report lga-pacific final 210513

Local Governments and their Representative Organizations in the Pacific:

Context, Challenges and Possibilities for

Cooperation and Support

Case Studies of Kiribati, Marshall Islands and Vanuatu

A research paper

Bernhard Weimer

May 2013

2

www.arial-programme.eu

VNG International Nassaulaan 12, 2514 JS The Hague, Netherlands, tel: +31 70 373 8401, fax: +31 70 373 8660

Author: Bernhard Weimer

Senior partner MAP Consult. Management. Governance. Development

Maputo, Mozambique

[email protected] [email protected]

with inputs from Mark Dacombe,

Localise Pty Limited, Perth, Australia (Annex on Marshall Island)

www.wearelocalise.com

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.wearelocalise.com/

Map 1: The Pacific, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Vanuatu

Source: http://www.mapsofworld.com/australia-and-oceania/ ; https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/rm.html

http://www.mapsofworld.com/australia-and-oceania/

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/rm.html

Exchange Rates

Local Currency (1 Unit) Country EURO

AU$ Australian Dollar Australia, Kiribati 0.79069

NZ$ New Zealand Dollar New Zealand 0.64638

US$ United States Dollar USA, Marshall Islands 0.76336

VT Vanuatu Vatu Vanuatu 0.00827 Source: http://www.oanda.com/currency/converter/ 17 April 2013

http://www.oanda.com/currency/converter/

5



Acronyms

ACP Africa, Caribbean and Pacific ADB Asian Development Bank AFBD African Bank for Development ALGA Australian Local Government Association AMCOD All Africa Ministerial Conference on Decentralization and Local Development AOSIS Alliance of Small Island States ASPAC United Cities and Local Governments of Asia Pacific AusAID Australian Aid Agency BTC Betio Town Council (Kiribati) CBO Community-based Organisation CDF Constituency Development Fund CEO Chief Executive Officer CLGF Commonwealth Local Government Forum CROP Council of Regional Organizations in the Pacific CSO Civil Society Organization CSP Country Strategy Paper DAC Development Assistance Committee DeLog Decentralization and Local Government DLA Department of Local Authorities (Vanuatu) DP Development Partner DRC Decentralization Reform Commission DSPPAC Department of Strategic Planning, Policy and Aid Coordination (Vanuatu) ECDPM European Centre for Development Policy Management EDF European Development Fund ELGA Emerging Local Government Association EO Executive Officer ESCAP United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific EU European Union FSM Federated States of Micronesia FSPI Foundation for the Peoples of the South Pacific International GFG Governance for Growth (Vanuatu) GoV Government of Vanuatu HDI Human Development Index JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency KANGO Kiribati Association of Non-Government Organisations KIRIWATSAN Kiribati Water and Sanitation Programme KSEC Kiribati Solar Energy Company KUC Kiritimati Urban Council LAAV Local Authority Association of Vanuatu LG Local Government LGA Local Government Association LGDF Local Government Development Foundation M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MCA Millennium Challenge Account MDG Millennium Development Goals MFAT Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (New Zealand) MIA Ministry of Internal Affairs (Vanuatu) MIMA Marshall Islands Mayors Association

6



MISA Ministry of Internal and Social Affairs (Kiribati) NAO National Authorizing Office NGO Non-governmental Organization NIP National Indicative Programmes NSA Non State Actor NZAid New Zealand Agency for International Development OECD Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development OEPPC Office of Environmental Planning and Policy Coordination (Marshall Islands) PAA Priority Action Agenda (Vanuatu) PBGD Provincially Based Government Departments (Vanuatu) PCC Pacific Conference of Churches PEM Pacific Economic Monitor PFIP Pacific Financial Inclusion Programme PIANGO Pacific Islands Association of NGOs PIC Pacific Island Country PIFACC Pacific Islands Framework for Action on Climate Change PIFS Pacific Island Forum Secretariat PLP Pacific Leadership Programme PNG Papua New Guinea PRC Peoples Republic of China PRIF Pacific Regional Infrastructure Facility PRIP Pacific Regional Indicative Programme PRISM Promotion of Regional Initiative on Solid Waste Management in Pacific Island Countries PSC Public Service Commission PSGP Provincial Government Strengthening Programme (Solomon Islands) RAMSI Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands RAO Regional Authorizing Office REDI Rural Economic Development Initiative (Vanuatu) RERF Revenue Equalization Reserve Fund (Kiribati) RMI Republic of Marshall Islands ROC Republic of China (Taiwan) RSTP Rural Skills Training Programme (Vanuatu) SIDS Small Island Developing States SPC Secretariat of the Pacific Community STP Sustainable Town Planning Project (NZAid) SWAp Sector Wide Approach SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats TA Technical Assistance TUC Teinainano Urban Council (Kiribati) UCLG United Cities and Local Governments UCLGA United Cities and Local Governments of Africa UNCDF United Nations Capital Development Fund UNDAF United Nations Development Assistance Framework UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change UNICEF United Nations Children's Fund USAID United States Agency for International Development USP University of the South Pacific

Executive Summary

The present study was commissioned by VNG-International on behalf of the EU-funded ARIAL Programme. It examines the local governments (LGs) and their associations in selected Pacific Island Countries (PICs) in the context of the region’s overall development framework conditions and challenges, as well as the support provided by major development partners (DPs). The field work included semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders, i.e. representatives of local and national governments, LG Association and bi- and multilateral donor agencies and was carried out in Kiribati and Vanuatu in April 2013. The case of Marshall Islands could only be dealt with in terms of desk research due to logistical constraints.

The findings of the research study are summarized as follows:

The LGs and their associations are affected by the challenges the PICs as a whole are facing, namely their smallness and distance from markets, widespread urban and rural poverty and the effects of a high urbanization rate and of climate change;

the aid support to the region is somewhat shifting in approach and emphasis as a result of political economic regional dynamics and the recognition that prevalent aid delivery modalities have not automatically increased aid effectiveness. It also appears to neglect a suitable role of LGs’ in development programmes aimed at more encompassing and sustainable solutions to the aforementioned challenges, few examples of an explicit LG focus in regional aid programmes notwithstanding.

The LGs in the countries studied have been grappling with the dilemma of being, on the on hand, institutionally responsible for a very wide range of functions in the delivery of public services, but are, on the other, manifestly under resourced to be able to perform adequately. Human resource constraints accentuate the dilemma. A more effective generation of own source revenue appears to be possible, but may only contribute marginally to the present resource gap, making the LGs dependent on additional transfers by governments and /or support by donors if the broad scope of their responsibilities is to be maintained. Alternatively, a review of this scope may limit the number of their functions and contribute to providing fewer public services with increased effectiveness and coverage.

The newly emerging LG Associations, the Kiribati Local Government Association (KiLGA) and the Local Authorities Association of Vanuatu (LAAV) and their leaders are aware of the aforementioned dilemmas and constraint. They are in the process of formulating and implementing strategies to address them. In so doing, they appear to have overcome initial doubts by governments concerning their policy agenda. The Marshall Islands Mayors Association (MIMA), one of the oldest LG association among the small island states in the region, has been recognized by the Government as an important partner for providing public services to urban and remote island councils, scarcity of resources notwithstanding.

