Citizens do not feel empowered and do not feel they are adequately given the space to meaningfully participate in public governance. Clearly, citizens are not satisfied with the manner in which government is run. This is evident across the developed

VALUING PEOPLE

Citizen Engagement in Policy Making and Public Service Delivery in Rural AsiaBy Michael Anthony Tarallo

AuthorHouse

Copyright © 2012 Michael Anthony Tarallo
All right reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-4685-5947-7

Contents

Abstract.......................................................................................ixAbbeviations and Acronyms......................................................................xi1. Introduction................................................................................13. Valuing citizen engagement in policy making and public service delivery.....................254. Opportunities for citizen engagement: What factors make it effective?.......................415. Conclusion and Recommendations..............................................................55Endnotes.......................................................................................63References.....................................................................................73About the Author...............................................................................85

Chapter One

Introduction

Citizens in both developed and developing countries have grown dissatisfied over past decades with traditional political participation and the functioning of democracies. 'In northern democracies', as argued by Zipfel and Gaventa, 'political participation has been declining steadily. Most people ... are disillusioned with the political system and feel they have little or no influence ... In parts of the global south ... confidence in local government is undermined by political corruption, the gulf between those in power and the lives of ordinary people and the failure to tackle widespread poverty.' As a result 'around the world, there has been an explosion of interest in more participatory forms of governance ... [This is primarily due to] 'demands from citizens to have more say in decisions that matter to them [as well as] ... the recognition by those in power that community involvement is central to the major challenges of revitalising democracy'. In an effort towards narrowing the gap between values and principles of democracy and realities on the ground, new channels of citizen engagement have emerged in various countries giving rise to new promises for participatory governance. Public governance has made initial steps in response to these demands by moving from public sector reforms that have tendentially focused on performance, efficiency, and productivity, towards recent developments that recognize the value of citizen engagement and the central role of individuals as 'citizens' rather than 'customers' in both the development and implementation of public policies. People should not be seen 'only as users or choosers, but as active participants who engage in making and shaping social policy and social provisioning'.

By 'citizen engagement' it is meant '[a]ll measures and/or institutional arrangements that link citizens more directly into the decisionmaking process of the State as to enable them to influence the public policies and programmes in a manner that impact positively on their economic and social lives'.

While societies and political dynamics have changed over time both in size and scope when viewed against the classical democracy of ancient Greece, modern democracy has not yet developed into a fully responsive mechanism to its citizens. Society has, indeed, outgrown what Plato regarded as 'the ideal size of the polis as being 5,040 households' for it being 'divisible by all the numbers between 1 and 10, [thus making] citizens obligations and municipal functions [assignable] to groups of the appropriate scale in ... what we would today call governance'. Our understanding of what constitutes 'citizenship' today has also diverged, to some extent, from Athenian selective and exclusionary model where 'only a small proportion of adult males were citizens, [while] a large segment of adult population (women, foreigners and slaves) did not have political rights'.

In more recent times, ordinary citizens' normative right to participate in government affairs stems from Article 1 of the Declaration of the Rights to Development and Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The former states that '[t]he right to development is an inalienable human right by virtue of which every human person and all peoples are entitled to participate in, contribute to and enjoy economic, social, cultural and political development, in which all human rights and fundamental freedoms can be fully realized'. Article 25 more specifically affirms that '[e]very citizen shall have the right and the opportunity ... [t]o take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives'.

The apparent weakness in current representative democracies is that they are not driven by principles that support a government 'of the people' and 'by the people'. As argued by Bourgon (2007), 'having a vote is different from having a say' simply because the 'right to vote', inherent with representative-style of government, 'does not imply that people are given a voice on matters that interest them most or that they have a role in the decisions that affect them most directly'. What recourse, then, do citizens have in between elections? As it is perceived today, participation is an ongoing and involving process that will not stand for the passivity dictated by intermediary periods from one election to another.

First termed by Hirschman in 1970, "voice' ... refer[s] to the range of measures – such as complaint, organized protest, lobbying, and participation in decision-making and product delivery – used by civil society actors to put pressure on service providers to demand better service outcomes'. Giving 'voice' to citizens, particularly to the weaker and marginalized groups, means setting a stage whereby 'the engagement with the State moves beyond consultative process to more direct forms of influence over policy and spending decisions, service delivery, the monitoring of programme impacts, and accounting for public expenditures'.

