1

Local Governance Support Project- Learning and Innovation Component (LGSP-LIC)

Local Government Division Ministry of Local Government, Rural Development and Co-operatives

Government of People’s Republic of Bangladesh (GoB)

Local Government and Development in Bangladesh Lessons Learned and Challenges for Improving

Service Delivery of Union Parishad (UP)

by

Dr Salahuddin M Aminuzzaman Professor, Department of Public Administration

University of Dhaka

January, 2010

LGSP-LIC is implemented with support from

Copyright © 2010 by Local Government Division Disclaimer: Views expressed in this report are those of author/s and do not necessarily reflect the views of Local Government Division (LGD), Ministry of Local Government Rural Development and Cooperatives, Government of Bangladesh, any other ministry of GoB and UN agencies including UNDP and Local Governance Cluster of UNDP Bangladesh.

2

Table of Contents 1. Introduction 3

2. The policy context 3

3. Local Governance scenario in Bangladesh 4

4. Best Practices and lessons 5

5. Potential of Union Parishad as a Service Delivery Agency 8

6. Critical issues of Service delivery at the Grass Roots:

Survey findings 8

6.1 Stakeholders’ perspective:

Upazila based GoB officials, UP Representatives and Civil Society 11

7. Way forward: What should be done? 13

8. What needs to be addressed immediately? 16

9. Challenges to meet in coming days 16

8. Conclusions 17

3

1. Introduction

Local government in Bangladesh has a long historical lineage and a strong constitutional framework. The Constitution of Bangladesh is one of the most progressive ones in the region as far as the emphasis and importance to Local Government is concerned. Articles 59 and 60 set the prime foundation of the role and structure of Local Government, which is further supplemented by Articles 9 and 11 with additional attributes of the system1. Bangladesh's political context, however, poses several challenges for improved local government system. Although democracy has brought popular representation to local government, but this has not been accompanied by effective powers and a political culture to enact the local popular will. As a result, all tiers of Local Government are yet to be run by the elected bodies.

2. The policy context Importance of local government in Bangladesh has been recognized by several policy documents, including the National Rural Development Policy and the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP). The National Rural Development Policy provides support for the development of mechanisms to develop the role of the local government as a facilitator and creator of the ‘necessary conducive environment for the required services to be provided to the rural people and also expand the opportunities’. It underlines the importance of ‘accountable and responsive’ local government institutions, where ‘people will be made aware of and given access to services and opportunities offered by government’. The document further asserts:

‘The centre-piece of the National Rural Development Policy is a strong and accountable system of local government, especially the Union Parishads. Union Parishads need to be empowered with additional resources, authority and training. A transparent formula needs to be put in place by which a significant amount of funds will be devolved to the union level as a matter of right, rather than as a function of central control. Union Parishads also need to be made accountable to the people through a system of regular village meetings as well as mandatory public display of information regarding government expenditure at all levels’ (GOB, 2000:5)

Similarly the second Poverty Reduction Strategy underlines the multidimensional nature of poverty and suggests few important areas of intervention of LGIs (Local Government Institution/UPs. PRSP has recognized the need, importance and the role of Local Governments as an active partner/ implementers of the programme. PRSP categorically noted that : a. “Local governments will be involved in microcredit delivery”; b. “In order to mainstream rural non-farm activities in rural development, an institutional set-up will be formed with different stakeholders, including local government institutions”; c. “There will be involvement of local government bodies and NGOs for greater participation of the community with a view to ensuring community 1 The Constitution of Bangladesh in Articles 59 and 60 lay down a framework for local government bodies. Article 59(1) provides that ‘Local Government in every administrative unit of the Republic shall be entrusted to bodies, composed of persons elected in accordance with law. Article 59(2) provides the broad functions of local government as: ‘administration and the work of public officers; the maintenance of public order; the preparation and implementation of plans relating to public services and economic development’. Article 60 stipulates that ‘For the purpose of giving full effect to the provisions of Article 59 Parliament shall by law, confer powers on the local government bodies referred to in that article, including power to impose taxes for local purposes, to prepare their budgets and to maintain funds’. In addition to these two articles, Article 11 of the Constitution provides as a Fundamental Principle of State Policy that ‘the Republic shall be a democracy in which…effective participation by the people through their elected representatives in administration at all levels shall be ensured’.

* Paper presented to the National Workshop on How to Improve the Service Delivery of Union Parishad (UP), held at Bangabondhu International Conference Center, December 12-13th 2009, organized by the Local Government Division, Ministry of Local Government, Rural Development and Cooperatives and UNDP.

4

driven primary health care services”; d. In extending the rural road connectivity “more involvement of local government institutions (LGIs)” will be made and the LGIs will be involved in “ensuring utilization and maintenance of constructed facilities”; e. For Disaster management “greater involvement of local government bodies and emphasis on non-structural mitigation” will be given; f. For the Control of Non-communicable Diseases “the government will, in partnership with local government administration and private sector create greater awareness”; g. For promoting good governance the PRSP acknowledged the importance of local government for “Improving the quality and predictability of public service delivery, expand citizens’ participation and promotion open hearings to ensure that local government is responsive to citizens’ needs.”