KiLGA, founded in 2012, has undergone a rapid initial maturation process and has made good use of the support provided within the ARIAL framework. It has been able to provide some practical support to their members. LAAV, formally created with initial ‘teething problems’, also has the potential to make a useful contribution to the cause of LG in Vanuatu, despite the institutionally and politically complex setting governing LG in that country.

The regional associations’ viability and sustainability will depend on providing useful and tangible contributions to addressing the challenges their member’s face. Special attention needs to be given to issue-based capacity building and innovative approaches to local economic development. They also depend on their capacity and advocacy work for influencing national development and public sector and fiscal reform agendas as well as on their ability to garner support from DPs. The abovementioned shift of the regional aid agenda provides a window of opportunity they may be able explore towards this end.

Key words: Pacific Island Countries, Kiribati, Vanuatu, Marshall Islands, Decentralization, Local Government, Local Government Association, Aid Programmes

8



Contents

Acronyms ............................................................................................................................................................................. 5

Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................................................. 7

1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................... 10

1.1 Scope ................................................................................................................................................................ 10

1.2 Methodology .................................................................................................................................................... 10

2 The Pacific region - a brief overview ..................................................................................................................... 13

2.1 Historical, institutional and socio economic features ...................................................................................... 13

2.2 Strategic issues and challenges ........................................................................................................................ 14

2.2.1 Economy and MDGs ..................................................................................................................................... 14

2.2.2 Urbanization ................................................................................................................................................. 15

2.2.3 Effects of climate change ............................................................................................................................. 15

2.3 International cooperation ................................................................................................................................ 16

2.3.1 Change of aid paradigm?.............................................................................................................................. 18

2.4 A role for local governments and their associations in aid programmes? ....................................................... 19

2.5 LGs in Pacific Island Countries – preliminary hypotheses ................................................................................ 21

3 Local Government in Kiribati ................................................................................................................................ 23

3.1 Kiribati: The macro context .............................................................................................................................. 23

3.2 Kiribati LGs: Basic features and institutional framework ................................................................................. 24

3.3 Issues and challenges ....................................................................................................................................... 25

3.3.1 LG revenue and expenditure ........................................................................................................................ 25

3.3.2 Delivery of local public services ................................................................................................................... 27

3.3.3 Other challenges .......................................................................................................................................... 28

3.4 LGs and International cooperation ................................................................................................................... 28

3.5 The Kiribati Local Government Association (KiLGA) ......................................................................................... 31

3.5.1 History, objectives and activities .................................................................................................................. 31

3.5.2 Perspectives ................................................................................................................................................. 32

3.6 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................................................... 33

4 Local Government in Vanuatu .............................................................................................................................. 34

4.1 Vanuatu: the macro context ............................................................................................................................. 34

4.2 Vanuatu LGs: Basic features and institutional framework ............................................................................... 35

4.3 Issues and challenges ....................................................................................................................................... 36

4.3.1 LG revenue and expenditure ........................................................................................................................ 36

4.3.2 Capacity for service delivery ........................................................................................................................ 41

4.3.3 Other Challenge: effects of climate change ................................................................................................. 42

4.4 Vanuatu LGs and international cooperation .................................................................................................... 42

4.5 The Local Authorities Association of Vanuatu (LAAV) ...................................................................................... 45

4.5.1 History, objectives and activities .................................................................................................................. 45

4.5.2 Challenges and perspectives ........................................................................................................................ 45

4.6 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................................ 47

5 Conclusions and recommendations ...................................................................................................................... 48

5.1 General conclusions .......................................................................................................................................... 48

5.2 Specific conclusions and recommendations ..................................................................................................... 49

9



5.2.1 National governments and donors............................................................................................................... 49

6 Annexes ................................................................................................................................................................. 53

6.1 Terms of Reference .......................................................................................................................................... 53

6.2 Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Vanuatu – key features ........................................................................................... 54

6.3 List of persons contacted .................................................................................................................................. 55

6.4 Kiribati: Solid Waste Management – towards a holistic approach (some personal considerations) ............... 56

6.5 The Local Development Finance Practice (UNCDF) .......................................................................................... 59

6.6 Local Government on Marshall Islands ............................................................................................................ 61

6.6.1 Introductory note ......................................................................................................................................... 61

6.6.2 Marshall Island: Macro context .................................................................................................................... 61

6.6.3 Local government ......................................................................................................................................... 61

6.6.4 The Marshall Islands Mayors Association (MIMA) ....................................................................................... 61

6.6.5 LG and International cooperation ................................................................................................................ 64

6.7 Bibliography ...................................................................................................................................................... 65

Maps, Tables and Figures

Map 1: The Pacific, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Vanuatu ....................................................................................................... 3

Map 2: Kiribati .................................................................................................................................................................... 23

Map 3: Vanuatu- Provincial governments ......................................................................................................................... 35

Table 1: Kiribati- Local Government Financing as % of Total Budget (2012) 25

Table 2: Kiribati Local Government – Sources of revenue (2012), in % of total revenue * 25

Figure 1: Kiribati- Composition of LG Councils ................................................................................................................... 24

Figure 2: Kiribati Local Government expenditure by categories, 2012 (in %) .................................................................... 26

Figure 3: Vanuatu’s Provinces ............................................................................................................................................ 35

Figure 4: Provincial governments- Total revenue, transfers and own source revenue, 2012 (in VT) ................................ 37

Figure 5: Vanuatu: Provincial Government Revenue (average) by source, 2012, (in %) ................................................... 37

Figure 6: Own source revenue, Shefa and Penama Province, 2012 (in VT) ....................................................................... 38

Figure 7: Vanuatu Provincial Government Expenditure, 2012 (in VT) ............................................................................... 39

Figure 8: Port Villa and Luganville municipalities - Revenue by source, 2011/12 (in VT)* ................................................ 39

Figure 9: Port Vila and Luganville Municipalities- Expenditure, 2011/2012 (in VT) ........................................................... 40

1 Introduction

1.1 Scope

This research report has been commissioned by VNG International, the International Cooperation Agency of the Association of Netherlands Municipalities, on behalf of the EU’s ARIAL programme.

1 Departing from ARIAL’s Strategic

Objective to improve “the participative power of local governments through the strengthening of its primal representative bodies; the Associations of Local Governments (LGAs) at national, regional and sub-continental level”

2,

the present study aims to provide an analytical overview on local government and the donor community in the Pacific. More specifically, the purpose of this study is the production of a research paper on local government and their representative organizations in Vanuatu, Kiribati and the Marshall Islands, including the mapping of bi- and multinational donor activities in their support possibilities for enhancing cooperation.

The study further attempts to identify the potential for cooperation and partnerships with other relevant organisations, be it regional or international local governments, agencies and associations. These not only include agencies with which cooperation already exists (e.g. the Commonwealth Local Government Forum - CLGF), but also the United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG), and their regional branches in Africa, and in Asia and the Pacific,(the United Cities and Local Governments of Africa (UCLGA), and United Cities and Local Governments of Asia-Pacific (ASPAC)), the Partnership for Democratic Local Governance in South East Asia, DELGOSEA

3 and others, respectively.

