The Cambodia Demand for Good Governance (DFGG) Project

15th Feb 2007 version

The Cambodia Demand for Good Governance (DFGG) Project

- An Updated Storyline

The proposed Demand for Good Governance (DFGG) project in Cambodiamay arguably be the World Bank’s firstproject devoted exclusively to developing demand side approaches to tackle governance issues,strengthening and linking the work of both state and non-state institutions[1]. Given this novelty as well as the challenging governance environment in which it is being developed, project preparation has involved continuous learning and innovation.

As can be expected, the project designis gradually evolving from the initial project concept note (PCN) that was developed in June 2006. The purpose of this note is to build on that PCN and provide an update about what the DFGG project is aiming to do, what ground realities and lessons have informed the design, and what are likely to be the project’s core components.

A. Genesis of the Project – The Rationale for DFGG

The Cambodian context today reflects a clear case of severe problems of governance.[2]Tackling these is not an easy task. There needs to be multiple strategies for engagement that go beyond traditional supply side initiatives targeting only public financial management, civil service reform and so on.

Among these strategies has to be the strengthening of constituencies outside the state executive – such as civil society, the media, parliament, local communities and the private sector. These constituencies, as highlighted in the recent Governance and Anti-Corruption (GAC) Strategy of the World Bank, create a demand pressure for better governance and can be critical allies and catalysts for reform in difficult governance environments.[3] The Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) has itself put good governance at the heart of its reform strategies (such as the Rectangular Strategy 2004-08, the Governance Action Plan, and the Decentralization and De-concentration policy). And it has alsorecognized the key role of civil society, the private sector and other development partners in its efforts to promote better governance.

Against this backdrop, the DFGG project’s proposed development objectiveis to promote good governanceby building the capacities of institutions, and supporting programs and coalitions that promote, mediate, respond to or monitor demand for good governance.

While the basic objective is straightforward, the challenge is of course how toachieve it. In Cambodia, knowledge and capacities of the proposed actors in undertaking a ‘social accountability’ role is quite limited. Moreover, there is little history of partnerships between state and non-state actors in governance reform.[4] Outlining the operational implications of supporting the demand for good governance has thereforebeen the main focus of the intensive project preparation process so far.The rest of this note attempts to shed light on the emerging trajectory for the operation.

B. What is “DFGG” – Defining what we are trying to do

Perhaps thestarting point in developing a program to support DFGG is to be clear upfront about what the term means[5].Conceptually, ‘DFGG’ refers to theextent and ability of citizens, civil society organizations, and other non-state actors to hold the state accountable and to make it responsive to their needs. And in return, this DFGG enhances thecapacity of the state to become transparent, accountable, and participatory in order to respond to these demands.

Given this conceptualization of DFGG, operationally, the proposed project approaches strengthening of DFGG as a process, which has four key elements (figure-1):

1. Promotion of Demand –The ability of citizens, civil society, and other non-state actors to demand better governance depends on their access to information, and the degree to which they can act effectively on this information. Thus, DFGG depends on (a) disclosure of information - the level of transparency of the government (regarding budgets, expenditures, programs, etc.), (b) demystification of information - strengthening the level of awareness and understanding of citizens (on laws, rights, budgets, policies, etc.), and (c) disseminationof information– spreading information (related to governance issues, processes, finances, laws, etc) to the ordinary public. In promoting demand, the three Ds should be followed by a C(collective action) – mobilizing broader action and advocacy around this information. Accordingly, initiatives such as freedom of information, awareness campaigns, rights education, and media programsthat ‘promote’ demand are the first component of DFGGproject support.

1. Mediation of Demand – While mobilizing demand through advocacy and information dissemination are important, these pressures only become ‘effective’ through mediation and institutionalized feedback to the state. Thus, strengthening DFGG also involves (a) creation and strengthening of avenues for feedback of citizens and civil society to public officials,(b) encouraging consultationof these actors in decision makingand public actions of executive agencies,as well as (c) formal and informal mechanisms for disputeresolutionthrough initiatives such as interface meetings between citizens and public officials, grievance redress mechanisms, and ombudsman’s offices.

1. Response to Demand – After mediation comes response, without which demand alone would remain powerless and non-credible. Thus, institutionalizing DFGG involves developing programs and initiatives within the executive that respond to demand either through (a) innovations in service delivery, (b) response based performance incentives, or (c) participatory action planning.

1. Monitoring to Inform Demand – Finally, the last element of increasing DFGG is the process of monitoring and oversight of the public sector by non-executive actors such as the parliament, the media, and civil society. This could take the form of (a) participatory monitoring (using citizen feedback surveys of government performance, social audits, media investigations, etc.), (b) independent budget and policy analysis, and (c) formal oversight mechanisms (parliamentary committees, vigilance commissions, etc.). These generate key information for the executive, civil society, and ordinary citizens that feeds back into the process of promoting DFGG – thus completing the cycle.

