Issues and Challenges of Local Government

Capacity Building: Bangladesh Experiences

Professor Salahuddin M. Aminuzzaman, PhD

Department of Public Administration
University of Dhaka
saminuzzaman@yahoo.com

Paper presented to International Conference on

Challenges of Governance in South Asia, Kathmandu,
Nepal December 15-16, 2008
 Context
Decentralization is one of the recent “development fads”.
It is a high priority Donor Agenda for reforms. (Leading
agents are WB, ADB, UNCDF and DFID).

Ideological base is still not sure but it is argued that

decentralization is generally motivated by political
imperatives.
But it has a sound basis in the economic rational of the
allocation of resources and the responsiveness of policy
making, strengthening grass root democracy.
It is also seen as a more effective means to tackle
poverty.
Unfortunately empirical evidences are yet to be
convincing. 2
 Context

Major Constraints
Conceptual clarity is yet to be cleared
(What to Decentralize? At what level and at what cost and
benefit.)
Political aspects of decentralization has been ignored
Difficulty of matching autonomy, authority and
accountability
Insufficient capacity at the designated level of
decentralization.
Decentralization as function also depends on the nature
of State. 3
 Context
Some observations from Bangladesh
Decentralization to enhance Local Governance in
Bangladesh has always been top-down and being
mastermind by Dictatorial rulers!!!

Demand side for Decentralization was hardly been there –

except few donor supported NGOs and Civil Society
raised the issue.

Paradoxically in spite of high Constitutional commitment,

Decentralization never got place in high priority reform
agenda.
Some form of in-built resistance from the political parties
and Members of parliament 4
The fundamental argument of my paper is that
Decentralization needs political, cultural, managerial and
institutional preparedness.

For that matter Capacity building at the local level is one

of the prime considerations for decentralization. Capacity
building also enhances the demand side of
decentralization.

Without such capacity building – decentralization could

be more of rhetoric and may even further weaken local
level governance and politics.

5
 Recent developments in Bangladesh
Decentralization is one of the recent policy focuses
of Govt of Bangladesh.
LGSP is one of such policies

LGSP is mounting a campaign to strengthen the

process of decentralization by strengthening the
Union Parishad (UP).
(A typical Union Parishad in Bangladesh consists of 19
villages and 13 Mouzas. A population of 21 thousand lives
on 8.2 thousand acres of land with 3900 households)
 Decentralization needs three F’s
•Functions (with assigned authority)
•Finance
•Functionaries (with authority, competence and
skill)

LGSP has primarily focused only on Finance

Bangladesh experiences of decentralization as a

Local Capacity building scheme grossly missed two
other elements.
One of the most important and serious challenge of
recent decentralization move in Bangladesh is capacity
building in shortest possible time with quality and
minimum cost.

In the light of the decentralization scheme (LGSP) of the

GoB, The paper presents two alternative schemes for such
capacity building approach

8
Institutional Profile of UP
UP as a local Government institutions has its origin in the
period of British rule originated by the Chawkidari
Panchayet Act of 1870.

•UPs lack credibility and image.

•Institutional and management capacity of the UPs is very
poor.

•A significant portion (85%) of UP officials (Chairman,

Members and Secretary) have not received any training.

•Female members of UP are still playing a “symbolic” and

“ornamental” role.
9
•UPs have a very weak financial and resource base.
Institutional profile of UP....

•Planning of UP projects is not participatory and fails to

address the dire needs of the poor and disadvantaged.

•There is no scope for effective community participation

in planning process.

•Some of the assigned functions are far beyond the legal,

managerial and financial capacity of the UP.

10
Capacity needs of the UP

Critical areas of concern for capacity building of the age

old institution are (Aminuzzaman, 2006):
•Skills related to community mobilization and social
mapping;
•Revenue mobilization and collection (fiscal regulations,
taxes, duties, user fees, revenue collection );
•Budget management (financial reports and audit,
Procurement procedures)
•Project design and management (participative planning;
project implementation and supervision);
•Inclusive strategic planning;
•Institutional innovation for service delivery,
•Monitoring and reporting system.
11
Supply Side of Capacity building
Present supply side of LG Capacity building is far too limited.
Roughly up 10% of the demand side could be addressed by National
Institute of Local Government (NILG), the sole training institution for
the Local Government bodies.
 Features of Alternative Capacity Building Service providers
15 national NGOs and 2 international NGO have been involved in
imparting training to the Local bodies through the funding support
from different donor agencies. NGO expertise are :
•Management of Social development activities and Salish (Alternative
Dispute Resolution) are the other common elements of training of
the NGOs.
•Women’s right and human rights.
•Technical aspects like project design and management, participative
planning, social monitoring, resource management/ budgeting,
office management, did not get adequate priority in the NGO training
packages.
•NGOs are heavily dependent on external resource speakers/
trainers.
12
Assessment of Capacity building Approach
Independent studies recognized that “most of the training
programs of the NILG are mere academic, routine,
repetitive and devoid of changing reality” (UNDP, 2006,
Aminuzzaman, 2007)
 
