1 Urban Governance Challenges: Evidence and Implication from PAPI Jairo Acuña-Alfaro Policy Advisory, Public Administration Reform and Anti-Corruption UNDP Viet Nam Presentation prepared for National Workshop on Local Economic Development - Practical experiences Bien Hoa city, Dong Nai province, Viet Nam 12 November, 2013
2 Nam 1aHZQ5nqP6U_DVfw
3 Local Economic Development & Governance To make local economic development work governance plays a key role. Local economic development succeeds where there are clear governance roles and where urban centres become engines of redistributive growth By 2025, 23% of the world s cities may be generating 65% of global growth. Of these, 73% will be in emerging markets. But, to attract financing, increase productivity and boost competitiveness, investment in people must be a priority. It is healthy, educated and empowered people who drive economic processes. Middle-income status now of Viet Nam Governance is about role of the State and its relationship with citizens, business and other non-state actors SUCCESS: When local policy-making processes include voice of citizens Source: Grynspan, Rebeca (2013). Speech on the occasion of the 2nd World Forum on Local Economic Development. Brazil, 30 October. 0/rebeca-grynspan-speech-on-the-occasion-of-the-2nd-world-forum-on-localeconomic-development/
4 In Viet Nam A new tool to include voice of citizens The Viet Nam Provincial Governance and Public Administration Performance Index (PAPI) A policy monitoring tool Voice of Vietnamese citizens about governance and public administration experiences Annual iterations monitoring changes in local governments performance The largest nationwide governance and public administration survey in Viet Nam Since 2010 more than 32,500 citizens surveyed In 2012 alone: 13,747 citizens A provider of evidence and data to policy makers and a complement to self-assessments and other surveys
5 What does PAPI measure? PAPI measures how citizens experience implementation of policies, laws and regulations Provincial Governance and Public Administration Performance Index (PAPI) Participation at Local Levels Transparency Vertical Accountability Control of Corruption Public Administrative Procedures Public Service Delivery Civic Knowledge Opportunities for Participation Quality of Elections Voluntary Contributions Poverty Lists Commune Budgets Land Use Plans Interactions with local authorities People s Inspections Boards Community Investment Supervision Boards Limits on Public Sector Corruption Limits on Corruption in Service Delivery Equity in Employment Willingness to Fight Corruption Certification Procedures Construction Permits Land Procedures Personal Procedures Health Education Infrastructure Law and Order PAPI is a barometer of performance
6 Mapping Differences in Provincial Performance
7 Governance and Public Administration Performance in 6 most populous provinces Province D1. Participation at local levels D2. Transparency D3. Vertical Accountability D4. Control of Corruption D5. Public Admin. Procedures D6. Public Service Delivery An Giang Dong Nai Ha Noi HCMC Nghe An Thanh Hoa Color code: Best performer Above 75th percentile Low Average Between 25th and 50th percentile High Average Between 50th and 75th percentile Poor Performer Below 25th percentile
8 Governance and Public Administration Performance in 5 centrally-governed municipalities Province D1. Participation at local levels D2. Transparency D3. Vertical D4. Control of Accountability Corruption D5. Public Admin. Procedures D6. Public Service Delivery Can Tho Da Nang Ha Noi Hai Phong HCMC Color code: Best performer Above 75th percentile Low Average Between 25th and 50th percentile High Average Between 50th and 75th percentile Poor Performer Below 25th percentile
9 Population and urban population of five municipalities, 2011 Population Urban Urban Population density population population Cities (thousand) (person/km2) (thousand) share (%) Ho Chi Minh city 7, ,589 6, Ha Noi 6, ,013 2, Hai Phong 1, , Can Tho 1, Da Nang Source: GSO (2012)
10 Urban rural governance differences Urban citizens more satisfied with their authorities performance in governance and public administration than rural citizens. Districts with better citizens satisfaction with authorities performance tend to have a narrower urban-rural gap in governance and public administration. Urban-rural gap in citizen satisfaction with governance and public administration has a U-shape association with the welfare level measured by the per capita expenditure. As the mean per capita expenditure of a district increases, the urban-rural gap in citizens experiences with governance and public administration decreases in the first stage, then slightly increases in the second stage. Source: Nguyen Viet Cuong and Phung Duc Tung (2013).Discrepancy in urban and rural governance at the disaggregated levels in Viet Nam: A small area estimation approach. Unpublished paper. Using PAPI data.