Government of Bangladesh in line with the Constitutional spirit has recently enacted a new law called Union Parishad Act 2009 replacing the old UP Ordinance of 1983.The UP Act 2009 has rightly recognized the importance of community participation, transparency and accountability by including specific sections on formation of ward committees, participatory planning, access to information, and extended authority of the Standing Committee etc. However, as of date, corresponding rules/ regulations to operationalize those new sections of the new law have not yet been framed.

With this background in context, this paper attempts to make an assessment of the state of local government and its role in promotion of local governance. The primary focus of the paper is to make a brief stocktaking of the institutional learnings that have been made and the best practices have emerged over the last one decade or so in the field of local governance. The paper emphasizes on the efficacy of the local government, in particular the Union Parishad, in the process of delivery of services to the rural communities in Bangladesh.

3. Local Governance scenario in Bangladesh Local government reforms in Bangladesh evolved very distinctly according to the needs of the ruling elites (Westergaard, 2000; Khan and Hussain, 2001). With change of government, the policy of local government also kept changing. Such changes were generally dictated by the imperative of legitimizing and broadening the narrow base of the power-holders in the national government. As a consequence, LGIs have not had any opportunity to act as effective tiers of governments with mandates and funds to carry out their roles and responsibilities. Though several attempts have been made to improve local government in Bangladesh,2 they continue to be managed and controlled by the central government administrative structures. Independent reviews observed that Bangladesh has not been successful in establishing a decentralized system of governance and accountability. A World Bank review of decentralization process in 19 countries ranks Bangladesh lowest in decentralization scale (Williams, 1998).

Local government has been repeatedly identified as a key strategic sector for improving governance and development in Bangladesh3. Considering the political economy and the Constitutional commitment, decentralization is an imperative to improve service delivery, respond to the demand of the civil society, resolve conflict, address the technological changes and meet the challenges of the growing urbanization. International lessons also draw a broad

2 Four different commissions/committees were constituted in 1993, 1997, 1999 and 2008 respectively to reform/ reorganize and strengthen the role, structure and functions of local government in Bangladesh. However, it was observed that no significant attempt has subsequently been made to operationalize and/or implement the major recommendations of these reform commissions/committees. 3 All Five Year Plans of the Govt. of Bangladesh highlighted the need and importance of local government as the prime institution for revitalizing the rural hinterland of Bangladesh.

5

conclusion that decentralization is not only a political process of creating accountability but also is the best means to bring government closer to people and institutionalizing democracy. Empirical data across the continents reveal that at least 3 Fs are essential to make any decentralization process successful (Ahmed, 2007). These are: Functions, Finance and Functionaries. In Bangladesh context, unfortunately there has always been a severe imbalance among the 3Fs. Finance and Functionaries have always been a perennial problem of the LG systems in Bangladesh. Empirical evidences (Akash, 2009, Hossain Rahman, 2006, Majumdar, 2009) suggest some invisible but serious challenges that characterize the governance of the rural local government. These are: i. Continued centralized control over the UP (and thus local government) maintained through the administration and the limited resources at its disposal4; ii. the critical and often hidden role of the MPs and other political stakeholders; iii. the poor understanding of the UP role both among its members and the wider populace;

The following matrix presents the overall governance conditions and challenges of rural local government.

Summary of Local Governance Scenario

Limited understanding of functions of UP held by population at large. Community members are rarely consulted and have low expectations of what the UP will accomplish.

Low awareness: UP members are only partially aware of their formally prescribed responsibilities, and in many cases lack the skills and resources required to discharge those functions.

Power of Chair: UP membership does not itself provide any guarantee of influence over the activities in which the body engages. The Chairman is placed in a relatively powerful position, and often takes decisions in conjunction with a small circle of associates, from which women members, in particular are likely to be excluded

Exclusion of women: Most studies and assessments have found that women members are generally excluded from major decision-making arenas.

Limited and insecure revenue base: The UP has limited capacity and incentive to raise revenue and is therefore highly dependent upon central government grants.

Lack of accountability of government officials: Government officials located at union level are answerable only to their own line departments and tend not to consult with let alone coordinate work through the UP.

Highly centralized project and programme design: Evidence indicates that the upazila line staff have limited control over the types of projects to be undertaken at Upazila level. Projects are designed and decisions are being undertaken at the Ministry level and relegated to the Upazila based line agencies for implementation only.

Poor relationship between administration and elected representatives: Relationship between elected representatives and local officials is characterized by mutual mistrust, suspicion and even hostility, but this does not preclude collusion where this is in the mutual interest of the parties concerned.

Coordination power of UNO is limited: A range of line departments performing both regulatory and developmental roles are located at the Upazila. The UNO, as the senior executive cum coordinating officer, has formal responsibilities of coordination but can exert little practical control over most of the activities undertaken by line departments.

4 A recent estimate suggests that only about 2 percent of national development budget is channeled through local government system. (Akash, 2009)

6

Increasing power of MPs over the local elected actors: MPs are only expected to perform a relatively minor and advisory role at Upazila level. In practice their influence from the Union and upwards is much more extensive and their views tend to outweigh other actors.