Finally, it is the aim of the present study to explore the potential of cooperation and partnerships between LGs, CSOs and international aid agencies, including the AusAID sponsored Pacific Leadership Programme (PLP) on the one hand, and Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) which have a Local Government (LG) focus in their activities, on the other. The study reflects not only VNG International’s interests in better understanding the LG and LGA dynamics in the region and countries studied, and gauging cooperation possibilities, but also corresponds to an articulated demand by ARIAL partners in the Pacific for a more dynamic relationship and more visibility of the Pacific in the overall ARIAL Programme.

4

1.2 Methodology

The Consultant’s TOR did not prescribe a specific methodology for conducting the research for this study. Therefore, the author chose a theoretical research framework drawing on the conventional body of literature on decentralization, local governance, intergovernmental relations

5 and on state-building in developing countries.

6 Taking into account

what appears to indicate a recent emphasis of context analyses with a focus on political economy, rent-seeking,7 as

well as, political settlements in aid-dependent countries, particular attention was given to include literature on these subjects, in general, and specifically in the Pacific

8. This approach was complemented by drawing on literature on

1 www.arial-programme.eu 2 http://www.arial-programme.eu/en/about-arial.html 3 http://www.delgosea.eu/cms/ 4 Job Boe, the Chief Executive Officer of Local Authority Association of Vanuatu (LAAV), in: http://www.dailypost.vu/content/boe-presents-paper-

behalf-pacific 5 e.g. Manor, 1999; Connerly et al,, 2010. 6 e.g. Bräutigam et al., 2008; Hameiri, 2010. 7 Rent is defined as forms of income of individuals, (public and private) enterprises and corporate organizations (including political parties), which is not the result of work/labour or generation of surpluses and use values, but rather result of strategic advantages, the resource endowments and political

and economic monopolies on resources including land, sea, subsoil and aid. Rent-seeking is ‘the expenditure of resources and effort in creating,

maintaining and transferring rents (Khan & Jomo, 2000: 70). It can take the legal (lobbying, contributions to parties) and illegal forms (bribes, nepotism, trade of influences illegal political contributions), using up resources which are social costs. According to Moore (1998; 2002) rentier states

obtain ‘unearned income’ in the form of strategic and mineral rents, aid rents etc. outside or at the margin of the tax system and without necessarily

producing an equivalent of public goods and services. 8 e.g. Khan, 2010; Eaton et al., 2009; Laws, 2013. The latter source was particular valuable since it contains a review of a vast body of literature on

development and cooperation in the Pacific region.

http://www.arial-programme.eu/

http://www.arial-programme.eu/en/about-arial.html

http://www.delgosea.eu/cms/

http://www.dailypost.vu/content/boe-presents-paper-behalf-pacific

http://www.dailypost.vu/content/boe-presents-paper-behalf-pacific

11



regional relations and development cooperation in the Pacific.9 An initial draft of the structure of the report,

elaborated at the beginning of the research project was approved by VNG International.

The main research question can be framed as follows:

What is the role and effectiveness of local governments and their associations, in selected countries in the Pacific, for enhancing the wellbeing of people and their participation in the political, economic and cultural life as citizens of their countries, taking into consideration the latter’s aid-dependence and the structural constraints regarding the building of the (local) state’s capacity to produce and deliver public services and goods?

A secondary question is:

What support (financial, institutional, instrumental, capacity, etc.) do national governments and international donor agencies provide to LGs and their associations, to strengthen their capacity to deliver services and contribute to poverty reduction, and, further, what possibilities exist to enhance support?

In attempting to answer these questions, the author reviewed selected relevant literature (see Bibliography, Annex 6.7) and conducted a series of interviews with representatives of national governments, local governments and their associations, bi- and multilateral donor agencies, NGOs, researchers and other stakeholders in Fiji, Kiribati and Vanuatu (see List of Persons Contacted, Annex 6.3). For the interviews the author used previously compiled research guidelines, with research questions selectively applied in an open manner, in function of the type of organization the interlocutor belonged to. The fieldwork was conducted during the period 25

th of March to 13

th of April, 2013, during which the Fiji

capital of Suva served as a base and hub for research trips to Kiribati (1st

to 4th

of April) and Vanuatu (7th

to 11th

of April). A planned trip to the Marshall Islands could not be realised due to logistical, time and budgetary constraints.

The study thus, has its limitations, most obviously the absence of fieldwork on the Marshall Islands. For this reason, an initially planned chapter on the Marshall Islands case is reduced to a mere Annex (see Annex 6.6). It is entirely based on desk research which benefitted considerably of substantive input by Mark Dacombe

10, Perth, Australia, and Albert

Cereala of FSPI, Suva, Fiji. A further limitation is the author’s ‘capitals perspective’, since there was no opportunity to visits LGs and take views of stakeholders outside the capital cities into consideration. A ‘local arena’ and a bottom-up perspective is clearly missing, which particularly in the case of Vanuatu, was sub-optimal. The Local Authorities Association of Vanuatu (LAAV), the authors’ principal interlocutor in Vanuatu’s capital, Port Vila, had little feedback from institutions (e.g. Port Vila municipality) and donors despite repeated attempts to line up meetings and interviews. Finally, the study suffered, to a certain extent, from an underrepresentation of positions and views of the largest Development Partner (DP) in the region, the Australian Aid Agency (AusAID). Despite repeated attempts to arrange meetings with the agency’s personnel in Kiribati and Vanuatu, it was not possible, to capture their view on the role LGs and LGAs play in addressing the development challenges in those countries and possibilities of their support in the agency’s bilateral aid programmes. The author had to rely on the information available on AusAID’s easily accessible and informative website.

Finally, a note on language, i.e. the use and meaning of ‘local’ (e.g. in ‘local’ government, ‘local’ stakeholder, ‘local’ community) is called for. In this study the word is used in a triad which describes three levels of a society or a political- administrative system, from national or central level, via the sub-national level to that of community and its grassroots organization. In this sense, ‘local’ describes the intermediate, sub-national level, between the central state and the community. The use of the word was adapted to the context of the countries studied and may thus, have different meanings, depending on the number of sub-national levels in a given context. In the case of Vanuatu with its three tiers of sub-national governments (provincial administration, municipality and area council), all these are encompassed by

9 The author found the research reports and publications of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), Australian Aid Agency (AusAID) and the New

Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) particularly useful. 10 Director, Localise Pty Limited, Perth, Australia (http://wearelocalise.com/), who has conducted trainings with the Marshall Islands Mayors Association (MIMA), supported by ARIAL, among others.

http://wearelocalise.com/

12



‘local government’, whereas in Kiribati and Marshall Islands with their two tier systems ‘local’ refers only to the lowest level of public administration.

The research for the present study would not have been possible without the support by all those women and men in the national and international organizations, national and local governments and agencies visited in Fiji, Kiribati and Vanuatu who accepted the request for a conversation/ interview with the author, patiently answering his questions and generously sharing opinions, information and contact with him. The author’s Thank You, Vinaka, Coraba and Tanku tumas, goes to all of them.

