Policy Issues And Challenges In Local Governance

Policy Issues and Challenges in Local Governance JESSE M. ROBREDO Mayor, Naga City ANGOC-JICA 3rd Country Training Program

August 29, 2006 SEAMEO-INNOTECH, Quezon City, Philippines

Outline □ Local governments in the Philippines □ The operating environment □ Challenges in local governance: The case of Naga City □ Policy issues in local governance □ The innovations paradox □ Institutional performance in support of of decentralization

□ What needs to be done

Subdivision of the Philippines □ 17 administrative regions □ 80 provinces □ 117 cities With mandatory LSBs □ 1,501 municipalities □ 41,939 barangays Barangay LSBs/School governance councils

Types of local governments □ Barangay - the smallest political subdivision of the country □ City and municipality consists of a group of barangays, usually covering a contiguous area □ Main difference lies in the level of urbanization. Indicated by the minimum requirements for conversion into a city: □ Average annual income of at least P100 million for last two consecutive years based on 2000 constant prices □ Population of at least 150,000, and □ Territory of at least 100 sq. kms.

□ Province - the biggest political subdivision comprises of a cluster of municipalities and component cities

Operating environment Three forces interact with local government: □ NGO sector. By and large, an active nongovernment sector in the Philippines

□ Especially true in Naga, where NGO accreditation has been in place since 1993. Close to 100 accredited NGOs and POs of various ideological persuasions. Most belong to Naga City People’s Council (NCPC).

□ Media. Philippine media reputed to be Asia’s freest. True both at the national and local levels

□ In Naga, three local TV stations, around 7 radio stations and 7 local newsweeklies

□ National government. A political factor, especially if chief executive belongs to the opposition. Very little resources from the top

□ Naga City largely depends on its own, operating as if the national government does not exist

Problem setting Naga a typical Philippine city: □ medium-sized, not big □ 137,000 population (2000 census) □ Daytime population of around 250,000

□ landlocked, not a port city □ has no shipping industry

□ peripheral, not central □ 500 kms away from Metro Manila, Metro Cebu

Why change was needed

„

„

„ „

Old politics—disdains change and seeks to maintain status quo Patronage was the rule. City Hall teemed with political appointees. A minority mayor (winning only 24% of the vote). Winning margin of less than 1,000. Owed political debt to former mayor Had to work with an opposition-controlled city council (7 of 12)

„

Demoralized workforce „

„ „

POLITICAL „

CORPORATE

„

“15-30” employees

Widespread patronage system Low pay Culture of mediocrity „

”for compliance” mentality

SOCIETAL „ „ „ „ „ „ „ „

Naga's eroded distinction as Bicol's premier city Public market in shambles; soon hit by a fire that ate up 1/3 of available space Congested central business district Sluggish local economy Scarce employment opportunities Proliferation of smut films and lewd shows Rampant illegal gambling Growing urban poor population

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Modified Krüger model

Transition Phase C u lt u re

Fi t

□ Can be explained by a modified Krüger Model of the change process □ Made iterative through a participative, dynamic visioning process

Re p i sis sh r ta o Present s nc n o State e Sp

Desired State

n io sit an Tr

□ On hindsight, Naga is a case study in change management

The Change Process

PARTICIPATIVE VISIONING

Evolution of city vision □ Built around the concept of creating a niche for Naga □ Rallying people on need to restore local pride □ Institutionalized participative visioning process facilitates community ownership “A City for the People” (1988-95)

“Uswag Naga 1998” (1995-98)

“An Maogmang Lugar” (1998 onwards)

Confidence building phase which laid down groundwork for reforms within City Hall and in the community

Emphasis on economic growth; period of rapid economic expansion

Redefinition of shared vision towards becoming an inclusive city and model of participative urban governance

“SELLING THE VISION”

Communication strategy □ Various approaches utilized by leadership in presenting the corporate mission/vision to its constituency □ Goal is securing their support so that the corporate vision becomes a shared community vision □ Includes the use of logos and sloganeering

“Kauswagan kan Naga—Kun Bako Ngonian, Nuarin Pa?”