4. Best Practices and lessons In the background of such governance context, over the years, Government of Bangladesh has experimented with a number of action learning projects to enhance the performance and institutional capabilities of the Local Government with particular focus to Union Parishad. One of such projects is the Sirajganj Local Governance Development Fund Project (SLGDFP)5.

The direct and positive impacts of SLGDFP demonstrate that real positive changes can be achieved in Bangladesh through empowering local government institutions. The major lessons learned from the project are:

As against all myths, direct fund allocation to the UPs is feasible. Direct block grant has proved to be feasible based on which Government of Bangladesh is providing direct block grants to all UPs from ADP.

Community involvement in planning, implementation, supervision and monitoring ensures efficient use of resources and helps create ownership of the people.

Citizens' committees involving UP representatives and the members of the community are effective in local level development.

UPs have become empowered to undertake development activities of the community and turned out to be more participatory than ever before.

A fair bidding process at the Union level ensures transparency and prepares the UPs to handle efficient contract management.

Participatory assessment of performance enhances capacity, transparency and accountability of the UPs.

Flexibility in process, social awareness, monitoring and project selection criteria ensure women participation in the planning processes and assure that their priorities get reflected in the final selection of the scheme.

The empirical evidences drawn from field level also suggest that the project bears significant implications for accelerated poverty reduction, social development and community empowerment in Bangladesh through the strengthening of local government. The broader lesson is that devising a comprehensive and appropriate policy, institutional and financing framework are the key factors that encourages the process of decentralization. The degree of political willingness and drive to empower elected LGIs, entrusting them with responsibilities and resources and support is a precondition for local level development. Some of the preliminary findings of the LGSP reveal that:

Allocation of block grants aimed at providing UPs directly to fund development expenditure in line with a clear transparent allocation formula help reflect the actual need of the community and can also address the need of the poor and disadvantaged.

5 Based on the successes and good practices of the SLGDFP, the Government of Bangladesh since 2006 has launched a new project called "Local Governance Support Project (LGSP)' , which aims to foster good local governance through enhanced fiscal decentralization as well as promoting poverty reduction through strengthening the capacity of UPs to deliver improved basic services to the local communities.

7

providing UPs with considerable discretion over the use of such block grants has fostered accountability and to a great extent allocative efficiencies and local participation;

pre-determined and predictable allocations make the planning process meaningful and effective;

One of the most striking learnings is that the conventional assumption of “weak capacity” of the UPs appears to be based on the false presumption. Field data reveal that UPs’ performance has noticeably improved from learning-by-doing and a more enabling framework of policies, procedures and systems.

Most of the UPs performed remarkably well as the implementation of schemes and utilization of funds were done efficiently. But, citizens' participation in budgeting and implementation process was less satisfactory.

A recent study on LGSP (Ali, 2009) draws some practical findings on LGSP. It observes that there are “acute shortage of human and logistic capacities” at the UP to smoothly run the LGSP. The study also reveals that though LGSP has pumped additional direct funding and new projects are being implemented, a significant percentage of the rural poor are still not aware of the spirit and mode of implementation of the LGSP. The study recommends the following:

There is a need for extensive trainings for the elected representatives and members of the Scheme Implementation Committee (SIC) and Scheme Supervision Committee (SSC) to ensure efficient utilization of fund and proper social monitoring and quality control of the projects under LGSP.

UP’s administrative and managerial competence has to be developed by adding various logistic supports (computer, transport facilities) and inducting technical and professional staff like -assistant engineer, computer operator and accountant.

Mass awareness of the rural community must immediately be created to enhance social accountability, participation and community based monitoring.

Non-government organizations (NGO) should be encouraged and used in inspiring people to actively participate in the development functions of Union Parishad.

Lessons from Learning and Innovation Component (LIC) of LGPS

The preliminary findings of ongoing studies6 reveal that LIC interventions of the LGSP in selected UPs have made noticeable impact on the nature and quality of service delivery system of the UPs. Following are some of the key lessons/ observations:

community’s involvement in planning, implementation, supervision and monitoring have brightened the prospect of sustainability of implemented projects;

Union Parishads have become focal points of delivery of various services at local level; Predictable funding enhanced the quality, coverage and content of the planning system

of the UPs; Union Parishads are now better working as offices and have more transparency; More conflicts are resolved at the local level due to regular and effective functioning of

the Gram Adalat.

6 Dr. Akhter Hussain, Documentation and Dissemination of Learning of LGSP-LIC,UNCDF, 2009 . and Dr. Zarina Rahman Khan, Women’s Participation in Local Development in the LIC Districts in Bangladesh, ,UNCDF, 2009

8

With the introduction of Women Development Committee (WDC) the status of women members and the women in the community has improved due to their visible role in the public sphere of planning, scheme selection and implementation. The mind of the community is changing as they themselves are part of the monitoring and supervision and can assess the women members performance.