The author is especially indebted to Rex Horoi, Albert Cerelala and Andrea Montu of the Suva Office of the Foundation for the Peoples of the South Pacific International (FSPI), who so effectively supported the author’s research trip in terms of logistics and setting up meetings and informational support. He is equally indebted to Mark Dacombe of Localise Pty Limited in Perth, Australia, for his valuable input for the section on the Marshall Islands and to Teresa Weimer, London, for her efficient proofreading and final editing. To all of them a wholehearted Thank You!

FSPI’s partnership with VNG International was decisive for the present study to happen. Therefore, last but not least, the author’s Thank You, or rather Hartelijk Dank, goes to Nicole Boot, the Team Leader of this project, and to Micheline Massé.

Finally, as usual, the reader is made aware that the research for this study is based on written and oral information used by the author, however, representing his own analyses and thus, reflecting neither the opinion of interlocutors, nor of VNG International. While all efforts have been made to reflect shared opinions and facts with fidelity, it is exclusively the author who carries the responsibility for eventual factual errors or erroneous interpretations.

13



2 The Pacific region - a brief overview

2.1 Historical, institutional and socio economic features

The Pacific Island Countries (PICs) whose local governments and associations are subjects of this study, Vanuatu, Kiribati and Marshall Islands, are part of the 22 countries and territories in the vast ocean region of approximately 30 million km

2 referred to as ‘Pacific’. They are grouped in three ethno-linguistic-geographic zones, namely Melanesia

(including Vanuatu), Micronesia (including Kiribati and Marshall Islands11

) and Polynesia. They vary considerably in size and population, with Papua New Guinea (7 million people) being the largest Pacific state and Tuvalu and Nauru (less than 10,000 people) at the other extreme. The ethnic, linguistic, cultural, economic, etc., differences between and within the states is enormous. Despite these, the PICs have a number of features in common, variations notwithstanding

Firstly, most of the PICs gained their independence from Britain, France, the USA, Australia or New Zealand between the sixties and the eighties of last century. Their legislation and system of (local) government and elections bear the imprints of the colonial past, such as the Westminster type of democracy.

Secondly, most of the PICs maintain, by design or default, a mix of, or co-existence between, the ‘modern’ system of governance and a traditional one based around chiefs/ traditional leaders, who exercise strong influence at community level. Therefore, one can speak of a ‘hybrid system’ of local governance. In some of the countries, notably in Melanesia, this is permeated by the ‘Wantok’ [One Talk] system, a kind of unwritten social contract, between those that speak the same language, to assist each other in times of need,as part of the socio-political relations. An endogenous basis for this situation can be traced to a social complex of high cultural diversity associated with small political units and a model of leadership which is intensely competitive, often labelled ‘the Big Man system’, in distinction to chieftainship. This model of leadership is characterized by a constant process of legitimacy maintenance through symbols of allegiance and discretionary resources, patronage networks, and the ever-present threat of rivals. Political parties do exist, however, they are characterized by fragile powerbases and changing loyalties often coupled to changing links to certain provincial interest groups, social bases and political figures. They have a low degree of internal and external consistency and effectiveness. Their fluidity forces them to form opportunistic electoral coalitions (Weimer et al.,, 2012: 27).

Thirdly, and related to this, one may consider the general absence (with very few exceptions, such as in Tuvalu) of forums and incentives for dynamic political settlements among national and local elites and between them as another common feature (Laws, 2013). This feature, confirmed in various interviews in the course of the present study, contributes to, legitimate and illegitimate forms of rent-seeking, problems of corruption, social (and ethnic) exclusion, and political tensions and instability. These issues have been associated with the major governance challenges which many of the PICs face- a matter to which a number of studies (Laws, 2013; Saldanha, 2004) have drawn attention to. These include weak accountability and checks and balances, associated with weak executive and parliamentary institutions, a politicised public service and planning and budgeting processes with limited transparency and involvement of citizens. Consequently, the need for institutional and public sector reform, including budgetary and fiscal reform has been highlighted (Duncan, 2011). For having a chance of success, such reforms, however, need to take full cognisance of the physical, cultural, economic, administrative, etc., specificities of each country (Ray, 1999).

Other challenges, namely economic development and poverty reduction, urbanisation and mitigation of the effects of climate change are discussed in the following section.

11 They have outlier islands in Polynesia, such as the Christmas Island which belongs to Kiribati.

14



2.2 Strategic issues and challenges

2.2.1 Economy and MDGs

The economic development of the PICs have structural constraints: their small, but rapidly growing populations, the small size of their land areas and GDP, as well as, the distance from major trading partners and markets,poor infrastructure, and lack of essential government services for considerable parts of the population.

Their productive and export base is narrow with a prominence of primary sectors (e.g. fisheries, agriculture), tourism, and services. Their economies and public sectors depend on inflows of external assistance. Taken together, this structure makes the PICs highly vulnerable to external shocks, such as, global financial crises and cuts in aid by donor countries (Le Borgne & Medas, 2007). Vulnerability to the effects of climate change and natural, disasters compound their vulnerability.

These vulnerabilities obviously have an impact on the budgetary polices and fiscal performance of the PICs. Again, there are considerable variations, with the larger, export-oriented members (e.g. Papua New-Guinea , Solomon Islands and Vanuatu) of the group more vulnerable to budgetary shortfalls due to changes in the global markets and smaller PICs performing somewhat better.

12 Nevertheless, the vulnerabilities and associated budget constraints will impact

negatively on the governments’ spending capacity (and thus, transfers to local governments for investment and services), unless mitigated by reforms of taxation and financial management. The revenue stabilization fund available to many PIC governments in the form of sovereign wealth fund (Le Borgne & Medas, 2007) are not necessarily effective in minimizing budgetary risks and meeting the growing demand for resources, also by local governments, in order to meet their expectations and obligations regarding the delivery of public services to a growing urban population (see below). Despite this assessment, a number of interviewees argued in favour of the creation of a revenue stabilization fund for local government, to be partially financed by donors.

Changes in the global economy will place greater pressure on the PICs to find ways and means of sustaining themselves. The ADB in its Pacific Economic Monitor (PEM) concludes that their common features enumerated above (geographical isolation, high transportation costs, low connectivity, and small and dispersed populations, etc.) may inhibit private sector job creation and public service delivery, with growth usually reaching only 1-2% per year. It is therefore, unlikely that growth will be the engine for significant reduction in poverty.

13 It is suggested that the building

of institutional capacity to link up with the major economies in Asia and the Northern Pacific, investment in communication and Information Technology and Communication (ITC) as well as labour migration may be ways to overcome impediments to growth.

Higher and sustained growth rates may be necessary but not sufficient conditions for many PICs to address poverty. Most of them face considerable challenges in achieving the globally defined Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), largely because of stagnant economic growth, a lack of employment opportunities in the formal sector, and the subsistence nature of the informal sector. The UNDP Pacific Centre concludes that PICs face the highest levels of vulnerability, with very low coping capacity and resilience to the endogenous and exogenous shocks that have adversely impacted the Pacific communities in recent years. As a result, the Pacific region runs the very high risk of not achieving the MDGs.

14 Particularly the target of halving the proportion of people living in extreme poverty (Millennium

Development Goal 1) is unlikely to be reached in the region.

