Choosing an assessment framework Ingvild Oia, UNDP Oslo Governance Centre

1. Choosing an assessment framework Ingvild Oia, UNDP Oslo Governance Centre

2. Objectives and structure of the session • How to decide on your governance principles? • Show two country examples, Indonesia and Nigeria (in addition to the local governance barometer introduced in first session. • Introduce the IDEA local democracy assessment framework • Present a flow chart for guiding the selection of framework from the users’ guide. Group work: Select a framework and explain why you chose it! Is there a need to adapt it?

3. Type 1: Assessments that focus on the achievement of policy objectives: Input factors Legal, organisational, training, physical Financial resources Policy objective Activities Outputs Impact Outcome Effectiveness Efficiency Economy

4. Type 2: Assessments that focus on public administration processes Processes and structures of: Public service delivery Public HR management Public financial management Government policy making Leadership Input Output Outcome Impact

5. Your value chain various performance values may be combined in functions, or value chains, expressing how they may contribute to various policy goals • Good local governance = effectiveness+ rule of law + transparency + accountability participation and civic engagement+ equity and fairness

6. Nigeria Good Urban Governance • In support of sustainable urbanization and good urban governance, UNDP and UN-HABITAT are assisting the National Bureau of Statistics in developing a customized framework for assessing the quality of urban governance in Nigerian cities. • In the 21 pilot cities, the project will: • help identify appropriate national indicators on urban governance, • develop national knowledge, including the creation of "Urban Governance Information Resource Centres", and • reinforce stakeholders-driven policy dialogue on good urban governance in Nigeria.

7. Framework

8. Indonesia Democracy Index • National leadership & ownership: • Rapid decentralization process  unequal democratic performance across provinces • Planning Commission needed an instrument to help assess democratic progress & setbacks in each one of the country’s 33 provinces • The IDI, measured at provincial level, is now the official policy planning tool for provincial govts

9. Indonesia Democracy Index • Country specificity: • Newly transitioned to • democracy, therefore • priority is to assess: • 1) Civil liberties, • 2) Political rights • 3) Democratic institutions 

10. Framework

11. Indonesia Democracy Index • Participatory & inclusive data collection: • IDI triangulates data from 4 different sources: • Media (analysis of newspaper content) • Official documents (local regulations, police records, records of local election office) • Focus group discussions (with pax from 13 different backgrounds) • In-depth interviews with some key informants •  Mix of qualitative & quantitative data

12. Indonesia Democracy Index Use in policymaking: The IDI is now an official target under Indonesia's National Medium-Term Development Plan (2010-2014): By 2014, an average score of 73/100 on the IDI has been set as a national target for the area of the plan concerned with the consolidation of democracy.

13. Excercise Use the flow chart to select your assessment methodology. Once chosen, review the governance principles/higher level indicators of this methodology, would you like to amend these and adjust the value chain? Choose one governance principle from the framework, look at its indicators. Are there concerns or issues in your country that make you want to adapt these indicators?