5. Potential of Union Parishad as a Service Delivery Agency An objective assessment of the performance of the SLGDP, the preliminary findings of the accomplishments of the newly introduced LGSP and the pilot experimentation of LIC covered Union, indicate some significant potentials of UP as a unit of local level development and service delivery. Following are some of the most noteworthy potentials:

a. UPs have capability to absorb and manage additional financial resources to undertake both conventional and non-conventional development activities.

b. UPs are capable to mobilize additional resources for its own development activities with new innovative techniques and delegated authority.

c. UPs have the potential to mobilize ‘social capital’ i,e, women, community members, union facilitators to ensure ‘social accountability” and “quality assurance” of the delivery of services.

d. UPs have all potential to be more ‘responsive” to community needs and ‘accountable” to the community at large with appropriate “watch dog” role of community,.

e. Higher level of community participation has enhanced quality and durability of UP projects.

f. UP complex could be developed as a ‘development hub” with better coordination, collaboration of field level GOB extension agencies/workers and UP elected official including the UP Standing Committees.

6. Critical issues of Service delivery at the Grass Roots: Survey findings Union Parishad (UP) is the frontline local government organization closest to rural people. However the scope and quality of service delivery is one of the most critical areas that have significantly tinted the “credibility” and “institutional image” of the institution (Aminuzzaman, 2008). Failure of the UPs to respond to the dire need of the rural people, particularly the poor and disadvantaged in particular, often tend to seek services from alternative sources like the NGOs and private providers. Field observations reveal that critical service areas like education, health, nutrition, family planning, irrigation, agricultural services, and the feeder / secondary roads are all managed directly by the central government officials and their field functionaries without any involvement of the UPs either in design or implementation process. Thus institutional "isolation' and ‘incapacity’ has made UP a non-responsive body to provide critical services to the rural poor, more so to the marginalized ones.

9

The empirical data7 reveal that as high as 75% of the rural people are not satisfied with the types and nature of the services being delivered by the UP. Furthermore, it is striking to note that dissatisfaction is significantly higher among the women (see Table 1).

Table1: Gender wise distribution of satisfaction of the delivery of services by the UP

Satisfied Not Satisfied Total

Male 29.36% (69) 70.64% (166) 61.03% (235)

Female 19.33% (29) 80.67% (121) 38.96% (150)

Total 25.45% (98) 74.54%(287) 100% (385) Chi square 4.84 significant at .05 level Source: Survey data

In line with the constitution, UP Act 2009 illustrates the role and function of UPs. It identifies four broad categories of functions including “planning and implementation of social and economic development activities”. In addition, the Second Schedule of the Act illustrates 39 specific functions of the UP.

Survey data, however, ironically presents a different picture. It reveals that UPs are far from directly implementing any of such functions. Even a significant number of UP elected officials are not fully aware of such functional responsibilities of the elected body (Aminuzzaman; 2007).

The community expectations for service delivery are presented in Table 2 below. The table reveals that the most expected services the rural people want are: income generating interventions; pro-poor support, continued supply of agricultural inputs and supplies; education and community health care services, micro credit etc. But none of the desired services are either directly or indirectly provided by the UP. Thus over the years as a poor women from the study area narrates the “UPs have become a symbolic institution only important during the voting seasons. We get some assurance and also some cash bonus from the candidates”.

Table 2: Types of services expected from UP

Types of Services Male Female Both (%)

Income Generating Activities 171(72.67%) 112 (64.67%) 73.51

Pro-poor support 134 (57.02%) 95 (63.33%) 59.48

Agricultural Input 187( 79.57%) 39 (26.00%) 58.70

Education 111(47.23%) 114 (76.0%) 58.44

Small and micro Credit 92 (39.15%) 131 (87.33%) 57.92

Community Health care 113(48.09%) 85 (56.67) 51.43

Rural Infrastructure 143(60.85%) 39 (26.00%) 47.27

Maintenance of Law & Order 64 (27.23%) 81 (54.00%) 37.66

Source: Survey data The respondents were asked to further assess their level of satisfaction as regards the coverage of service delivery in selected areas (Table: 3 below). The survey data reveal a very disappointing picture. The respondents observed that in critical areas which have significant

7 A survey was undertaken for this study in 23 Union Parishad both in LGSP and non LGSP covered areas. As many as 385 adults (235 Males and 150 Females) were chosen through a purposive sampling.

10

impact on their livelihoods like fisheries/ livestock, health and family planning, irrigation and agriculture, they hardly get any service from the UP.

Table 3: Present level of satisfaction for UP Service delivery

Source: Survey data

The respondents those who are not satisfied with the performance of the UP in service delivery were asked to indentify as to why they think the UP has failed to provide necessary services to the expectation of the community members. Table 4 below presents the findings:

Table 4: Perception on why the UP fails to provide necessary services

Why UP fails to deliver services? N=287 Lack of commitment /vision of the UP leaders 77.00 Lack of Integrity and honesty 70.03 Lack of Govt. support 68.99 Failure to negotiate with GOB 66.55 Poor leadership 64.11 Lack of planning 62.40 Lack of resources 46.69 Lack of skill and expertise 37.98

According to the respondents the most significant factors that prohibit the UPs to provide necessary services to the community is lack of commitment and vision of the elected officials particularly the Chairperson of the body. Lack of Integrity and dishonesty of the leadership is also one of the critical factors. But the community members also recognized that the UPs could not negotiate with the service delivery agencies of the government and failed to put a proper strategic plan and or induce necessary services from outside. Interestingly the community members did not put very high weight on the conventional explanation like lack of resources/ skills and expertise of the UP leadership as the prime factors for failure of service delivery.