However, there are considerable variations. The Cook Islands, Niue, Palau, Samoa, and Tonga are considered to be ‘on track’ towards achieving the MDGs. Fiji, the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), the Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, and Vanuatu are exhibiting ‘mixed progress’ in realizing the goals by 2015. Conversely, Kiribati, Nauru, and Papua New Guinea are considered ‘off track’ in achieving the MDGs (Laws, 2013). Existing weaknesses in the

12 http://devpolicy.org/shifting-fiscal-terrain-in-the-pacific-20121220-2/ 13 http://www.adb.org/news/smallest-pacific-economies-must-build-links-boost-connections-thrive-adb 14 http://www.pacific.one.un.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=118&Itemid=169

http://devpolicy.org/shifting-fiscal-terrain-in-the-pacific-20121220-2/

http://www.adb.org/news/smallest-pacific-economies-must-build-links-boost-connections-thrive-adb

http://www.pacific.one.un.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=118&Itemid=169

15



information base notwithstanding, on aggregate, there is mixed progress, especially if one takes into consideration that some countries have ‘localized’ the global MDGs. It is not known, to what extent national poverty reduction strategies and measures are broken down to LG levels.

2.2.2 Urbanization

The PICs have witnessed dramatic urbanization in the past decade. According to a recent ADB study (ADB, 2012), in 2011, 2.03 million persons were residing in Pacific urban centres, which accounted for approximately 20% of the total Pacific population. Urban poverty is now more widespread than rural poverty in the majority of PICs with an increasing number of urban residents living in squatter settlements.

The Pacific has traditionally been a rural agricultural/ subsistence society with traditional land tenure systems linked to individual families in clusters of traditional villages. This is, howver, no longer the case since new settlement patterns, planned and unplanned, have evolved around those clusters, driven by modernization and migration. This process was accompanied by the informalization of the economy which sustains an increasing part of the urban population, with a decline in the quality of life in Pacific urban areas, mirrored in increasing rates of urban poverty incidence and a failure by national and local governments to deliver public services in terms of quality and coverage. Especially the youth is affected by this process (Cameron et al., 2011).

The national and local governments have been overwhelmed by the scale and impact of the urbanization process, and, so far seem to have failed to find adequate solutions, in terms of planning, investment and governance. The land tenure issues, importunate for spatial and investment planning, have not been sufficiently addressed (ADB, 2012). The local governments, at the forefront of the urbanization challenges, have many responsibilities for public services and planning, but inadequate resources. Their success or failure in managing urbanisation and provide the required levels of physical and social infrastructure, and services, will affect many lives in a new urban Pacific and will impact on the political and social stability of the PICs.

Looking ahead, the ADB study (2012) suggests that:

urbanization issues would need to feature more prominently and need to be embedded into national and regional planning and development agendas,

most Pacific countries would benefit from a reassessment of their entire urbanization process, and a decision as to how each country’s urban management issues are to be addressed, and,

the greatest probability of success in improving urban management will result from an incremental approach formulated as part of a long-term overall urban sector management plan to which a wide range of stakeholders are committed.

The local government’s role and capacity in managing urbanization is, therefore, likely to become more important in the future.

2.2.3 Effects of climate change

Pacific Island Countries (PICs) are especially vulnerable to the effects of Climate Change. Sea‐level rise caused by global warming and melting of polar ice caps is their key climate change‐related threat (Alfaro‐Pelico, 2012). This exacerbates the risks for the island’s population which are already prone to extreme weather conditions such as tropical cyclones, tsunamis, floods, and associated phenomena such as coastal erosion. The predicted rise in sea levels, increased number of tropical cyclones, altered precipitation patterns and higher temperatures will aggravate these environmental dangers and will impact negatively on the agricultural resource base, the public and private infrastructure, the availability of freshwater in the PICs and, therefore, the livelihoods of populations in the PICs (Alfaro‐Pelico, 2012). The overall threat for low-lying Small Island Developing States (SIDS), such as Kiribati, is their complete disappearance, although the predictability of, and uncertainty around, such an event is subject to debate and (Dornan, 2012).

16



Programmes and financing instruments for dealing with the effects of climate change are addressed in the Bali Roadmap, which identified the common areas of intervention aimed at mitigation, adaptation, technology and financing. These four pillars of the Bali Roadmap emerged from the Thirteenth Session of the Conference of the Parties (COP‐13) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The specific priority objectives of SIDS are reflected in the Barbados Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island States (Alfaró-Pelico, 2012). One of the most vocal groups in raising the climate change-related concerns of SIDS and lobbying for financing of mitigation and adaption measures is the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), an intergovernmental organisation of low‐lying coastal and small island countries, established in 1990.

15.

The PICs are challenged with mainstreaming climate change adaption measures in policies and programmes, including at the local government level. The PIFS’s key instrument is the Pacific Islands Framework for Action on Climate Change 2006-2015 (PIFACC), endorsed by Pacific Forum Leaders in 2005. It serves as the blueprint for action for the Pacific region on climate change both at the regional level and the national level. The goals stated in PIFACC are: i) implementing tangible, on-the-ground adaptation measures; ii) governance and decision-making; iii) improving understanding of climate change; iv) education, training and awareness; v) mitigation of global greenhouse gas emissions; and vi) partnerships and cooperation.

16The PIFACC is promoted by the PIFS as well as the Council of Regional

Organizations in the Pacific (CROP), an umbrella organization which the PIF is part of.17

First experiences with various financing facilities for climate change adaption measures, ranging from national and sub-regional trust funds managed by implementation entities, via development banks to budget support, have been documented (PIF, 2011). The financing of the various modalities depends to a large extent on the cooperation with bi- and multilateral donor agencies. Again, it is not clear, to what extent climate change mitigation and financing mechanisms involve the local governments in the Pacific Region.

2.3 International cooperation

This section gives an overview of the PICs’ international cooperation, focussing selectively on bi- and multilateral donors. According to the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the major bilateral donors are Australia, the United States of America, Japan, New Zealand and France.

The PICs economies and budgets depend to a large extent on the support of these and other bi- and multilateral partners, few exceptions notwithstanding. According to Laws (2013), the Pacific region:

between 1970 and 1999 ,received a total amount of aid assistance of almost 50 billion US$;

between 1995 and 1999, witnessed an average per capita aid that exceeded that of Sub Sahara Africa by ten times, and that of India by 100 times, and,

between 2012 and 2016, will benefit from an increase of Australian aid by approximately 37%, from approximately 1.17 billion AU$ to an estimated 1.6 billion AU$.

Among the bilateral donors, Australia is by far the region’s most important Development Partner (DP). Its aid assistance is delivered via AusAID’s regional programmes executed and coordinated in partnership with the PIFS as well as through regional standalone programmes such as the Pacific Leadership Programme (PFP) and the multi-donor Pacific Region Infrastructure Facility (PRIF

18). The bulk of aid is delivered through bilateral partnership agreements,

signed thus far, by 11 Pacific governments. Australia’s bilateral partnership and cooperation agreements with the PICs

15 http://aosis.org/aosis-news/ 16 http://www.sprep.org/attachments/legal/APClimateChange.pdf 17 http://www.forumsec.org/resources/uploads/attachments/documents/FINAL-%20CROP%20Response%20to%20Climate%20Change.pdf 18 the other DPs are the Asian Development Bank (ADB), The European Union (EU), the New Zealand Aid Programme (NZAid) and the World Bank

(WB). PRIF works in the following priority sectors: energy, telecommunications, transport (land, air, sea), waste management and water and sanitation, the latter two of particular relevance to LGs. see: http://www.theprif.org/

http://aosis.org/aosis-news/

http://www.sprep.org/attachments/legal/APClimateChange.pdf

http://www.forumsec.org/resources/uploads/attachments/documents/FINAL-%20CROP%20Response%20to%20Climate%20Change.pdf

http://www.theprif.org/

17



are based on the principles of the Port Moresby Declaration19

which defines the joint commitments and actions of the partners for accelerated development in the Pacific Region and the achievements of the MDGs.

