Third, the rules and processes government establishes during plan implementation to elicit community involvement.  Fourth, the rules and processes government implements during the plan‘s monitoring and evaluation to enable communities to hold government accountable for plan implementation. INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT FOR LOCAL GOVERNANCE The institutional context for local governance in Mozambique makes promoting true participation and downward accountability a significant challenge. Key limitations are:  the absence of elected district authorities and a district budget,  a very centralized government structure  poorly trained and equipped staff at the district level  a thin stock of linking social capital to connect civil society with government decision- making  a weak democratic culture at the local level, partly due to the recency of independence from colonialism, a protracted civil war, and a very young multi-party democracy Despite these limitations, Mozambique also counts with positive assets and signals to start the process of building good local governance. Some of them are: 1 This is a very short summary of the analysis and recommendations contained in the report. A more detailed summary appears in the conclusions and recommendations section.  5  government interest in developing a more statutory basis for civil society participation in government decision-making, through Consultative Councils at the District and PA level. Evidence of this are the Decree 15/2000 and a Draft Law of State Local Bodies.  a thick stock of bonding social capital that could facilitate the thickening of linking social capital, as well as local experiences in developing linking organizations that serve as pilot models to be scaled up.  a rich array of experiences with participatory district planning that have tested different methodologies and develop some local capacity for conducting them. The most promising of these experiences is the UNCDF/UNDP pilot in Nampula. This pilot has demonstrated that it is possible to mainstream a participatory district planning process managed by public officials using public administration procedures. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THE NAMPULA PROJECT The overall conclusion is that the Nampula model has several strengths that need to be preserved as well as several limitations that should be addressed. Key strengths and limitations are analyzed. ISSUES, OPTIONS, AND MECHANISMS FOR IMPROVED LOCAL GOVERNANCE Key recommendations to improve the participation and downward accountability component of the DPFP being designed by the WB and the GOM are:  Develop a strategy for creating linking social capital. The proposed strategy is twofold: create mandatory Forums de Localidades in each localidade and create incentives for the voluntary formation of Commissoes de Desenvolvimento Local (CDLs) at the povoacao level. Section V.1 discusses the advantages of this strategy as well as provides recommendations on who should be responsible for implementing it, on what incentives should be given for organizing, and the risks of this strategy.  Improve the structures that the Nampula model has piloted for civil society-district government dialogue. It is recommended that the FLs act as an informal structure for this dialogue and that formal dialogue through CCs takes place at the PA and district level. Criteria for civil society representation in CCDs and CCPAs are proposed. Key issues that should be present in the production of the district plan are discussed, such as: (i) including an annex in the DDP where the List of Community Priorities identified in each CCPA is presented; and (ii) developing a plan for community self-help activities.  Improve participation and downward accountability in subproject implementation by increasing transparency and information release about public procurement, creating community oversight committees and community-based operation and maintenance management committees;  Creating conditions for downward accountability about plan implementation are suggested. They include: electing civil society representatives to participate in the CCs for a certain period of time and mandating instances for them to report back to their constituencies; ensuring that administrative rules for planning, budgeting, financial management, and procurement are transparent; develop an aggressive communication strategy; and a system of rewards and sanctions that provides incentives both the district staff and the local population to engage in good local governance.  Strengthening the capacities of provincial and district officials, as well as community leaders and members. I discuss principles for effective capacity building, and make  6 recommendations for developing a professional development program at the provincial level, a learning program that matches good and bad performing districts to exchange information, the creation of provincial and district participatory development coordinators, and actions to improve community capacities.  7 I. INTRODUCTION 1. The purpose of this report is to provide diagnostic elements to assist in the design of the participation and downward accountability system of the District Planning and Financing Program that the World Bank and the Government of Mozambique are negotiating for implementation in four provinces of the center region of the country. Specific objectives of the study (see Terms of Reference in Annex) are:  To review the current rules, regulations and institutional arrangements for community participation and accountability in Mozambique.  To propose institutional arrangements and mechanisms that will improve people‘s participation in decision making during the district planning process and during the implementation of the resulting district plans and projects.  