An analysis of the above empirical data draws three important conclusions:

a. A significant majority of the rural people specially the poor are not even marginally satisfied with the nature and quality of service delivery system of the UP.

Types of Services Highly Satisfied

Not satisfied at all

No such service delivered

5 4 3 2 1 Fisheries /Live stock

5.97 7.53 86.49

Health & Family Planning

1.82 4.94 8.31 84.94

Irrigation 3.12 8.83 19.48 68.57 Agriculture 5.71 9.87 11.69 10.91 61.82 Irrigation 3.12 6.23 8.83 12.73 31.95 37.14 Law and order 8.83 10.13 14.55 9.87 41.30 15.32 Salish 7.53 10.65 15.84 13.51 44.42 8.05 Education 3.90 3.90 92.21 3.90

11

b. Some of the most commonly expected services are not provided by the UP. Whatever services being provided by the UP are not responsive to the true need of the community in particular, the poorer section.

c. According to the community members, not necessarily the availability of resource and technical/ management skill but the integrity, initiatives, commitment, vision and close engagement of the UP leadership with government extension agencies are the key factors that affect the quality and nature of the service delivery of the UP.

Respondents were asked to suggest how to improve the present state of service delivery system of the UP. Table 5 presents the suggestions being put forward by the respondents. Interestingly the striking suggestion is to reduce the leakage to ensure better service delivery. The respondents also suggested that given the political milieu, UP leadership have to be persuasive in drawing more resources from the Upazila Chairman and the local Member of Parliament. They also suggested the meaningful involvement and inclusion of the community members in project design could also excel for better service delivery by the UP. Engagement with NGOs and extension workers of the GOB could also be considered as another option to improve the service delivery.

Table 5: Suggested options to improve the service delivery system of Union Parishad

Reduction of leakages/corruption 73.87 Tadbir (Persuasion) of the Upazila Chairman/ MP 70.03 Involvement of the community in the project design and implementation 69.98 Negotiation /bargaining with UNO (Dendarbaar) 66.55 More targeted grants or the poor 65.85 Joint project/ Cooperation with NGOs 65.85 Engagement with GOB extension agencies 53.66 Borrowing from Bank 34.15

Source: Survey Data ( n=287)

6.1 Stakeholders’ perspective: Upazila based GoB officials, UP Representatives and Civil Society In order to identify the major constraints of service delivery system of the UP, four FGD sessions were held at Upazila level. Each of these FGDs were attended by a number of GOB officials those who have functional relationship with UPs (including the UNOs), UP representatives, civil society and members of the community.

Two core questions were placed to the FGD sessions: a. What are the critical institutional problems that affect the quality and scope of service delivery functions of the UP? b. What could be done to address such problems?

Following are the summary of the observations:

Limited manpower and resources It is no doubt that considering the work load and responsibilities, the UPs are understaffed. UP also lacks logistic supports like computer, transport like motorbike etc. Though the UP has a relatively large tax base (as per the Model Tax Schedule), political reality and overall socio-

12

cultural and economic conditions8, do not permit the UP to collect tax up to the potential target. UPs therefore become more dependent. UPs in general lack managerial capability and resources to design and run innovative service delivery in areas like employment generation, health and education. Rather UP tend to be more interested and confined to infrastructure specially construction of roads and culverts. Delayed release of Government development grants also hampers the timely completion and quality of UP projects. There are reports that such delays also open the window of opportunity for corruption and leakages of public resources and subsequently hamper the quality of the service delivery projects.

Lack of Coordination The participants in general observed that there has a lack of coordination between UP and extension service delivery workers of the government at the field level. In fact there is no formal links even between the Standing Committees of the UP with the extension workers of the corresponding line agencies of the Government. Such isolation makes lots of the UP services dysfunction and ineffective. This also deprives the UP of getting technical assistance and other professional support from the GOB line agencies. UP Standing Committee members in particular noted that they have not enough authority to oversee / monitor the activities of the extension workers of the government. They also complain that there is no regulatory / legal framework through which UP can insist the government official to be accountable to the local elected bodies. Government extension workers informed that the physical facilities at UP complex is not yet fully ready to accommodate their work place and other structural facilities. Moreover they have not yet been formally instructed by any rules from their respective line agencies to work with and for the UPs in particular. Lack of appropriate rules and regulation During the FGD session a number of Upazila based officials acknowledged that there is a lack of appropriate integrated rules and regulations for coordination and monitoring the field level extension staff of GoB like Health Assistant, F.P Assistant, Sub Assistant Agriculture Officer, social service field workers etc.) Appropriate instructions from are missing from line ministries to provide technical support to the UPs. Ineffective monitoring The existing system to oversee and monitor UP functions are ineffective. Though the Deputy Director Local Government (DDLG) on behalf of the Deputy Commissioner is supposed to visit Union Parishad periodically but for lack of time, transport and other logistics most of the time it is difficult for the DDLG to inspect Union Parishad in due time. The conventional monitoring tool being developed by Monitoring wing of the LGD is also not done with proper care. Respective line agencies also do not monitor their UP based programmes in collaboration with the UP. Due to lack of logistic support and incentive system, the Upazila based Union Tag officers9 of respective line ministries hardly visit the UPs for supervision of development activities.

