Transparency, accountability ke to decentralization

Transparency, accountability ke to decentralization

By Rainer Rohdewohld

JAKARTA (JP): In the context of implementing regional autonomy
as stipulated in Law No. 22 (1999) on Regional Governance, one of
the most-heard arguments is that "the regions are not yet ready
and not yet able" to deliver the government functions
that have been transferred.

This argument, which used to be the main weapon of the New
Order government to defend its centralistic approach to
administration while paying only lip service to decentralization,
usually lacks empirical evidence, and in most cases, no clear
benchmarks are established to define what "capacity" is needed or
available.

During the last 12 months, the Deutsche Gesellschaft fur
Technische Zusammenarbeit-GTZ (German Technical Cooperation) and
the USAID-funded CLEAN Urban Project have conducted a study to
identify the capacity building needs of local governments and
local parliaments (DPRD).

Other donor-funded projects from ADB and CIDA contributed to
the study (www.gtzsfdm.or.id). Findings and recommendations of
the study team were presented to the government by the end of
November, and initiatives are under way to formulate a medium-
term strategy for capacity building which integrates government
programs with support from various donor agencies, like USAID,
GTZ and the World Bank.

While the field assessments of the study team confirmed the
widespread lack of managerial and planning capacity at the local
government level (we should not forget that in the past local
governments were not supposed to plan and manage independently
but to carry out instructions and orders from above), they also
confirmed that in many cases the required technical competencies
and skills are available.

The planned transfer of central government civil servants to
the regions will in addition constitute a substantial infusion of
skilled manpower into the local government agencies, and will
give them - despite concerns over overstaffing and the "putra
daerah" issue - access to professional experience and
competencies.

The study also confirmed that the "lack" of local government
capacity (and confusion about the details of the new local
governance system) is often caused by insufficient information
strategies of the central government, and by the lack of
coordination between central government agencies responsible for
certain aspects of the decentralization policy.

No doubt that many local government officials still adhere to
the habit of waiting for instructions from above, but even in
regions with innovative leadership, and with sufficient financial
and human resources, the lack of policy management by the central
government caused delays in preparing the regions for
regional autonomy.

Building capacity at the local level to fully implement
regional autonomy (and its underlying principles of democracy,
participation and justice) requires concerted efforts by the
central government and the regional governments.

A capacity building strategy must include a number of core
elements: it must be linked to the realization of good governance
(which includes having accountability, transparency and
participation), it needs a medium-term orientation (no "quick
fix" solutions!), and it should sequence priority areas so that
urgent and important issues are tackled first.

Capacity building initiatives must be demand-driven and must
be based on the specific conditions in each region. "One-size-
fits-all" programs (which were the hallmark of the past New Order
regime) are a waste of scarce resources and will fail to deliver
results. Existing tools and instruments (like standard training
programs in financial and urban management) should be adjusted to
the new framework.

The horizontal exchange, between regions, of information and
experience of "lessons learned" will become a major tool for
disseminating innovations. Finally, capacity building programs
should utilize a multitude of providers, including
universities, professional associations, and private sector
entities.

Capacity building is not something one government agency alone
can claim ownership.

The GTZ/CLEAN Urban study has suggested 12 major areas for
capacity building activities:

* Finalizing the regulatory framework for decentralization

* Managing the transition period

* A local government budget and finance reform

* Civil service issues

* Training and skills development

* Monitoring the performance of local governments

* Regional planning

* Interregional cooperation

* Adjusting sectoral systems (regulations, institutions, working
mechanisms) to the new decentralization framework

* Supervision by the central government

* Institutional reform (both at the regional and the central
level), and finally the

* Local policy arrangements, i.e. how political decisions are to
be taken on the local level, aiming at a maximum involvement of
stakeholders.

The capacity of public sector organizations is a dynamic and
normative concept, not something that can be easily quantified.

Many factors influence whether a local government agency can
deliver services with the required quantity and quality: the
environment in which its operates (e.g. the legal framework),
organizational issues (like its decision-making procedures, its
organizational structure, access to information and other
resources), and the knowledge, skills and work ethics of its
workforce.

Some of these factors can be influenced by the local
governments, some are determined by the central government.
Others (like work ethics) are influenced by tradition, social
norms and values which change only slowly over time.

Regional autonomy opens the way for local governments to
tackle many (but not all) of these factors according to their own
needs and conditions, without having to follow uniform blueprints
determined by Jakarta.

For instance local governments can make choices regarding the
mechanisms on how to deliver services: by using the traditional
government agencies (dinas), by using local enterprises (BUMD),
or by contracting-out to the private sector.

A functioning and transparent political system at the local
level would ensure that the local leadership is held accountable
for the results (positive and negative ones) of its
decisions.

In this sense capacity building is more than ensuring that
solid waste is collected regularly, and that KTPs are being
issued; it also means ensuring that finally local communities
have a voice in determining the kind of public services they
want.

Regional autonomy requires a learning process for all
involved: the local communities, local parliaments, the local
government officials, and the officials in central government
agencies. The capacity of local governments to deliver services
to their communities will increase over time, if they are given a
chance.

Participation of local communities, transparency and
accountability of the local leadership are key principles of the
decentralization policy, and local communities should not
hesitate to insist that these principles are respected and
adhered to.