20 The Cairns Compact

21

approved by the leaders of the PIF and donors in 2009 aims to strengthen the development coordination.

The USA considers the Pacific Islands as important to their geostrategic and security interests. The USAID mission for the region based in Papua New Guinea, although closed in 1995, has been reopened in 2011. Priority areas for USAID support are environment and climate change (including disaster relief), health and governance.

22 The agency’s

programme is, in the case of Vanuatu only complemented by the support provided by the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) (see Section on Vanuatu).

Both New Zealand and Japan are important regional DPs. The Pacific region is of strategic importance to the economy and security of both. In 2009, Japan announced a development assistance programme of up to 50 billion Yen

23,

focussing on the three priority areas, namely i) environment/climate change, ii) overcoming vulnerabilities/ human security, and iii) enhancement of people-to-people exchanges. Most of the aid is delivered via projects and technical assistance and capacity building implemented by the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) and the Japanese volunteer service, complemented by cooperation and coordination with the PIFS.

24

New Zealand considers the Pacific region as the geographical focus area of its aid assistance. Based on the cooperation principles defined on the Cairns Declaration and the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, the New Zealand aid programmes delivered by NZAid, supports sustainable development in the region and its countries in four areas, notably by i) investing in economic development, ii) promoting human development, iii) improving resilience and responding to disasters, and iv) building safe and secure communities

25. Coordination between NZAid and AusAID in

the framework of the Cairns Compact is emphasized. Aid volumes are expected to grow albeit in a less dynamic way as in the past.

The Republic of China (ROC) and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) are both present in the region, in a kind of zero-sum game, with each of the Chinas attempting to condition its support to the non-recognition of the other. ROC aims at keeping PICs governments in power through financial support which guarantees its international recognition. A regular dialogue is maintained with the PIF. ROC’s financial support is preferentially given through off-budget delivery modalities such as the Constituency Development Fund (CDF), criticised for its lack of transparency and accountability (van Zyl, 2010). As ROC’s controversial CDF in Solomon Islands demonstrates, it can reach down to local stakeholders, seen as guaranteeing the electoral support to the regime which recognizes the ROC in international affairs. At present, in the Pacific, ROC supports Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, Solomon Islands and Tuvalu.

The PRC also appears to have strategic interests in the Pacific, which go beyond its growing trade relations and aims at extending ties of friendship and cooperation (including military cooperation), in a region in which the US is reasserting its influence (Shie, 2007). The PICs’ imports of consumer goods and appliances from China, facilitated by resident Chinese traders, have grown dramatically in the past few years. Chinese aid to its government partners in the Pacific appears to focus on donations of durable consumer goods to (e.g. vehicles, ICT equipment), scholarships, and financing of infrastructure projects through credits and grants. The year 2012 witnessed the first ever joint cooperation project between the PRC and a Western country, New Zealand, in the Cook Islands, in the field of water and sanitation (NZAid, 2012: 16).

Concerning multilateral cooperation agencies, the ADB may be considered the predominant one in th Pacific. Its strategies and fields of activities, and their analytical underpinnings, are formulated in its Pacific Approach 2010-2014

19 http://www.ausaid.gov.au/countries/pacific/Pages/Port-Moresby-Declaration.aspx 20 http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/ministerial_statements/ausaid/html/ausaid-04.htm 21 http://www.ausaid.gov.au/countries/Documents/Cairns-compact.pdf 22 http://www.usaid.gov/pa 23 Equivalent to approximately 480 million US$. 24 http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/oda/white/2011/html/honbun/b3/s2_3_07.html ; http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/spf/palm2003/relation.html 25 http://www.aid.govt.nz/webfm_send/3

http://www.ausaid.gov.au/countries/pacific/Pages/Port-Moresby-Declaration.aspx

http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/ministerial_statements/ausaid/html/ausaid-04.htm

http://www.ausaid.gov.au/countries/Documents/Cairns-compact.pdf

http://www.usaid.gov/pa

http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/oda/white/2011/html/honbun/b3/s2_3_07.html

http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/spf/palm2003/relation.html

http://www.aid.govt.nz/webfm_send/3

18



framework (ADB, 2009b). The goal is ‘to foster connectivity, consensus and a greater community’ through inclusive and environmentally sustainable growth, good governance and regional cooperation and integration. Among its focus sectors are urban development, water and sanitation and public sector management and capacity building. These are considered drivers of change. High level coordination and dialogue mechanisms exist with AusAID, NZAid, and the World Bank, and, increasingly, with PIFS and the South Pacific Community (SPC), both part of the Council of Regional Organisations in the Pacific (CROP). Regional infrastructure projects such as the aforementioned PRIF are the fruits of this multilateral approach. PRIF does not only provide funding for infrastructure projects, but has additional functions as knowledge hub and coordination mechanism, as well as, a provider of technical and advisory services. ADB support is increasingly aligned with the PIF’s Pacific Plan adopted in 2005, considered the master plan for regional integration and cooperation.

26

The EU cooperation with the Pacific is defined in its Pacific Strategy27

formulated in response to the PIF’s Pacific Plan. It aims to strengthen the political dialogue with the region and its 15 Africa, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) and three Overseas Countries and Territories (OCT)

28 and focuses on development cooperation, sustainable management of

natural resources, governance and regional cooperation. In 2012, the EU Commission renewed the EU-Pacific development partnership, giving emphasis on clime change adaption measures and promoting dialogue with PIF, Australia and New Zealand. The total aid volume to the Pacific, for the period 2008-2013 is €750 million, including €567 million (2012) for the 10

th European Development Fund (EDF). Its regional projects with the PIFS are covered by the

Pacific Regional Indicative Programme (PRIP) and administered by a Regional Authorizing Office (RAO), i.e. the Secretary General of PIFS; this is complemented by Country Strategy Papers (CSP) and National Indicative Programmes (NIP), administered by the National Authorizing Office (NAO)

29. The present funding volume of €10 million for Non-

State Actors (NSA) is said to be increased considerably for the 11th

EDF.