8 Field studies observed that rural people even the financially able ones are not happy with the performance of the UP. In general they consider that they do not get the real “value for their money by the services being rendered by the UP. (Aminuzzaman, 2007, Hobley 2004) 9 For each Union of an Upazila, there is a Union specific Tag Officer. The Tag Office is supposed to visit and monitor the activities of the respective Union and report back to UDCC now Upazila Parishad.

13

Lack of accountability and transparency Civil society members observed that there is hardly any scope for the members of the community to lodge any complaint to appropriate authority when there is any service delivery forgery or corruption. Most of the UPs tend to practise a ‘pseudo participatory” planning system where only handpicked persons are involved and even that is done without the knowledge of the community members at large. Such practices keep the members of community specially the marginal poor, women and destitute in complete dark about the projects undertaken by the UP. Civil society members further noted that there is no formal mechanism for the UP to work closely with NGOs. Ups are not aware what activities are being carried out by number of NGOs in their respective areas. The NGOs also being a service provider to the rural communities tend to work in isolation. These results in a lack of coordination and thus the actual needs of the community are not appropriately served and accountability and transparency to the community as well as to the UP is absent. Such lack of transparency and accountability has some bearing on the service delivery specially to the poor and disadvantaged community. Political manipulation Community people noted that influential local political elite specially of the ruling party in coalition with UP Chairman/ members tend to manipulate the service delivery process of the UP. Thus in some cases UP services are delivered on “political” criteria than “objective” assessment. This is specially true for safety net programmes. A section of UP Chairmen endorsed the observation and noted that some UP projects are determined not by “development need of the area but on the political priority of the influencing political elite”. Such elite generally refers to the ruling party local chapter and in many cases the Member of the Parliament of the constituency. It is also alleged that a new nexus has been formed between Upazila based GOB officials and MPs to dictate the UP in determining and prioritizing the projects. Non Cooperation from Upazila based bureaucracy Lack of cooperation and coordination from central govt. functionaries./ Non cooperation from field bureaucracy is also a critical factor that affects the quality and process of service delivery. There appears to be a Low trust relations between UP and Upazila Administration. A section of UP Chairmen complaints that, on various occasions, they are treated as subordinate institutions by the Upazila administration/ or a section of Upazila officials.

7. Way forward: What should be done? During the FGD sessions the participants suggested the following broad options for immediate intervention to enhance the quality and scope service delivery at the local level. Some of the suggestions are:

Institutional Strengthening of UP: Given the wide variety and expanding responsibilities especially with the assigned role and responsibilities to involver and implement the PRSP interventions, UPs need to develop its institutional capacity and human resources. The UPs should immediately be staffed with an Accountant and a Draftsman. Provision should be made to provide UP with adequate logistic support like computers, internet accessibility and other office equipment. Following the Upazila Parishad model, a position of a Female Vice Chairman may also be created. This will ensure further women representation and allow the Chairman to delegate some of the development functions.

Need for effective coordination between UP representatives and government official: Both UP representatives and government officials recognized that in order to provide better

14

services there is a need for effective coordination between UP representatives and government official both at Upazila level as well as at field level. Various Upazila level committees of the respective line agencies need to be activated under the supervision of the Upazila Parishad.

Use of UP Complex as service delivery hub: Although the UP complex is supposed to be the base station of number of specialized GOB extension workers, but at present there is hardly anyone stationed there. The mere presence of the extension workers of livestock, fisheries, agriculture, education, health and family planning would bring a significant change in the quality of delivery of services. Concerned line ministries should therefore take necessary measures to develop appropriate rules / instruction manuals for their respective extension worker to work with and for the UPs. Those who are covering a number of UPs should also be advised to maintain an office at the UP level at least for some specified days in a week. LGD should also approach different line ministries to issue circulars / memos/ instructions so that the field based extension workers of different line agencies attend UP monthly meeting regularly.

Formalizing the practice of participatory open budget: UPs have been practicing participatory open budget to ensure transparency acknowledging the community peoples’ demand. Open budget is an innovative initiative to ensure transparency which also recognizes the aspirations and needs of the community. It also reduces the external political pressure to divert UP fund for personal gains. UNOs should take active initiatives to make sure that the practice of Open Budget is operational in their respective Unions of the Upazila. However this will need specific rules and circulars from the LGD in line with the recently enacted UP Act 2009.