Figure-1: Four Core Elements of DFGG

Based on the above operational interpretation of what DFGG entails, the project aimsto strengthen DFGG in Cambodia by providing support to institutions and programs that perform one (or more[6]) of the above functions – promotion, mediation, response, or monitoring for DFGG.

It is important to note here that the above definition of DFGG has a key implication – it means that the institutions that strengthen DFGG can be both government institutions and non-state ones. A state-run broadcasting corporation involved with disseminating information about public programs and their budgets, and providing feedback of citizens to public officials is as much a ‘demand side’ actor as civil society and the private media promoting demand. Likewise, ombudsman offices and vigilance commissions, or ministries running programs for legal and rights awareness education are also ‘demand side’ actors. Moreover, the response function of DFGG is something that is most often only provided through the state executive. What matters for strengthening DFGG under this projectis therefore what an institution doesrather than where it is situated.

C. Principles behind Project Design –Determining to ‘whom’ and ‘how’ support would be given

The support for programs that promote, mediate, respond to or monitor DFGG could happen in many ways. One could, for instance, fund aggressive programs for investigating and punishing corrupt public officials. Or, multiple small initiatives for monitoring local service delivery could be financed. Alternatively, a brand new national institution dedicated to promoting transparency and curbing corruption could be established.

However, the constraints of the challenging governance climate that the project faces in Cambodia means the approach for developing a project that is essentially charting new territory in the country’s socio-political landscape shouldbe gradual, realistic, and strategic. Moreover, the project should focus on sustainability in the long run rather than creating short term flashes that fizzle out after the project ends. In this regard promoting ownership and credibility of the proposed initiatives would be critical.

Taking on board the lessons of international experience of working on governance and anti-corruption in difficult environments as captured in the Bank’s Governance Strategy, and other country assistance frameworks[7]the project’s design was therefore shaped by the following principles and practical considerations:

• The focus would be on building institutional capacity – As global experience shows, governance reform is a long-term process and the sustainability of these reforms ultimately depends on credible and effective institutions. Innovative programs and sub-projects are effective for short-term mobilization of demand, but at the end of the project cycle what survive are durable institutions. Thus, the core philosophy of the DFGG project is to offer the bulk of the support for institutional development – skill building, organizational management, financial sustainability, result orientation, client focus, performance incentives, etc.[8]
• Both state and non-state institution would be supported– Based on the logic provided above, the project would provide support to both state and non-state institutions that are providing a promotion, mediation, response, or monitoring function in a DFGG context.[9] The state actors could be in the legislature (parliament), judiciary (courts or alternative dispute resolution bodies), executive (ministries and local governments) or formal oversight bodies (audit agencies, vigilance commissions, or ombudsman offices). Non-state actors would include NGOs, CBOs, the private sector (including trade unions) and independent media working on similar themes. Again, what essentially matters is the mandate of the institution rather than where it is situated. The idea would then be to develop linkages between these state and non-state agencies that could forge partnerships lasting beyond the life of the project.
• The focus would be on existinginstitutions –Experience suggests that for sustainability and ownership it is imperative to build and strengthen a country’s own institutions and initiatives rather than impose reforms from the outside. This also avoids unnecessary set-up costs. The pragmatic decision of the project is hence to identify and work only with existing Cambodian institutions – both on the state and non-state side.
• Build on promising governance innovations – A key strategic choice was made to build upon existing governance innovations that have demonstrated some successinCambodia already.This approach has several merits. Firstly, it helps to strengthen these innovations and facilitate their success and scaling up. Secondly, it signals the Bank’s commitment and support for DFGG innovations that Cambodian institutions have themselves introduced. Finally, if the strategy of ‘betting on winners’ is successful, the demonstration effect of these institutions could over time create a ‘ripple effect’ for further reform in other more challenging sectors, agencies and areas within the Cambodian context.
• Engage with committed leaderships -Further, given that good institutions are often built upon the work of good people, the institutional support of the project would be geared towards agencies whose leaders have shown keen interest and desire to work on strengthening DFGG.[10]This would enable them to build stronger coalitions of support around the institution that draw in both state and non-state actors, and build on the novel governance reforms they have introduced.
• Target all four elements of DFGG to have maximum effect – Finally, the project would aim to build upon each functional element of the DFGG process – promotion, mediation, response, and monitoring – since this ensures the greatest effectiveness in strengthening DFGG. However, no single institution would be expected to simultaneously cover all four areas.