11 Urban rural governance differences PROVINCES DISTRICTS Relatively clear spatial pattern: The Northern Mountain and Highlands regions have lower PAPI scores, meaning lower citizens satisfaction with governance. Provinces and districts in Central Coast and South East tend to have higher performance scores. There is a large variation in citizens satisfaction with governance in districts within a province Source: Nguyen Viet Cuong and Phung Duc Tung (2013).Discrepancy in urban and rural governance at the disaggregated levels in Viet Nam: A small area estimation approach. Unpublished paper. Using PAPI data.
12 Differences in governance experiences between urban and rural households Ratio of urban to rural PAPI Statistically significant different Proportion of households with low PAPI by urban &rural areas Higher proportion means lower governance and public administration performance Lower governance and public administration experiences in rural districts in yellow provinces Source: Nguyen Viet Cuong and Phung Duc Tung (2013).Discrepancy in urban and rural governance at the disaggregated levels in Viet Nam: A small area estimation approach. Unpublished paper. Using PAPI data.
13 Participation in municipalities Stakeholder theory to examine whether citizen participation differs between big and small cities in a rapidly urbanized Viet Nam. Explore dynamics between the poor and non-poor people in five Viet Nam s big cities (Ha Noi, Ho Chi Minh city, Da Nang, Hai Phong, Can Tho). Citizens from big cities and citizens who belong to unofficially poor groups participate less. Citizens' inputs were not adequately considered in government decision-making processes. For policy makers, this implies that citizen participation should be considered even more in the management of cities expansion. In addition, the categorization of poor households needs to be closely monitored to minimize the risk of de-facto poor households being excluded from the group. Equality is not just only about reducing income and public access gap but also ensuring equal chances of participation for everyone. Source: Nguyen Van Thang; Le Quang Canh and Tran Thi Bich (2013) Citizen Participation in City Governance: Experiences from Viet Nam.Unpublished paper. Using PAPI data.
14 Participation & economic conditions in municipalities Participation and effective participation of different groups, Offical poor Unoffical poor Non-poor Participation Participation effectiveness Invitation to vote Citizens access to public services. In each city, the unofficially poor households seem to have less participation than other groups, including in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh city. Access to public services of different groups, Offical poor Unoffical poor Non-poor Offical poor Unoffical poor Non-poor Waste services Water sypply services Public safety Participation Participation effectiveness Invitation to vote The officially poor in Viet Nam participated more in local decision-making activities, and received more consideration of local governments than unofficially poor and non-poor groups. One notable result here is that unofficially poor group has lowest participation rate and the lowest use of their inputs in the sample of 2011, but the poor is relatively worst-off in terms of participation and invitation to vote in Offical poor Unoffical poor Non-poor Waste services Water sypply services Public safety Source: Nguyen Van Thang; Le Quang Canh and Tran Thi Bich (2013) Citizen Participation in City Governance: Experiences from Viet Nam.Unpublished paper. Using PAPI data.
15 Participation of different groups by municipalities Citizen participation in political and management activities not only differs by the poor groups but also by cities. For example, in Hai Phong, the officially poor group is most excluded from political activity and local decision-making issues; while the officially poor households participate more in Ha Noi, Da Nang and Can Tho cities. Ho Chi Minh City has the lowest level of citizen participation, especially for unofficially poor households Participation in management activities, 2011 Offical poor Unoffical poor Non-poor Ha Noi Hai Phong Da Nang Ho Chi Minh Can Tho Megapolitian Participation in management activities, 2012 Offical poor Unoffical poor Non-poor Ha Noi Hai Phong Da Nang Ho Chi Minh Can Tho Megapolitian Source: Nguyen Van Thang; Le Quang Canh and Tran Thi Bich (2013) Citizen Participation in City Governance: Experiences from Viet Nam.Unpublished paper. Using PAPI data.