Activating and strengthening UP Standing Committees: By law every UP must form 13 Standing Committees (SC) concerning different areas of its operational and developmental activities. But in most cases such SCs are formed as “ritual” than as a necessity. Activating such SCs could significantly enhance the service delivery in respective areas of community need. The SCs by inducting co-opted members from the community and also from the line agency representatives could make a substantive contribution to the quality of management, supervision and monitoring of the development activities of the UP. There is also a need to ensure effective coordination between standing committee and government official so that the line agencies can synchronize their development activities and extension programmes in line with the priorities and demand of the UP.

Being innovative in mobilization of local resources: Resource mobilization is one of the major concerns for UP to deliver quality services to the community. UPs should explore the windows of opportunities to seek and generate fund from non-conventional sources. As a matter of fact, UP is formally recognized as “Partner Organization (PO)” of Palli Karma Sahayak Foundation (PKSF). UP should take initiatives to develop pro-poor projects and income generating activities to cater to the needs of the poor. UP could even go for partnership projects with NGOs using its own resources. Keeping in view the GOB policy priority on PPP, UP may also consider joint venture projects with private sector that would generate income and employment opportunities of the rural communities. However, in order to develop such projects by the UPs, there is a need for a policy guidance and corresponding rule to be framed by LGD.

Disbursement of fund: It is now evident that the delivery of services at the local level is severely affected by the late delivery of funds from the central level. Installments of fund should be given timely. By mandatory rules first installment should be released in September / October and the second must be released latest in December.

15

Effective linkage between UP and Upazilla: An effective linkage should be established between Upazilla and Union Parishad in order to ensure effective service of government official in terms of reporting system, monitoring and evaluation. There should create an opportunity to discuss the service delivery loophole and allegation in Upazila Parishad meetings.

Activating the Union Tag Officer for monitoring: Union Tag officers must be made active and accountable through appropriate circulars. Additional back up support for the UP Tag Officers’ should be arranged.

Information dissemination and social audit: NGOs and civil society bodies should undertake awareness programme to make community members more aware about the “Citizen Charter’ on UP. As a policy decision Government should encourage the NGOs and CBOs to be engaged in undertaking ‘social audit’ of the performance of the UP.

Institutional partnership with Line Agencies/ Bank/ Sector Corporations/ NGOs and Private sector: There is a need for framing an appropriate policy and corresponding rules/ regulations to institutionalize the relationship between the UP and government agencies /NGOs, CSOs and the private sector to undertake some social service and income generation programmes for the community. In order to improve the service delivery of the UP, the following collaborative/ partnership programmes with different agencies have been suggested by the members of the FGD sessions:

Nature of collaborate projects Partner Agencies Social forestation Forest department/ NGO/ CBOs Pisciculture (small water bodies which are given to the Ministry of Youth affairs should be taken back as in most cases it is being misused/unused)

Fisheries department/ Fishermen Community/ local entrepreneurs/PKSF/ NGOs

Supply of drinking water project Public Health Engineering Dept./ Private Entrepreneurs/ NGOs

Co-operative marketing system (vegetable, poultry, fish etc.)

Co-operative dept, PKSF, NGOs

Solar energy project for supply of electricity (irrigation, domestic use) through mobilization of bank loan

Local banks (Bangladesh Krishi Bank, BASIC Bank) etc., Polli Bidyut, NGOs, private sector

Small & cottage industries Bangladesh Small and Cottage Industries Corporation / NGOs/ PKSF

Power from Rice Husk /Alternative Energy Local banks (Bangladesh Krishi Bank, BASIC Bank) etc., Polli Bidyut, NGOs, private sector

16

8. What needs to be addressed immediately? In order to address the operational problems as regards service delivery and overall performance of the UP, following immediate interventions should be taken into account by the Government:

a. Formulate the rules/ regulations and related circulars to operationalize the newly introduced sections of UP Act 2009 with particular focus to Ward Committees, Citizen’s Charter, transparency, increased human resources, writing of ACR of UP staff, use of information technology, budgeting, etc.

b. Provide UPs with more human resources (as suggested in the UP Act 2009) and necessary logistics supports.

c. Ensure a regular fiscal disbursement schedule of UP funds. d. Formulate clear guidelines and instructions to ensure that UP based extension workers

of the Government are based at the UP complex or at local level. e. Activate and formalize the role of the upazila based Union Tag Officer with specific TOR

and allocation of additional logistic supports/ resources. f. Strengthen the monitoring and technical assistance role of the DDLG. g. Revision of GoB rules as regards the lease of Jal Mahals, Hat Bazaar and other

conventional resource bases that used to be under the UP custody. h. Initiate mass awareness campaign on the LGSP modalities of programs, fund

management and scope and extent of community participation in such programs. i. Assess the performance of the present Upazila Resource Team as capacity building

agent of the elected UP members /functionaries and initiate necessary changes, if need be.

9. Challenges to meet in coming days Over the years UPs have made significant progresses and lots of institutional learning have been accumulated. However those do give testimony that genuine decentralization has been achieved and installed. There are a number of new challenges to institutionalize good governance at the local level. Some of these challenges are as follows:

Devising institutional arrangements to help bridge the LG-community gap, and the LG-line department gap;

Enhancing and improving the interest and capacity of local community in planning process by ensuring that it goes beyond participatory needs assessment and takes into account more “technical” aspects, such as appraisal, design and costing, etc.