On the supply side, given the institutional and other
practical limitations of NILG, two alternative options can
be explored:

Approach A: Capacity building service through NGOs;

Approach B: Capacity building service through Upazila

Resource Team (URT)
13
Approach A: Capacity building service through NGOs : A number of
NGOs are expected to be providing the capacity building service to
the primary level beneficiaries i.e. UP Chair, Members, Secretary and
the members of Project Implementation Committee (PIC).

Approach B - Capacity building service through Upazila Resource

Team (URT)
Under this approach, a Upazila Resource Team (URT) could be
formed in each Upazila. The UNO will act as the Coordinator of the
URT. Each Upazila has as many as 25 to 28 Professional cadre
officials representing various line ministry and are all placed in one
complex.

In both Approaches, the members of the training team (i.e. URT

members and the trainers of the NGO) will be given a short but
intensive TOT by the NILG.
14
Preferences of potential training recipients
As many as 250 UP officials (Chairman, Members and
Secretaries) have been interviewed during this study.
60.58% of the UP officials preferred the NGOs as the
potential capacity building agent.

Reasons for such preferences as identified by the UP

officials are:
a. NGO trainers are friendly and approachable;
b. Trainers are realistic and down to earth;
c. Trainers tend to respect the trainees;
d. NGOs make the training session more enjoyable by
using various interesting approaches;
e. NGOs provide good travel and other allowances
f. NGO programs usually have exposure visit 15
On the other hand, 31.56% of UP officials have opted for
the Approach B (URT model), while 7.86% are unsure
about any of the approaches.

Reasons for such preferences are:

a. Upazila based officers are knowledgeable and experts
b. This will boost their self confidence and prestige;
c. This will create a bridge between the UP and Upazila
based officers and trainers;
d. Upazila based officer will have an opportunity to
understand and learn problems related to UP;
e. It will also minimize the ‘gap of understanding’
between the UP officials and Upazila administration.

16
Financial implication
However, from the cost estimation of both approaches,
it is observed that Approach B, i.e. URT is financially
much more cost effective. The variation of cost between
the two approaches is significant (i.e.66%).

17
Assessment of the Approaches by NILG Experts

The NILG professionals based on personal experiences

and observations noted that the NGOs in general have
some in-built limitations. Such as:

A. NGO training programs are generally run by make shift

trainers.
B. Trainers tend to take “too idealist position” in
analyzing the administrative and governance issues and
tend to ignore the political reality.
C. NGOs are neither accountable to the UP nor to the
Upazila administration, thus it would be difficult to
ensure monitoring and quality control. 18
Assessment of the Approaches by NILG Experts
NILG experts have shown their preference for Approach B,
i.e., the URT model on the following counts:

•This model could draw the professional experiences and

competences of the GoB field level staff;
•Higher chances of sustainability; it is cost effective, and easy to
monitor and follow up;
•The URT members are more directly and functionally linked to the
ultimate beneficiaries and thereby can communicate with them more
freely.
•This approach will also enhance the capacity and understanding of
the URT members to adapt and adopt their role, responsibility and
institutional links with the UP.
19
Recommendations

Considering the recently accumulated experiences, cost

effectiveness, sustainability, appreciating the immediate
demand for the training, and advantage of short lead
time for launching the capacity building programme,

Government may opt for Approach B i.e. using the URT

model.
However, it is difficult to completely discard the potential
and advantage of the Approach A only on cost ground.
It is therefore recommended that on an experimental
basis a selected number of NGOs be given the capacity
building responsibilities on a pilot/ experimental basis to
test the comparative advantage, efficiency and impact. 20
Conclusions
Need for a clear Decentralization Policy (in the light and
spirit of the Constitution) – which demands “Political Will”
Political decentralization is also a necessary condition
Continuous updating and improvement of curriculum and
training modules is needed. (TNA and diagnostic
assessments)
Training modules need to be developed with the active
participation of the local governments. (in some cases
tailor made)
Exposure visits to “best practices” and “peer learning”
should be introduced/ encouraged.
Use of indigenous knowledge can play an important role
in managing local affairs/ governance issues. 21
Thank You

22