Citizen engagement in public governance promises an 'enrich[ment of] the practice of representative democracy ... [as] it broadens the base of support and reduces the political risks associated to ambitious new initiatives'. While government remains central to society, citizens no longer perceive themselves as passive clients or consumers of government services but rather as an active force towards solutions to handle emerging issues more effectively. Recognizing that '[n] o government can claim to have all the tools, nor all the powers necessary to affect complex and effective policy outcomes', especially in a modern global society, Bourgon (2008) perceives citizens as 'agents of change' necessary to tackle issues that 'require a change of societal behavior ... [or] when the nature and scale of issues exceeds the legislative authority of the state and the government's ability to act ... [e.g.] global warming and poverty alleviation, ... prevention of obesity, wellness and labour productivity, ... 'safe streets', civic participation and community development'. To this end, greater and meaningful engagement by citizens in public governance requires innovative institutional mechanisms, processes and policies.

The book aims to address the following questions – (i) What major factors account for greater citizen engagement in policy making and public service delivery? (ii) In what ways does citizen engagement in public governance matter?

Principles and strategies of citizen engagement in public governance will be addressed in this research by analyzing not only challenges of governance and public administration systems in general, but also by examining a number of innovative practices in rural Asia, with a particular focus on citizen participation in policy development and implementation in the water sector.

The largest and the most populous continent in the world, Asia comprises culturally and religiously diverse countries that range economically from great wealth to extreme poverty, and politically from the oldest non-Western democracies to oppressive regimes. What is interesting about Asia in general is that '[e]conomically ... a number of countries ... achieved unprecedented growth and social modernization under authoritarian rule' as compared to 'their peers in other regions'. Culturally, the 'Asian values' of 'family and community over individuals, discipline and hierarchy over freedom and equality, and consensus and harmony over diversity and conflict' 'have historically played a significant role in prioritizing and justifying the rights and duties of individual citizens and the power and authority of their political leaders'. Against this backdrop, citizen participation and democratization assumes a different connotation in Asia, where democracy is 'equated ... with benevolent or soft authoritarian rule'. Notwithstanding, Asia remains the region that is more often recognized in the United Nations' ambit for its innovative practices in public administration, including citizen participation in governance. In fact, over a period spanning nine years since 2003, Asia alone provided 35 examples out of 98 from developing countries duly recognized by the United Nations (UN) for the region's commitment, both at state and citizenry level, towards innovative practices in public administration and governance. For this reason, it is worth reviewing why and how Asia stands out within a realm that is not necessarily Asia's more renowned strength – democratization.

The research focuses on the water sector in Asia's rural areas, with particular emphasis on potable water and irrigation water management. This is so because 'two million people die from waterborne diseases and billions more suffer illnesses – most are children under five'. With a rural population in Asia of 58 percent, efficient and effective water management is of significant concern. Implications are considerable for both India and Thailand as 70 percent and 66 percent of the population live in rural areas, respectively.

With a view to recognize the value that citizens generate when actively involved in shaping and implementing policies, literary review is tailored around two areas – (i) a brief examination of a few major trends that have affected public administration reform and governance; and (ii) the examination of a number of recognized and awarded innovative practices in public governance by citizens in rural India and Thailand. Case analysis is carried out vis-à-vis Fung's (2006) 'democracy cube' and issues of democratic governance. The research focuses on India and Thailand as they represent diverse contexts, problems and approaches to democratic governance.

While India is recognized as a consolidated democracy, citizen participation is not fully developed mainly owed to low literacy across the country that hampers qualitative participation. Democracy in Thailand, on the other hand, does not vaunt of a positive democratic standing to start with, stifled both by a cultural view of citizens' role in society which limits their political space and a highly mobilized and controlling aristocracy. Yet, there are several examples whereby initiatives in these countries have been recognized by the United Nations for their excellence in public administration and governance. This recognition potentially makes the contrast between the not-so-enabling environment and citizen participation in governance an interesting topic for review. The case studies form part of a long list of winning and runner up initiatives globally recognized by the United Nations within the context of the UN Public Service Awards' annual competition.