Developing demand-driven mechanisms for capacity-building, thus placing LGs firmly in the “driving seat”;

Providing local citizens with access to information about LG resources and decisions through comprehensive communications strategies;

Identifying / devising strategies / approaches / innovations for further strengthening of local government by establishing vertical and horizontal linkages to ensure a balanced development;

17

Devising approaches and methodologies to include the LGs (UPs, Upazila Parishads, and the Zila Parishads) with the proposed district based budget system10;

Devising approaches and methodologies to enhance LGs capacity to design and implementation of Public Private Partnership projects to improve the service delivery at the grass roots levels;

Finding ways and approaches to institutionally integrate the LGs in the implementation and monitoring process of the various MDG/ PRSP intervention programmes of the government.

8. Conclusions Advocates of decentralization in developing countries argue that bringing government closer to the people will make it more responsive and hence more likely to develop policies and outputs which meet the needs of ordinary citizens — the majority of whom are ‘the poor’. The evidence for this proposition is systematically compared across a selection of African, Asian and Latin American countries concluded that responsiveness to the poor is quite a rare outcome, determined mainly by the politics of local-central relations. Positive outcomes are mainly associated with strong commitment by a national government or party to promoting the interests of the poor at local level11. Noble laureate Amatay Sen (1999) observed that poverty is the deprivation of basic capabilities that provide a person with the freedom to choose the life he or she has reason to value. These capabilities include good health, education, social networks, and command over economic resources, and influence on decision-making that affects one’s life. From this perspective, poverty and underdevelopment is thus a condition that has three interrelated perspectives: a. it is the lack of income, employment, productive assets, access to social safety nets; b. lack of access to services such as education, health care, information, credit, water supply and sanitation; and c. lack of political participation, dignity and respect.

Grass roots based Local Government system is perhaps one of the institutional frameworks that could address all three dimensions of underdevelopment and poverty. Both Bangladesh pilot experiences and regional/ international experiences (Shotton,2004) reveal that rural local governments could utilize the resourcefulness of the rural poor and create the conditions for them to improve upon their conditions through an enabling environment. However it is also true that without a real devolution of authority, local governments will find it hard to be effective in addressing the developmental needs, poverty and the cry for good governance at the grass roots. In fact, countries that have developed efficient local government systems have had to take hard policy decisions, which in most cases, were not politically popular. What is therefore needed is a strong political will to install an effective and truly decentralized local government system.

10 During the last budget speech (2009) Honorable Finance Minister has indicated that during the next fiscal year GoB will on experimental basis start working with district based budget for a balanced growth and distributive justice. 11 There paradigm case is the Indian State of Kerala and West Bengal.

18

References

Ahmed, Junaid, (2007), Local Governments: International Experiences, paper presented to National Workshop on Strengthening of Local Government Institutions, Dhaka, National Institute of Local Government. 20 March 2007 Akash, M.M.(2009), Prostabito budget O Shtahneo Sarkar : Trinomuler Jonogoner Prottasha (Proposed Budget 2008-09 and Local Government: Expectation of the Grass Roots People (a research paper in Bangla), Dhaka: Governance Coalition. Ali, Md. Sabet (2009), An Examination of Innovations in Union Parishads: A Study of Local Governance Support Project; unpublished Thesis MA in Governance and Development, IGS, BRAC University. Aminuzzaman, Salahuddin (2008), Governance and Politics: Study on the Interface of Union Parishad, NGO and Local Actors, Institute for Environment & Development (IED), Dhaka.

Aminuzzaman, Salahuddin (2003), Overview of the Regulatory Framework of Functional Responsibilities of Local Government; UNCDF, Dhaka. Hoble, Mary and Salahuddin Aminuzzaman (2004), Institutional Mapping of Local Governance, Dhaka: DFID Aminuzzaman, Salahuddin (2005), Decentralization in Bangladesh: what went wrong?; University of Dhaka. Aminuzzaman, Salahuddin (2002), Perception of Governance: The Unheard Voices; Manabik Shahajya Sangstha (MMS). Hossain, Zillur Rahman (2001), Actors and Roles, Community Capacities and Local Governance; Dhaka: Power and Participatory Research Centre. Khan Zarina R. and Akther Hussain (2001), Review/Stocktaking in Local Governance, University of Dhaka. Sen, Amatay (1999), Development as Freedom. London: Oxford University Press. Shotton, Roger (ed), Local Government Initiative: Pro-Poor Infrastructure and Service Delivery in Rural Asia – A Synthesis of Case Studies, NY: UNCDF, 2004. Westergaard, Kirsten (2000), Decentralization in Bangladesh: Local government and NGOs, Center for Development Research, Copenhagen, Denmark; Paper prepared for presentation at the Colloquium on Decentralization and Development at Department of Political Science. Williams, M; Keith McLean, and Graham Kerr (1998), Decentralization and Rural Development: Characterizing Efforts in 19 Selected Countries, World Bank, September 1998.