16 PAPI weighted, 2011 PAPI 2011 vs. GDP2010 The correlation between PAPI2011 and GDP2010 is strong and positive with statistic significance at 0.05% (r=0.3150**). Richer provinces do not necessarily do better than poorer ones. Being wealthy is not an advantage to higher levels of governance and public administration performance Bac Kan Lai Chau Dien Bien Cao Bang Kon Tum Ha Giang Quang BinhHa Tinh Lang Son Son La Quang Tri Hoa Binh Yen Bai Tuyen Lao Cai Quang DakNong Ninh Thuan Ha Nam Hau Giang Phu Yen Ben Tre Binh Dinh Nam Dinh Da Nang Quang Nam Binh Duong Dong Hai Thap Duong Tien Giang Thanh Hoa Can Tho Thai Nguyen Nghe An Vinh Gia Lai Long Thai Binh Hai Phong Thua Ca Thien-Hue Mau Binh Phuoc DakLak Vinh Phuc Khanh Hoa Dong Nai Bac Giang Soc Trang Kien Giang Quang Ninh Phu Tho Bac Ninh Bac Lieu An Giang Quang Ngai Ninh Binh Hung Yen Binh Lam Thuan Dong Tra Vinh Long An Tay Ninh BR Vung Tau GDP 2010 at current prices (log10) 95% CI Fitted values PAPI weighted, 2011 Ha Noi r=.31** TP.HCM
17 PAPI weighted, 2011 PAPI 2011 vs. Human Development Index (HDI) 2008 Governance and Public Administration very strongly associated with overall Human Development Index (0.3723***). Provinces with higher levels of performance in PAPI also tend to have higher human development levels (or vice versa) Lai Chau Ha Giang Dien Bien Son La Yen Bai Lao Cai Kon Tum Ninh Thuan Gia Lai Bac Kan Cao Bang Tra Vinh Quang BinhHa Tinh Lang Son Quang Tri Long An Binh Dinh Nam Dinh Ben Tre Quang Nam Hoa Binh Binh Duong Dong Thap Tien Hai Giang Duong Thanh Hoa Can Tho Nghe An Thai Nguyen Thai Binh Vinh LongHai Phong Thua Thien-Hue Ca Mau Tuyen Quang DakNong DakLak Binh Phuoc Vinh Phuc Khanh Dong Hoa Nai Soc Bac Trang Giang Kien Giang Quang Ninh Phu Tho An Giang Bac Ninh Ha Nam Bac Lieu Quang Ngai Hau Giang Phu Yen Ninh Binh Hung Yen Binh Thuan Lam Dong Tay Ninh TP.HCM Da Nang Ha Noi Human Development Index, HDI % CI Fitted values PAPI weighted, 2011 r=.37*** BR Vung Tau
18 Some Policy Implications from PAPI PAPI is not just a single index, but an array of indicators assessing various key aspects of governance and public administration. Annually implementation from 2011 onwards allows to chart trends both at national and provincial levels Understand urban rural differences for policy making Province to province comparison reveals relative strengths and weaknesses which may shift over time requiring policy makers attention to be adjusted At higher development levels, urbanization process makes governance processes more complex Over time PAPI allows to evaluate results and impacts of reform efforts at both central and local level End objective is to support improving livelihoods and including citizens voices in local policy-making processes 18
19 Một số tác động ban đầu của PAPI Cấp tỉnh Cung cấp nguồn dẫn chứng cho các tỉnh/thành phố phân tích và đề ra các giải pháp cải thiện hiệu quả quản trị và hành chính công (Bình Định, Quảng Ngãi, Hà Tĩnh, Kon Tum, Đắk Lắk, TP. Hồ Chí Minh, Đà Nẵng, Đồng Tháp, Thái Nguyên, Đắk Nông, Vĩnh Phúc ): Đề án cải thiện hiệu quả quản trị và hành chính công của tỉnh Kon Tum (Quyết định số 703/QĐ-UBND ngày 3 tháng 8 năm 2012); Chỉ thị số 19/CT-UBND ngày 29/11/2012 của tỉnh Quảng Ngãi; Công văn số 2211/UBND-TH ngày 03/05/2012 của tỉnh Đắk Lắk; Thái Nguyên và Nghị quyết số 15/2012/NQ-HĐND ngày 15/12/2012 (trong đó nêu nâng cao chỉ số hiệu quả quản trị hành chính công cấp tỉnh (PAPI) nhằm đâ y ma nh thực hiện cải cách hành chính; công khai, minh ba ch và đơn giản hoá các thủ tục hành chính; nâng cao chất lượng, hiệu quả hoa t động của bộ máy hành chính nhà nước) Chỉ thị 13/CT-UBND của tỉnh Đồng Tháp Chỉ thị 13/CT-UBND của tỉnh Bình Định Chỉ thị số 06/CT-UBND của tỉnh Cà Mau Hoạt động hội thảo chia sẻ kết quả về cách thức cải thiện chỉ số PAPI ở nhiều tỉnh/thành phố (Bình Định, Hà Tĩnh, Kon Tum, Đà Nẵng, Đắk Nông, Thái Nguyên, ) Hoạt động nghiên cứu chuyên sâu về chỉ số PAPI (Tp. HCM, Đà Nẵng, Hà Nam, Ninh Bình, Cao Bằng, Điện Biên, Phú Yên, Quảng Nam ) Xem thêm tại: