WAC News June 2006

8/9/2019 WAC News June 2006

1/4

and badly maintained sanitationand sanitary condition. In quanti-tative term, the status of access tosanitation is worse than the watersituation.

Apart from the lower availability

and accessibility, its use is limitedby the poor maintenance, notedin terms of irregular or no watersupply, bad sanitary conditionand lack of proper drainage,among many. Qualitative surveynoted that even the households,which have got personal toilet,prefer to go for open defecation.One important reason for this hasbeen lack of water for cleaning,flushing the toilets. The otherreason has been the lack of suffi-cient drainage system, whichresults in choking of these toiletsvery frequently.

On the basis of Poverty Map-ping, the Municipal Corpora-tions of Gwalior, Bhopal, Ja-balpur and Indore have selected16, 17, 15 and 14 slums, re-spectively for implementation ofSlums environmental SanitationInitiatives under Water forAsian Cities Programme of UN-HABITAT.

drinking water. Findings of thesurvey and analysis are pre-sented in Table below.

The study revealed a high per-centage of households havingaccess to improved water

sources, which is indicative of thepresence of infrastructure butdoes not necessarily ensure therequired availability of water tothe households. Qualitative find-ings reveal the seasonality ofwater availability, with predicta-bly the summer season being theworst for the inhabitants in thepoverty pockets. Water supplythrough municipal taps get re-duced considerably as does sup-ply through hand pump, borewells and tube wells. Water isalso supplied through municipaltankers, but this also fails to fulfillthe requirements of water. Thequalitative survey also found thateven where sources of waterwere present the dependence ofthe community was graduallyincreasing on the same sourceover time due to an increase inpopulation. Lower access to qual-ity sanitation facilities and ser-vices is mainly hindered by thecurrent status of low availability

Identifying the poor, their condi-tion, needs; and addressing theirrequirement through pro-poordelivery approach is the primaryobjective of the poverty mapping.The Government of Madhya

Pradesh (GoMP) has acceptedthe Municipal Action Plan forPoverty Reduction (MAPP), whichis based on city wide povertymapping and is an instrument forslum level intervention to achievethe target 10 of Millennium de-velopment Goal no. 7.

On the GoMPs request, UN-HABITAT has carried out a city-wide Poverty Pocket SituationalAnalysis (PPSA) for mapping thepoverty and environmental infra-

structural deficiencies in eachpocket for prioritizing interven-tions in the four project cities. ThePPSA questionnaire was evolvedin consultation with GoMP, DFIDand WaterAid India, the cooper-ating partner of UN-HABITAT,which became the basis of identi-fying the poverty pockets forimplementing the MAPP. Thesurvey in the 4 cities was under-taken by the joint team of theMunicipal Corporations andlocal NGOs in a three tier ap-

proach, which involvedspatial mapping of infra-structural deficiencies inthe slums by splitting theslum into a number ofclusters and base line indi-vidual level householdssurvey for monitoring theMDG parameters of ac-cess to improved sanitationand sustainable access to

Volume II - Issue 08

Poverty Mapping in Bhopal, Indore, Gwalior & Jabalpur

June 2006

The locus of pov-erty is moving tocities. In the nexttwo decades, morethan 95 per cent ofthe populationgrowth in the

worlds poorestregions will occurin urban areas,with the result thatcities will becomethe predominantsites of poverty incoming years.

Malnutrition, hun-ger and diseaseare becoming

more prevalent inslums, particularlyin developingcountries. The ur-ban poor are muchmore vulnerable toincome-dependanthunger.

State of the WorldsCities 2006/7

Citizens Report Card on

Public Services

2

Landmark Initiatives for

Good Governance in Indore

4

INSIDE THIS ISSUE:

Details Bhopal Indore Gwalior Jabalpur

Total No of Poverty Pockets (PPs) Identified 380 604 229 324

Total Households (HH) 128,170 176545 60,787 109,866

Number of HH living in the PPs BelowPoverty Line (BPL)

63,921 19614 10,452 26,726

% of HH living BPL 49.8 30 17.19 24.33

% HH living in the PPs with access toimproved water source (average)

95.80 66 96.11 96

% HH living in the PPs with access toimproved sanitation (average)

58.0 84 68.49 54

% HH living in the PPs defecating in open 42 16 31.50 45.7


2/4

Citizens Report Card on Public Services isa strategic tool developed by Public AffairsCentre (PAC), an NGO in Bangalore. Theaim of this tool is to help citizens providedirect feedback and engage state agen-cies in efforts to improve service deliveryand governance.