Strategies and outcomes PHASES

STRATEGIES/MANIFESTATION

OUTCOMES

Sponsorship

• Vision-selling through social marketing: “Naga’s Progress—If Not Now, When?” slogan • Operationalized our 1988 election campaign vision of “City for the People” into three doable elements: inspiring governance, renewed community pride, and economic recovery and progress. • More than 30 court cases filed against city government by nightclub, bus terminal operators • Political conflict between city government and other politicians behind illegal vices

• Shared city vision • Bureaucratic reforms: elimination of patronage, results-oriented management • Societal reforms: anti-vice drive vs. smut films, lewd shows and gambling • Expansion of business district through bus terminal relocation

Resistance

• General approval from key sectors of society, i.e. church, business • “Wait-and-see” attitude from the general public, local civil society

Strategies and outcomes Transition

• Sustain confidencebuilding measures by forging sustainable partnerships, i.e. with business sector, local civil society • “Growth with equity” development philosophy

Culture fit

• Governance framework anchored on leadership, partnerships and participation

• High approval rating from the general public • Rapid economic growth, jumpstarted by private sector-led property development (Panganiban area upgrading, satellite and district markets, etc.) • Continuing professionalization of local bureaucracy (PIP, Quality Service Improvement Program) • Dialog, engagement and partnership with NGOs and POs, e.g. NGO-PO Council • Culture of excellence in the local bureaucracy • National and international recognition as center of local governance innovations • Entry of more private sector-led development initiatives: CBD II, South Riverfront, Southwest, East Highlands Ecotourism, etc. • Novel participation mechanisms: referendum, Naga City People’s Council (NGO federation co-managing the city)

Service quality improvement □ PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (PIP) □ Sought to improve both processes and procedures (systems change) and values and culture (people change) □ “Performance Pledge” □ Annual Very Innovative Person Award for cost reduction measures □ Productivity Improvement Circles

Service quality improvement □ PUBLIC SERVICE EXCELLENCE PROGRAM (PSEP) □ Linked service values and orientation with existing procedures. Continually proposed improvements whenever possible □ Documentation of City Government’s frontline services. Laid down foundation for Citizen’s Charter □ Expanded service listings in the Performance Pledges

THE NAGA GOVERNANCE MODEL

A guiding framework Guided by its experience, Naga City evolved its own governance model □ Progressive development perspective. Seeks

prosperity-building tempered by an enlightened perception of the poor

□ Functional partnerships.

Vehicles that enable the city to tap community resources for priority undertakings □ Participation. Mechanisms that ensure long-term sustainability of local undertakings

The Naga Governance Model

DOING MORE WITH LESS

Building partnerships □ Tapped community resources in implementing development programs and projects □ By design, almost all city programs are implemented in partnership with both GO, NGO sector □ Complements City Hall’s limited resources. Doing more with less

□ Illustrative examples:

□ Kaantabay sa Kauswagan – tripartism □ Emergency Rescue Naga – pooling together of people, equipment, facilities, other resources of local schools, police and fire departments, amateur radio groups, national and local health agencies □ NEED and School Board education projects – city government, DepEd, NACITEA, PTAs, barangays, other stakeholders

THE IMPERATIVES FOR

People participation □ At the operational and practical level, partnerships work best among organized groups and institutions □ Can exclude community at large (particularly marginalized sectors and individual citizens) reducing them to mere spectators □ Partnerships must be complemented by mechanisms that mainstream the marginalized, and actively engage them in governance

SHAPING, INSTITUTIONALIZING FUNCTIONAL

Participatory mechanisms □ Continuing NGO accreditation □ After the Code was passed, Naga was among the first to implement the provision mandating NGO accreditation. □ During its first run in 1993, more than 40 applied with the city council and were duly accredited.

□ Multi-level consultation mechanisms □ Under Naga SPEED component, multiple consultation channels were set up □ Specific sectors, groups, or the entire constituency can participate in identifying and affirming developmental priorities

SHAPING, INSTITUTIONALIZING FUNCTIONAL

Participatory mechanisms □ Referendum on development issues □ On August 6, 1993, Naga pioneered the conduct of a citywide referendum when three development issues were submitted to Nagueños for decision □ In the process, the city government demonstrated that participation even at this scale works

□ The Empowerment Ordinance and the Naga City People’s Council □ Through a landmark legislation, the local government initiated a system of partnership wherein it encouraged the federation of NGOs and POs into the Naga City People’s Council (NCPC) □ Institutionalized a system of self-regulation among the rank and file of NGOs and POs in the city

FUNCTIONS OF THE

Naga City People’s Council The council □ appoints NGO representatives to local special bodies of the City Government □ observes, votes and participates in the deliberation, conceptualization, implementation and evaluation of projects, programs and activities of the City Government □ proposes legislation, participates and votes at the committee level of the Sanggunian, and □ acts as the people's representatives in the exercise of their constitutional rights to information