The research is structured along three main chapters, in addition to the introduction and the conclusion. Chapter Two addresses the first research question by focusing on challenges and trends in citizen engagement in public governance. The analysis captures the (i) modernization of the State, covering the paradigm shift from New Public Management to Public Value Management; and (ii) revitalization of democracy, covering growing demand to make democracy more meaningful and to allow for more opportunities of participation in policy-making decision and service delivery. The main body of the research is captured under Chapters Three and Four. Through case studies, Chapter Three answers the second research question by addressing the value and relevance of citizen engagement through innovative practices in policy making and service delivery in India and Thailand. With due regard to the limited scope of the research, drawing from the case studies, Chapter Four will examine what factors, institutions, and mechanisms make citizen engagement effective in rural Asia.

Chapter Two

Citizen engagement in public governance: Challenges and trends

Societal problems are neither few nor simple. Governments are challenged by developments that 'have conspired to cause public sector and civil society innovators to rethink th[e] division between government and citizens, and find ways to thicken the engagement of citizens' in policy making and service delivery. Faced with demands by citizens towards greater involvement in decision-making process as well as the increasing complexities and changes in global environments, the approaches governments consider to address public concerns will inevitably vary from country to country based on 'different philosophies about the role of government in society'.

The past several decades 'have been a rich period of experimentation in public administration aimed at making government more efficient, effective, productive, transparent and responsive'. Modern public administration grew from a 'compliance model' of the early 20th century, to a 'performance model' of the late 1980s to early 1990s, to a current 'enabling and engaging model' whereby governments are more frequently called upon to take on board the 'wisdom of the crowds'. The 'growing social gap between citizens on one hand, and politicians, political parties, and governments, on the other' is significant to a point where citizens feel powerless and alienated vis-à-vis their representative democratic governments. Citizens want to participate directly in policy decisions that affect their lives and they want to do so ex ante.

But what major factors account for greater citizen engagement in policy making and public service delivery? Chapter Two aims to address this question. While others exist, the chapter briefly focuses on two of the leading trends worldwide – (i) the modernization of the state, covering the realignment of public administrations towards a citizen-centered focus, and (ii) the revitalization of democracy in favor of direct citizen participation.

Modernizing the state

Modernizing the state is a challenge. It is a process that aims at marrying efficiency of government structures with effectiveness of results that address emerging societal demands. For quite some time, scholars and governments have debated which public administration approach best addresses public issues. Debates on merits and demerits of New Public Management (NPM) and Public Value Management (PVM) have dominated the last thirty years or so. Contention has flourished around two fundamental concerns – is it a question of whether governments are 'doing things right and cost-effectively' (primarily the focus of NPM) or whether they are indeed 'doing the right thing' (a fundamental principle of PVM)?

A controversial characteristic of NPM is that it 'assum[es] the superiority of the private sector and private sector management techniques to those of the public sector and public administration'. Basic principles of NPM can be 'classif[ied] ... into three broad categories: organizational restructuring [e.g. downsizing, disaggregation into departments and agencies], the use of market-type mechanisms [e.g. privatization, contracting out, user charges], and a focus on performance [e.g. performance budgeting and management, outputs, and indicators]'.

By contrast, while recognizing merits of private sector's principles rather than its values, PVM does not equate '[g]overning ... as the same as shopping or more broadly buying and selling goods in a market economy'. Governing entails more than providing services but rather providing services that matter, where valued social and economic outcomes are advanced. Public value is what the people say it is, and it should therefore be collectively built through citizen engagement. NPM and PVM have practically little in common. Hood and Peters (2004) argue that NPM has moved into an 'age of paradox'. This is attributed to the fact that actual implementation has come to contradict the very same principles that originally set NPM apart from other public administration philosophies. To begin with, while the replacement of Weberian 'rules-based, process-driven' approach was a central drive for public administration reforms, it has been 'noted that process controls over bureaucracies were in many cases retained and augmented and that increased formality and regulation were imposed on public bureaucracies during the New Public Management.

Second, NPM advocates for a 'leaner, and increasingly privatized government, emulating not only the practices but also the values of business'. Pressured by market-oriented competition, according to NPM supporters, small government is achieved through disaggregation – meaning the act of decentralizing government functions to arms' length agencies (a process known as 'agencification'). However, under NPM the number of administrative units increased and therefore enlarging the scope of government. Not only has agencification created more complex and dynamic agencies interrelationship, it has also created duplication of expenditures and more bureaucratic leadership positions.

(Continues...)

Excerpted from VALUING PEOPLEby Michael Anthony Tarallo Copyright © 2012 by Michael Anthony Tarallo. Excerpted by permission of AuthorHouse. All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.