Report Cards are used to aggregate andrank the services, like water supply, roads,public hospitals etc., through scientificsample surveys. Feedback is collected fromusers of each service about key issues. Thisenables policy makers and citizens to ex-amine intensity of difficulty experienced bythe citizen such as breakdowns, delaysand corruption specifically in each service,and the relative performance of differentagencies on these dimensions of service.

Report Cards originated from a modestprivate initiative by Dr. Samuel Paul in theearly nineties. In 1993, Dr. Paul with sev-eral friends initiated a project to produce aReport Card on Public Services inBangalore to demonstrate what civil soci-ety could do to improve governance. Thisrepresented a novel approach that re-ceived both national and internationalattention.

The approach entailed a random samplesurvey of the users of different public ser-vices (utilities) in the city, and the aggrega-tion of the public feedback as a basis forrating the service providers. The focus onurban public services stems from the con-cern about the deterioration of our citiesand the realization that improved produc-tivity calls for an enhancement of the qual-ity of urban living. This exercise generatedmuch public and media interest in Banga-lore and provided a stimulus to severalpublic service agencies in the city to re-view and improve their performance andattitude towards its customers.

Content of Report Cards

Report Cards are simple aggregations offeedback from users of key public services(like drinking water, roads, public hospi-tals etc.), collected through scientific sam-ple surveys. PACs early Report Cardsfocused on major Indian cities. Feedbackwas collected from users of each serviceabout key issues such as:

a. availability and quality (such as regular-ity of water supply and quality of water);

PAGE - 2 June 2006

Citizens Report Card on Public Servicesb. problems or deficiencies encountered

(breakdowns in supply);

c. effectiveness of grievance redressalmechanisms (time taken to act on com-

plaints or applications for connection);d. behaviour of staff they interact with (such

presence at seat and courtesy);

e. hidden costs incurred; and

f. overall satisfaction with the service.

The data was then aggregated to rate andrank the services on the basis of the feed-back collected. This enabled policy makersand citizens to examine the intensity ofdifficulties experienced by the citizen suchas breakdowns, delays and corruptionspecifically in each service, and the rela-tive performance of different agencies onthese dimensions of service.

Report Cards operate with a simple butflexible approach for organizing publicfeedback, with the following objectives:

Generate citizen feedback on the de-gree of satisfaction with the servicesprovided by various public service agen-cies;

Catalyze citizens to adopt proactivestances by demanding more account-ability, accessibility and responsivenessfrom service providers;

Serve as a diagnostic tool for serviceprodders, external consultants and ana-lysts/researchers to facilitate effectiveprognosis and therapy;

Encourage public agencies to adoptcitizen friendly practices, design per-formance standards and facilitate trans-parency in operations.

The steps in preparing a Report Card con-sist of:

a. selection of households for surveythrough stratified random sample meth-

ods;

b. design of questionnaires;

c. survey of selected households;

d. focus group discussions and mini-casestudies;

e. documentation of the information pro-vided to the public by service providers.

This blend of techniques enhances theoverall validity, by reducing research

bias, revealing errors in measurementand verifying and cross-checking data.Systematic action takes place after theresearch phase. Since citizens cannotvoice their dissatisfaction with monopolyservice providers, by moving over to acompetitor or alternative, these user sur-veys are a surrogate for competition. Widespread dissemination of negativefeedback by citizens then acts as a triggerfor initiating change efforts. This percep-tion is then used to stimulate collectiveaction by citizens and also to provideleadership in the agencies an opportunityto bring in effective reforms and strategicreorientation.

Report Card on Bangalore

In the course of the First Report Card onPublic Services in Bangalore (1993), eightcivic agencies in the city were scrutinizedand critiqued by the residents. After fiveyears, civic agencies in Bangalore wereput to test once more. Have they im-proved? What about corruption? Howsatisfied are the residents of Bangalorewith the civic agencies? The city was revis-ited through the Report Cards to explorethese issues.

The Methodology: Feedback wascollected from slum (839) and non-slum

(1,036) households separately in Banga-lore. The sample has been selected ensur-ing representation to all categories of citi-zens by geographic location as well asincome.

The agencies covered were Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board(BWSSB), Bangalore City Corporation(BCC), Karnataka Electricity Board (KEB),Bangalore Telephones, Ration Shops, Po-lice, Public Buses, Regional Transport Of-fice (RTO), Public Hospitals and BangaloreDevelopment Authority (BDA). Refer Table:Feedback from Users of Services on thefollowing page.

The higher levels of satisfaction in the caseof those residing in the slums could be onaccount of two factors:

a. general expectations about the ser-vices are low

b. the 2-point scale used in place of thestandard 7-point (to reduce complex-ity) made respondents in slums chooseeither fully satisfied or dissatisfied.


3/4

public services. Report Card studies are notmerely a means of collecting feedback onexisting situations from citizens. They are alsomeans for testing out different options thatcitizens wish to exercise, individually or col-lectively, to tackle current problems. For ex-ample, the Bangalore study enquired into

whether citizens were willing to pay more orbe part of citizens bodies made responsiblefor managing garbage clearance.

An important aspect of Report Cards is thecredibility they have earned. The conclusionsin a Report Card are not based on the opin-ions of a few persons who think in a particu-lar manner, nor based on the complaints of afew aggrieved citizens. The methodologyinvolves systematic sampling across all sub-sections or strata of citizens including thosewho are satisfied as well as the aggrieved

and presents a picture that includes all opinions.

This is possible because the methodology makes use of advancedtechniques of market research, for selecting samples, designingquestionnaires, conducting interviews and interpreting results. Asa result, the report cards are able to provide reliable and compre-hensive representation of citizens feedback. The Report Cardstudies benchmark the quality of public services as experiencedby citizens.

Impact of Report Cards

Civic engagement of public services has been the major outcomeof these Report Cards. From these experiences, one could per-ceive the impact at five levels:

1. Creating Public Awareness: The Report Card findings are

generally publicised prominently by major newspaper.2. Strengthening Civil Society Initiatives: The findings andinformation provided by Report Cards have largely succeeded incatalyzing citizens to take proactive and creative steps.

3. Mobilisation of Stakeholders: Seminars and meetingsare also organized in connection with the release of Report Cardfindings, involving local activists in civic affairs, representatives ofresidents; associations and NGOs interested in the problems ofthe urban poor.

4. Public Accountability: Report Card studies clearly broughtto light a wide panoply of issues, both quantitative and qualitativethat send strong signals to public-service providers.

5. Activating Stakeholder Responsiveness: Many agen-cies used the Report Card findings as a diagnostic tool to triggeroff further studies and internal reforms.

There is wide international recognition for this tool the UNDP, the World Bank, the DFID, and Transparency International havesystematically shared this tool across good governance projectsthey work with in countries such as Bangladesh, Vietnam, Philip-pines and Ukraine.

Source: Good Urban Governance Campaign

Article 36 by Dr. Suresh Balakrishnan and Dr. Gopakumar K.

VOLUME II - ISSUE 08 PAGE - 3

The Report Card on Public Services for the

Urban Poor in Mumbai

Public services are the lifeline for low-income households, espe-cially those living in urban slums. The city of Mumbai is estimatedto have a population of 12.5 million of which 5.5 million are be-lieved to be living in slums. Slum dwellers occupy nearly 12% ofthe total housing area in the city. The population density in theslums is a phenomenal 24,300 people per square kilometre on anaverage five persons share a dwelling space of an average size of15 square metres. The Report Card study addressed four dominantthemes: To what extent have urban services reached the slumpopulation? How do slum dwellers rate these services? How didthe agencies respond to complaints and please for better services?To what extent have initiatives of urban NGOs reached slum

dwellers?

The study was built around the initiative from the Rationing KrutiSamiti (RKS), a group of 38 NGOs and local groups in Mumbai.The database that emerged from the study made possible an in-depth assessment of the stress experienced by slum dwellers whileusing public services, the result of their problem-solving initiatives,hidden costs and options for citizens participation, and also pro-vided insights for follow-up action by the local NGOs.

Building Blocks of Report Cards

Report Cards capture citizens feedback in simple and unambigu-ous terms by indicating their level of satisfaction or dissatisfaction.For example, the most basic but clear feedback that a citizen may

give about power supply in Bangalore is total dissatisfaction. Toappreciate this feedback, we must relate it to the ratings given toother public services by the same person. For instance, water sup-ply ma be rated worse than power supply. When we look at thesetwo pieces of information, we can conclude that power supplymay be a cause of dissatisfaction, but the priority for correctiveaction may be on water supply. Hence measures of citizens satis-faction across different public services constitute the core of ReportCard studies.