2ND LEVEL OF PARTICIPATION: ENGAGING WITH INDIVIDUALS

The i-Governance Program

□ A program that identifies and uses various tools to:

□ encourage participation in government decision-making, especially by individual citizens and households □ concretize the governance principles of transparency and accountability

□ Allows city government to meet the challenge of sustaining innovative approaches by:

□ Doing more with less □ Improving and ensuring equitable service delivery

PROGRAM COMPONENTS

Delivery mechanisms 1. Analog or paperbased tools. Addresses

need of around 67% of population without ICT access ƒ Performance Pledges ƒ Citizens Board ƒ Naga City Citizens Charter

2. Digital or ICT media (eGovernance) ƒ naga.gov initiative, through the city’s website www.naga.gov.ph

3. Mobile Governance.

Uses cellphones which have higher penetration rate than dialup internet. Around 67% of households own a mobile phone. ƒ TxtNaga

4. Network access improvement. Addresses

digital divide through strategic IT investments ƒ Cyberschools (Click Project) ƒ Cyberbarangays

City website □ Maximizes web technology

□ Within reach of local resources and capability in a developing country □ Offers access to information on Naga, including city government financial reports □ proposed and approved annual operating budget □ quarterly financial statements □ bid tenders, and bidding outcomes □ Platform for communicating requests and complaints in cost-effective and efficient manner □ Contains a digital version of the Charter (called NetServe) and the Citizens Board

TxtServe Naga

A MOBILE GOVERNANCE ENGAGEMENT TOOL

□ Allows citizens to send complaints, other concerns to City Hall through SMS or text messaging □ Previously uses Smart Telecommunication’s 2960 facility

□ Reconfigured early this year to meet local needs more fully □ Owned by city government, instead of being Smart network dependent

WHY IS D YOUTH CNTER\'S POOL W/C S SUPPOSD 2 B PUBLC POOL BEING CLOSED COZ PRIVATE SKOLS\' P.E. STUDENTS R USING D WHOLE POOL EXCLUSIVELY? why?

TxtServe Naga, Reloaded i-GOV’S MOST PROMISING FRONTIER

□ TXTNAGA Hotline – a locally managed and controlled SMS messaging system Consists of

□ a PC □ a GSM/GPRS modem □ TXTNAGA hotline with Globe Telecoms (0917-TXTNAGA or 0917-8986242), and □ SMS applications developed by local programmers

ADVANTAGES:

□ Locally managed, customizable and therefore more flexible, instead of being network dependent □ More accessible to ordinary citizens. Less than P1 per SMS sent vs. P2.50 under the 2960 service □ More cost-effective in the long-run

The Innovations paradox A POLICY ISSUE IN LOCAL GOVERNANCE

□ “But if [innovation] sounds so simple, why is it so difficult for institutions to innovate?” □ Peter Senge, senior lecturer at MIT, after listening to Peter Drucker describe three elements of the discipline of innovation in 1998

□ Philippine institutions also need to ask a similar question – especially 15 years after enactment of 1991 LGC □ “In spite of the opportunities described above, why it is difficult for innovative ideas and endeavors to be scaled up and adopted by the mainstream?

Opportunities □ Policy environment □ Local Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act No. 7160) – local autonomy law adopted decentralization as development strategy; devolved powers, authority, resources and accountability to local government units □ Supreme Court rulings affirming local autonomy – IRA impoundment (vs national government), utilization of SEF (vs COA), etc

Opportunities □ LGU exemplars □ Local authorities and communities that continue to ‘push the envelope’ of innovations in governance: □ Naga, Cebu, Marikina, San Fernando, La Union (cities); □ Bulacan, Nueva Vizcaya, Oriental Negros, Bohol (provinces); □ Concepcion, Iloilo; Upi, Maguindanao; Irosin, Sorsogon (municipalities) □ Lahug, Cebu City; Calag-itan, Hinunangan, Leyte; Tabuk, Mandaue City (barangays)

Opportunities □ Support systems □ LGU awards programmes: Galing Pook, Clean and Green, Most Competitive Cities etc □ Grants, technical assistance programmes: □ WB’s Panibagong Paraan; AusAID, ADB, CIDA programs for local development initiatives (foreignassisted) □ Synergeia Foundation; Foundation for Worldwide People Power; etc (local + foreign assisted) □ Kilos Asenso (?) – proposed grants matching program in 2006 GAA. Conceptually sound. Implementation mechanism, implementors’ credibility are suspect