To review and propose ways (e.g. communication strategy, flow of information) in which the district administration or others handling public resources could report faithfully to beneficiaries on the intended and actual use of resources at the local level.  To assess and propose institutional mechanisms through which local communities can regulate the behavior of district officials involved in the management of public resources and the provision of public services.  To propose capacity building needs and institutional arrangements to improve participation, transparency and accountability at community and district levels. 2. The report is based on a three-week mission in Mozambique and the review of secondary sources. During the mission I interviewed a broad range of stakeholders which included government officials at the national, provincial, and district levels, donor agencies, consultants, and civil society representatives from communities and NGOs (see Annex for a detailed list). In my field trips I paid particular attention at three experiences: the UNCDF/UNDP‘s funded pilot in Nampula, ADEL‘s program in the district of Buzi, province of Sofala; and Concern‘s experience in the district of Machaze, province of Manica. I also drew from written material such as mid-term evaluations, consultants reports, and the best practice study on community participation in Mozambique funded as part of the DPFP formulation process 2 (see Annex for a detailed list of the references consulted). By the end of the mission I had meetings to present my preliminary observations with government officials and donors‘ representatives. A Draft version of this report has been reviewed and discussed by a large number of people, to whom I want to express my gratitude for their very useful feedback..3 In particular, I would like to thank Louis Helling for his excellent feedback and contributions to the report. Finally, I would like to thank all those who helped me during my stay in Mozambique 3. The Report is organized in five sections:  The next section, section two, defines a framework of the key dimensions that affect the quality of a participatory and accountable district planning process; 2 See Matakala and Cavane (2002). 3 Ministry of Planning and Finance: Roberto Salomão, Eugénio Simbine and UNDP Technical Advisor Nelson Amaro; Ministry of State Administration: Luciano Norte; Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development: Jose Mathe; Consultants: Eunice Cavane, Patrick Matakala, Anselmo Zimba, Filimone Meigos, and Luis Artur; DPFP Nampula: Castro Sanfins; DPFP Coordination Unit: Custodio dos Mucudos and Taquidir Bacar; Donors: Jan- Willem le Grand (Netherlands Embassy), Havard Hoksnes (Norwegian Embassy), Bernard Weimer (Swiss Cooperation), Rikke Fabienke (UNDP), and Kristin Wambold-Leibling (UNCDF); Aniceto Bila, Louis Helling, and Kate Kuper (World Bank).  8  Section three analyzes the institutional context that exists in Mozambique for rural local governance.  Section four describes the main features of the Nampula Project and analyzes its main strengths and limitations in terms of participation and downward accountability;  Section five presents options and mechanisms for addressing the limitations of the Nampula Project;  Section six summarizes the main conclusions and recommendations. II. ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK 4. In this section I define key terms that are used throughout the paper and present a framework for analyzing the district planning process from a participation and accountability perspective. 1. Key definitions 5. Three concepts that are at the core of this analysis and that require some sort of definition are: participation, accountability, and community. 6. Participation. Despite the multiple definitions of participation, each one with a different emphasis, most scholars agree that it is ―a process by which people, specially disadvantaged people, influence decisions that affect them‖ (World Bank, 1992, p.177) as opposed to one where decisions are imposed on them by hierarchical outside agencies. The rationale for promoting participation is to ensure that communities play an active role in the decisions which affect their lives and to make governments more accountable: ―as participation increases, vital information not in the public domain becomes available and the voices of interested parties can help make governments more accountable; both in turn enhance performance‖ (World Bank 1994, p.3). 7. Accountability. The concept of accountability stands on two pillars: answerability and enforcement:  Answerability is ―the obligation of public officials to inform about and to explain what they are doing‖ (Schedler 1999, p. 14). Answerability implies a double quest for information and explanation or justification. The informational dimension involves the right to receive information and the corresponding obligation to release all necessary details. It is basically a monitoring activity concerned with obliging power holders to exercise power in transparent ways. The argumentative dimension involves the right to receive an explanation and the corresponding duty to justify one‘s conduct. It forces power holders to justify their acts, to give valid reasons.  Enforcement is ―the capacity of accounting agencies to impose sanctions on power holders who have violated their public duties.‖ (p. 14) The enforcement dimension of accountability implies rewarding good and punishing bad behavior. Depending on the severity of the offense, possible sanctions range from the destruction of reputation through public exposure and removal from office, through legal sanctions.  There are many types of accountability (vertical, horizontal, political, bureaucratic, etc). This study is concerned with what the terms of reference describe as “downward accountability