Report Card studies go into different aspects of performance ininterfacing with citizens, to provide indicators of problem areas in

Table: FEEDBACK FROM USERS OF SERVICES

Agency General Households Slum Households

Usage Satisfied Dissatisfied Usage Satisfied Dissatisfied

BWSSB 84 42 18 87 62 38

KPTCL 99 47 14 86 73 27

BMP 48 41 16 63 65 35

Telephones 41 67 7 -- -- --

Ration Shops 78 52 10 87 70 30

Police 7 34 26 9 25 75

Public Buses 82 32 18 95 83 17

RTO 20 32 27 -- -- --

Hospitals 25 36 14 32 74 26

BMC Schools -- -- -- 32 74 26

BDA 5 16 38 -- -- --


4/4

Editorial BoardMalay Shrivastava, Secretary, UADD, State Govt. of M.P

Hazari Lal, Director, Govt. of India

Gulshan Bamra, Project Director, UWSEIP, Bhopal

Debashish Bhattacharjee, ADB, India Resident Mission

Aniruddhe Mukerjee, CTA, UN-HABITAT, Bhopal

EditorKulwant Singh, CTA, UN-HABITAT, New Delhi

In 1818, the capital of Holkars was shifted from Maheshwar. Till1870, when first municipality was constituted in Indore, the citydespite its prosperity, lacked planned development. Later it de-veloped into a major urban centre. Glorious past of good gov-

ernance to ensure effective development of the city can betraced in the chronology of following landmark initiatives:

In 1856octroi on 21 items and transit tax on Agra-BombayRoad was lifted to promote trade and commerce in HolkarState.

1893-94:piped water supplies from Sirpur and Piplyapalawater reservoirs were introduced.

1904: Municipality was given judicial powers equivalent toclass III Magistrate.

1906: Juna powerhouse was established at Indore andpower generated here was used to provide street lighting forthe city; prior to this kerosene lit lamps (from 1870-1903) and

petrol lamps (from 1903-1906) were used for the purpose.

1906:octroi and opium tax were lifted.

1906:completion of construction of Bilawali Tank.

1910: Ramchandra Rao and its team developed a detailed100-sheet survey map of Indore City, promoted by the thenHolker Ruler. This set of maps still the most authentic documen-tation of valuable property and urban conglomerate develop-ment available and in use by City Engineers office.

1912: Municipality was made a semi-autonomous institutionthrough a municipality act.

1912: Mr. H.V. Lancaster was invited by the local body to

give advice regarding expansion of the city and improvementsin the sanitary conditions in residential areas.

1913: Limbodi-Bilawali water Supply Scheme was madeoperational to control acute water crisis, Indore faced fromtime-to-time in the past years.

1918:Mr. Patrick Giddies (eminent city planner of that pe-riod) prepared a developmental plan for planned develop-ment of Indore city under Holker rule.

Landmark Initiatives for Good Governance in Indore

PAGE - 4

UN-HABITAT

Water for Asian Cities Programme

EP-16/17, Chandragupta Marg, Chanakyapuri

New Delhi - 110021 (India), Tel: +91-11-42225019 / 22

Fax: +91-11-24104961, Web: www.unwac.org

WAC Programme Project Office

E-1/191, Arera Colony, Bhopal - 462016

Madhya Pradesh, India, Tel: +91-755-2460835-36

Fax: +91-755-2460837, Email: [email protected]

1920: for the first time people used their right of franchise toelect 15 (out of 30) members of Indore municipality.

In 1924 overall control of Municipal government washanded over to elected representatives and Indore became thefirst city of central India to have an elected municipal govern-ment.

In 1924based on the recommendations of Mr. Patrick Gid-dies city improvement trust was constituted with a view to en-sure the citys planned development.

1925:Primary education was made compulsory for all.

1926: Indore Municipality bought a vehicle for lifting wastesand spraying water on roads.

1929:detailed Areal Photography Survey was done underHolkers initiative for the then Holker State of Indore (6 de-tailed survey sheets are available, presently with the City Engi-

neers Office). 1938: Mr. R.H.V. Stamper prepared a report on improve-

ment of city circulation pattern. Jawahar Marg and SubhashMarg now form lifelines of the city, have been constructed asper the recommendations of Stamper.

1939:completion of Yeshwant Sagar Dam under MaharajaYeshwant Roa Holkers initiative to overcome water crisis ofIndore. The dam, still a major source of water supply to thecity, was designed by the eminent civil engineer Dr. M. Vish-weshwaraiya.

1956: Indore Municipality was upgraded to Municipal Cor-poration and Late Ishwarchandra Jain became its first Mayor.

1984:commissioning of Narmada Project Phase I. 1992:commissioning of Narmada Project Phase II.

Till 1995tenure of Mayor was for one year. Mr. MadhukarVerma became first Mayor to have a tenure of five years (from1995 to 1999).

Mayor Mr. Kailash Vijayvargiya had a special place in thehistory of Indore Municipal Corporation as its first directly-elected Mayor under the powers developed by State Govern-ment as per the 74th Constitutional Amendment.

Documents

WAC News June 2006