The World Bank’s support to its 10 Pacific members states and to the region as a whole is defined in its Regional Strategy (WB, 2000) and its Regional Engagement Framework (WB, 2005). The World Bank’s overall intervention logic is simultaneously aimed at a) strengthening government capabilities in service delivery (supply) and b) improving the incentives for private sector development and job creation, especially for youth (demand). Thus, its country strategies and assistance programmes reflect measures which improve, on one hand, the effectiveness of public expenditures, notably in social sectors, asset management and natural hazard management, and that of the business environment by facilitating domestic job creation and accessing regional job markets (WB, 2005: 17). In 2012, the Bank presented a discussion note entitled Pacific Futures, a new draft strategy for its engagement in the Pacific (WB, 2012). Takeing into consideration the unique features of the region, it discards the relevance of conventional growth paths for the PICs and identifies three key factors for sustained growth and development: i) natural resource wealth and niche opportunities (including specialised tourism); ii) remittances from their population living abroad, and iii) leveraging historical and regional ties for guaranteeing sustained levels of aid.

2.3.1 Change of aid paradigm?

Can continued high aid levels be part of the development solutions for the Pacific? While there is no doubt, that aid, and increased aid is a necessary condition for the development of the PICs, given their unique features, doubts about its technical nature and aid delivery modalities, about targeting and priority setting, and about its impact on governance and effective poverty reduction have increasingly been uttered. During the fieldwork for this study, the author has heard from various sources, including representatives of aid agencies sentences such as ‘aid has dismally failed the Pacific people’, and ‘aid has not done the job of reducing poverty’ (interviews).

This anecdotal evidence is corroborated by the recognition, by aid agencies such as AusAID, that poverty reduction is ‘off track’, and the impact of aid has been ‘mixed’, with indicators on education and health showing that the region

26 http://www.pacificplanreview.org/pacific-plan/ 27 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2006:0248:FIN:EN:PDF 28Pacific territories with constitutional ties to France (New Caledonia) and the UK (Pitcairn), British Virgin Islands. 29 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-435_en.htm

http://www.pacificplanreview.org/pacific-plan/

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2006:0248:FIN:EN:PDF

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-435_en.htm

19



‘lags behind’.30

Given these ‘failures’, others have argued that aid, as a concept, needs to be both enhanced to include labour migration (Overton, 2009) and be more ‘political’ in addressing existing power relations in recipient countries, seen as one of the causes of aid’s low effectiveness (Laws, 2013). As a consequence, political economy analyses have become instruments for a better understanding of the foundational factors, rules of the games and windows of opportunity in a given country specific context, aimed at moving from ‘best practice’ to ‘best fit’ aid programmes. Such analyses and accompanying academic research show that long-term development success hinges on at least two conditions: The first is bold and long-term political leadership or, “enlightened Machiavellian management of politics (…) by leaders who are driven both by their own preferences and principles (…) and by a pragmatic awareness of the limits to their power and the need to construct coalitions for policy change and institutional reform’ (Grebe, 2013). The second is the creation and promotion of forums and platforms which facilitate the inclusion of hitherto excluded segments of national and local elites in developmental political settlements (Laws, 2012), aimed at lowering or eliminating the barriers of ‘limited access orders’ and thus, the risk of political violence inherent to such orders (North et al.,, 2011).

The new emerging ‘aid paradigm’ recognizes the crucial support for political settlement processes, also in the Pacific. The language of politics, political settlements and alliance-building has entered the aid programmes of donors such as AusAID, and they seek to actively promote and support platforms and dialogue forums such as the Pacific Leadership Programme (PFP), which seek to include churches, the private sector, traditional leaders, media, NGOs and other stakeholders in the dialogue with governments on development and cooperation, policies and programmes. As suggested in the final section of this study, Pacific LG and their associations are ‘natural’ candidates to be included in such dialogue and policy processes, given their institutional responsibilities and democratic legitimacy.

2.4 A role for local governments and their associations in aid programmes?

“Local government is not particularly strong in the Pacific Islands” (Hassall, 2010), nor is it subject to much attention in development policies of Pacific governments and their DPs. In fact, they ‘shine through their absence’ not only in almost all donor programmes for the PICs, but also in studies such as by Laws (2013). There are, however, a few exceptions. Three of them, two bilateral and one multilateral programmes merit further analysis.

The first is the New Zealand Agency for International Development (NZAid). The agency, which is part of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) of the New Zealand Government, has recognized the importance of LG in general and urban governments (municipalities) in particular, for development. NZAid supports local governments via the CLGF regional programme (The Pacific Project, see below), bilateral projects such as the solid waste management project in Kiribati (see section 3.4) and through Technical Assistance (TA) via cooperation twinning arrangements between LGs in NZ and in PICs (interview).

According to the NZAid’s interlocutor interviewed, the major challenges facing LGs in the Pacific are: the provision of public services, specifically in urban areas (coupled with institutional capacity building in the fields of planning, budgeting, management for that purpose), the reconciliation between traditional forms of local rule and modern LG, especially in villages and outer islands, and the construction and management of local markets under gender considerations. Further, an LG reform is overdue in many of the PICs, which would result in fewer, but better managed and resourced LG functions. The potential merit of LGAs is recognized, particularly with regard to lobbying/ advocacy and the provision of a platform for central, local, community and traditional LG stakeholders, in which issues of reform and service provision can be debated (interview).

Already in 1999, based on a report by the UN Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), a scoping study for NZAid identified support for LGs as an ‘opportunity for development’ (LG-NZ, 2002). It highlights the role LGs in the Pacific can, and should, play in:

30 http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/ministerial_statements/ausaid/html/ausaid-04.htm

http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/ministerial_statements/ausaid/html/ausaid-04.htm

20



good urban governance;

urban government and provision of public services;

improving LG finances;

promoting small business, and,

engaging in regional cooperation, including with NZ local governments and their association.

This study contributed to the emergence of The Pacific Project of the Commonwealth Local Government Association Forum (CLGF) in the early 2000s. Its overall goal is ‘to improve quality of life for communities in the Pacific region through strengthened local democracy and good governance’ with the following three focus areas (CLGF, n.d.):

1. Promotion and advocacy of local democracy and decentralisation, 2. Exchange of experience, and, 3. Practical capacity building.

The Programme covers nine member countries in the region (Cook Islands, Fiji Islands31

, Kiribati, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, and Vanuatu) and includes the Commonwealth Local Government Good Practice Scheme (CLGGPS). The latter is one of CLGF’s key components, together with:

Community awareness including women in Local Government;

Support to dialogue, policy and legislation;

Strengthen local government associations;

Training programmes in-country and the region;

Local elected leadership training – widely embraced;

Professional staff development;

Research, profiles and case studies –with University of the South Pacific (USP), UNDP, FSPI, Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat.

Phase 1 of the CLGF Pacific Project (2005-2010)32

entailed the CLGP regional capacity building project with four components

33 and a project aimed at reconstruction of the Honiara City Council after election-related political violence

in Honiara in 2006; Phase 2 (2011-2015) focuses on a) advocacy and networks, b) LG structures, systems and policies, c) LG service delivery d) urban management, and e) knowledge management and research.

34

NZ has possibly been the most important driver of The Pacific Project, with the principal funding partner being NZAid, although AusAID has also made substantial contributions, with additional support having been provided by a number of development partners, including the EU and the Commonwealth Secretariat (Hassall, 2009: 179). In 2008, NZAid suffered budget cuts which have negatively affected the programme and that of implementing partners such as FSPI (FSPI, n.d.:2). While NZAid funding for CLGF is guaranteed up to 2014, the future commitments to LG programmes and their funding have yet to be decided.