The project team well recognizes that the DFGG project is only one piece in the overall agenda of governance reform that the RGC will be undertaking, and the challenges are too large to be addressed by a single project. The project is therefore adopting an opportunistic approach tostrengthen a few existing good institutions and committed leaders by assisting them to become better and best. If successful, the project could pave the way for future work on strengthening DFGG in the country.

D. Project Components – Outlining what the project will do

Working on the above principles, the project design has three core operational components[11] – (i) support to state institutions, (ii) support to non-state institutions, and (iii) communication, monitoring & evaluationand learning. The motivations and basic nature of these are described below.[12]

D.1 Component 1: InstitutionBuilding for State Institutions:

The first core component is the institutional support to state institutions working on strengthening DFGG for a 3-5 year period. At the time of writing this note, the first short-list of 5 possible state organizations had been selected for support.The process for their selection and the nature of proposed support is outlined below.

D.1.1. Selection Process and Criteria:The state institutions to be supported under the project will be pre-selected during project preparation. This is being done for several reasons.First, is to avoid creating tricky competition for project funds among state agencies. Second, to get a broad distribution of institutions covering different criteria, which could only be done through pre-selection. Finally,given that DFGG is a relatively new concept in Cambodia, a lot of capacity building and joint planning is needed upfront during project preparation with each of the supported institutions. This could only be done if they were chosen during the design phase.

The project team therefore went through a series of consultations with government, donors, and civil society organizations over a six-month process to generate a shortlist of potential candidates for support. This search was further informed by an existing assessment of options for increasing social accountability in Cambodia done by DFID and the World Bank country team[13], and two rapid institutional assessments[14]of transparency institutions done recently by different World Bank teams. Finally, inputs were sought from the project counterpart agency – the Ministry of Interior (MOI).

The available spectrum of Cambodian state institutions undertaking DFGG-related functions of promotion, mediation, response, and monitoring were then narrowed down based on the following criteria in order of importance:

(i)The mandateand activities of each institution (or program within it) should cover at least one element of strengthening DFGG, viz.promotion, mediation, response, or monitoring;

(ii)The institutions should have demonstrated success and/or have a committed leadership willing to support DFGG activities;

(iii)To the extent possible, the chosen set of institutions should cover the focus sectors for governance reform highlighted in the World BankCountry Assistance Strategy (CAS) for Cambodia[15]—decentralization and de-concentration, natural resources management, private sector development, and public financial management;

(iv)Finally, to the extent possible, the chosen state institutions should cover the various parts of the state machinery – executive, legislature, judiciary, and independent oversight agencies. They should also cover both national and local levels of engagement.

D.1.2. Selected Institutions: Based on the above criteria, the following five institutions have been chosen for support by the DFGG project:

(1)Ministry of National Assembly-Senate Relations and Inspection (MONASRI)

(2)The Arbitration Council

(3)Radio National of Kampuchea (RNK)

(4)Ministry of Interior’s One Stop Window Services (OSWS) and District Ombudsman’s Office

(5)A National Assembly (Parliamentary) Committee

A brief description of each of the above institutions is given in Annex2 to this note.

D.1.3. Nature of Expected Support: The support to be provided to each state institution will be determined through a participatory process, complemented with technical guidance from a team of expert consultants. This participatory process will begin with a workshop in which key stakeholders relevant to the operations of each state institution (such as NGOs working on legal awareness for MONASRI, or labor unions for the Arbitration Council) will share ideas for strengthening the DFGG mandate of the institution. An advisory committee or working group consisting of a sub-set of these stakeholders will then help each institution collaboratively develop a proposal for project support. This will be done through facilitated and informal “mini retreats” bringing government officials together with clients of state institutions and appropriate leaders in civil society, knowledgeable donors and others. This is expected to build ownership and a network of support for the implementation of the proposal. Final feedback on each proposal will come from a national level multi-stakeholder workshop towards the end of the project preparation period. All through this participatory design process, expert consultants will contribute what they know to strengthen these institutions.

Although the details of the actual support to each institution will be determined by the above process, broadly speaking it is expected to involve the following core areas:

(i)Capacity building – The project will provide technical assistance and training on various features of organizational management (e.g. organizational structure, business processes, skills, finance, information systems, performance reward systems, ethics, etc.),

(ii)Scaling up – Building on the existing successful DFGG activities of each institution, the project will facilitate efforts to scale up both their scope and coverage and strengthen sustainability,

(iii)Innovation– Using international experience and by creating linkages with non-state partners the project will encourage the institutions to try new innovations to strengthen their effectiveness,

(iv)Partnerships – Each institution will be given incentives to build partnerships with non-state actors, through say a facility for external engagement or a separate incentive fund for partnershipsand coalition building,

(v)Communications – Each institution will be supported to develop a communications plan to generate greater awareness and promote transparency,