Institutions and human development □ In Philippine context, 1987 Constitution mandates local autonomy as state policy □ Operationalized through Local Government Code of 1991 □ Envisions partnership between national government, LGUs (provinces, city/municipality and barangay), and civil society organizations (CSOs) in promoting development in local communities

□ 15 years later, there is need to assess impact of these institutions in enlarging people’s choices in the context of decentralization strategy

Three propositions for investigation □ Based on “Declaration of Policy” (Section 2, RA 7160) □ Responsive and accountable local government structure (Sec. 2a) □ Exacting public accountability (Sec. 2b) □ Building stakeholdership (Sec. 2c)

Responsive and accountable govt structure □ Section 2a - development of self-reliant communities that will be more effective partners of the national government as end-goal of local autonomy □ Broadly, how strong or weak are the institutions involved in the decentralization process? □ More specifically

□ How self-reliant are the communities that we have today? □ How autonomous are the local government units (provincial, city/municipal, and barangays) that are supposed to facilitate the development of self-reliant communities? □ To what extent has the national government decentralized power, authority, responsibilities and resources to bring about genuine local autonomy under the LGC? And how were these carried out by national agencies at the regional level?

My sense □ Decentralization flattened government structure from vertical top-down orientation towards broad-based horizontal one □ Contributes to tremendous resiliency of the Philippines

□ There are less self-reliant communities □ But self reliance should be measured in terms of outcomes, not just IRA dependency

□ Lack of focus, weak policy support at national level. National government still competes with LGUs in service delivery □ National agencies should focus on quality assurance □ Impels need for best practice-driven policymaking

Exacting public accountability □ Section 2(b) - mechanisms of exacting accountability from local governments □ Operative principles behind public accountability are information openness and transparency. The LGC requires this of all LGUs □ Broadly, how open and transparent are the institutions involved in the decentralization process—from national, regional, provincial, city, municipal to barangay levels? □ Are their annual budgets and performance reports readily accessible to the public? □ How many NGOs and civil society organizations have been accredited by the LGUs? How many of these sit in the local special bodies? More importantly, how are these NGO representatives selected? □ To what extent has the national government promoted transparency and good governance among LGUs?

Building stakeholdership □ Section 2(c) - more about citizen empowerment, which is at the heart of human development □ Stakeholder participation a key to better services and more effective programs and projects. Ensures success and sustainability □ Most development outcomes today are in spite of, not direct consequence of institutions working together in Philippine governance □ They can be much better if HD interventions are planned and integrated with active participation of stakeholders at all levels of government

Building stakeholdership □ There is need to look closer at the entire governance machinery (from planning to monitoring and evaluation) in ensuring that public investments on HD matter □ To what extent do stakeholders participate in governance processes at the local (barangay, city/municipality, provincial), regional and national levels? □ Is their participation limited only to planning? implementation? monitoring and evaluation? □ To what extent are these plans implemented? □ What mechanisms have been used to regular report progress of implementation to stakeholders? Are these reporting mechanisms effective?

What needs to be done □ Human development indicators to become primary outcome-oriented public accountability measure □ Implications: □ We should not stop at measuring HDI and its related indicators merely for its sake; rather, we should promote and mainstream it as a tool to exact public accountability. □ This will require thrusting HDI into the political realm: □ as part of the political discourse □ as primary issue over which citizens judge their leaders during elections

What needs to be done □ “Best practices” driven policy making □ Next logical step to local awards programmes and ongoing efforts to replicate best practices over the last 15 years □ We should set the bar higher for local governments. If not now, when?

What needs to be done □ Link innovation by local authorities to public accountability □ According to Drucker, the discipline of innovation has 3 elements: (1) focus on mission, (2) define significant results, and (3) do rigorous assessment □ Rigorous assessment requires abandoning what doesn’t work after assessing results □ In the Philippines, it should include ditching political leaders who are not able to deliver results

What needs to be done □ Promote and enforce information openness as fundamental public policy

□ In Rogers’ diffusion of innovations theory

□ Free flow of information is paramount □ Opinion leaders exert strong influence in the process, and □ Change agents/gate keepers also play a key role

□ Under “information openness” regime

□ National leaders become lead change agents by setting the primary example of transparency and accountability □ The role of gatekeepers is minimized