The Programme has been lauded by most interviewees for its important contributions to the strengthening of local government, notably through the capacity building component, the exchange of experiences,the provision of comprehensive information on the state of affairs of LGs in Pacific member states (e.g. via the LG profiles and relevant legislation in CLGF’s website

35) and relevant research (e.g. on formal and traditional forms of local governance).

31 Membership of Fiji Island was suspended after the military coup in 2008 32 http://www.clgfpacific.org/phase-1-2005-2010/. 33 a) Strengthening regional networks and cooperation between local government practitioners, b) Enhancing training and capacity building

opportunities for local government, c) Institutional strengthening programmes and activities that demonstrate fundamental values such as a human rights based approach and mainstreaming of the tenets of good urban governance, d) Regional exchange of policy and good practice, and technical

cooperation. 34 http://www.clgfpacific.org/phase-2-2011-2015/ 35 http://www.clgfpacific.org/clgf-pacific-local-government-capacity-building-project/

http://www.clgfpacific.org/phase-1-2005-2010/

http://www.clgfpacific.org/phase-2-2011-2015/

http://www.clgfpacific.org/clgf-pacific-local-government-capacity-building-project/

21



However, alsomore critical voices also made themselves heard during the research for this study. For example, the quality, impact and sustainability of CLGF’s capacity building approach have been questioned, while others commented on the ambitiousness of CLGF’s programme ,as well as, the choice of complex issues for capacity building (e.g. local economic development), for which CLGF’s technical competence was questioned (interviews).

The third case is AusAID, which does not have a specific bilateral LG component in its cooperation portfolio, despite its ‘whole of government approach’ to development cooperation.

36 Exceptions from this are the Australian bilateral

support to strengthen intergovernmental relations in Papua New Guinea (PNG), via the CLGF Pacific Project, and the support to the Provincial Government Strengthening Programme (PSGP) in Solomon Islands within the framework of Australian-led Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands (RAMSI) (Weimer et al., 2012). A rollout of similar programmes in Kiribati and Vanuatu in 2010 was decided against, with the arguments that it a) did not correspond to AusAID’s priorities seen in sector and infrastructure programmes such as the Pacific Regional Investment Facility (PRIF) and b) NZAid was better placed for such programmes (interview).

The Pacific Leadership Programme (PLP), however, recognizes the need to involve LGs and their associations in their work (interview). Starting work in 2008, the PLP complements the AusAID public sector support by seeking to promote dialogue with and engagement between PIC governments, CSOs, religious institutions, the private sector and their associations, etc. This approach results from a request by the Pacific Leadership Forum, amid at institutional support for mitigation tension within PICs, against the backdrop of political instability in some Pacific Countries (e.g. Fiji, Solomon Islands, PNG, and Vanuatu). It also meets, to some extent, the conclusions of a recent study, which stresses the need for international cooperation to promote forums for dialogue and possibly political settlement among national and local elites, including marginalized or excluded ones, based on thorough political economy analysis of the respective contexts.

The PLP maintains, until June 2013, country 'projects' in Tonga, Samoa, Vanuatu and Solomon Islands. Implementing and/ or benefiting partners include the Pacific Islands Private Sector organizations (PIPS), the Pacific Conference of Churches (PCC), The Pacific Islands Association of NGOs (PIANGO), the Foundation for the Peoples in the South Pacific International (FSPI), Civicus, and national partners, as well as CLGF.

PLP representatives explicitly see a complementary role for LGAs , given their potential capacity to aggregate and reconcile community, LG and national interests. For that purpose, LGAs need to be well mandated by their members, well-managed and show proactive, competent leadership and robustness. They also need to be able to identify and address ‘issues’, pertinent to local governments and around which dialogue, leadership quality (by the various local and national stakeholders) can be tested and demonstrated, and practical solutions proposed and decided upon. Such ‘issues’ could be, for example, the gendered planning, organization, financing, maintenance, etc. of local markets, or in fragile environmental situations, a holistic approach to solid waste management, from strategic planning to operations. (See Annex 6.4).

2.5 LGs in Pacific Island Countries – preliminary hypotheses

As a point of departure, we briefly summarise the conclusions of a study on LGs in the South Pacific published in 2008 (Hassal &Tipu, 2008), which serve as points of reference or baseline for the following case studies. They will be revisited in the final chapter in the light of the findings of the present study.

The 2008 study draws the following conclusions on the state of affairs of LGs:

1. LG in the South Pacific, isa complex blend of modern democratic principles and government systems with traditional institutions and practices, and is often extremely small-scale, reflecting a history of robust traditional governance in all of the island states, and at the same time a failure of central government to provide or support

36 http://www.ausaid.gov.au/whole-of-government/Pages/home.aspx

http://www.ausaid.gov.au/whole-of-government/Pages/home.aspx

22



effective service delivery at the local level. LGs are thus in a transitional stage to more effective and autonomous entities;

2. LGs in the PICs may be constituted as a city, a town, a village, or an island. Despite growing urbanisation, the number of LG entities for cities and towns is much smaller than the number in rural areas (villages and island councils), with the latter, usually very small, hardly to be expected to develop into effective, modern authorities. A growing part of the urban population lives in peri-urban squatters, both outside the jurisdiction of municipal authorities and that of their traditional village authority or village council;

3. Current levels of funding for LGs are not sufficient particularly when expressed in per capita terms. Pacific cities and towns are thus unable to provide adequate levels of service and infrastructure development.

4. Urban planning has taken place on a small and sporadic scale, but has not resulted in adequate preparation for current levels of urban growth or citizens’ aspirations, due to, among others, considerable constraints on land available for urban development. There has been little systematic assessment of the quality of life in urban areas;

5. The quality of inter-governmental relations has not been adequately researched. At a time when the small states require increased transparency, efficiency, and ‘whole of government’ coordination to make the most effective use of scarce resources, LG is for the most part still treated as a junior subordinate by national authorities, rather than as a necessary and equal partner in the delivery of improved governance to citizens.

6. LGs have paid little attention to the role of civil society, with a resulting disengagement between local leadership and the community, apart from those interested at local level – particularly in the business community – most affected by local government’s regulatory or developmental decisions.

7. Donors with few notable exceptions have shown little interest in LG.

The following case studies will provide evidence which help to confirm, or reject, these baseline findings of 2008.

23



3 Local Government in Kiribati

3.1 Kiribati: The macro context

The Republic of Kiribati, independent since 1997, consists of 33 island, 23 of which are inhabited, and spread over a huge ocean area (see map) with an exclusive economic zone of 3.5 million km

2.The

population of an estimated 103,248 persons (2013)

37

lives on a land area of 726 km

2 , with up to 45%

concentrated on the island of Tarawa, which hosts the capital. The economy is largely externally driven, based on aid, profits from the fishing industry,

remittances from seafarers and profits from the Revenue Equalization Reserve Fund (RERF), a sovereign wealth fund created in the nineteen-fifties on the basis of the booming phosphate revenues at the time. The GDP per capita is relatively high (5,500 USD), given the low population figure and the Human Development Index (HDI) is in the same bracket with countries such as South Africa. Since 2000, GDP per capita has decreased, caused by increases in the cost of fuel, fluctuations in copra prices, volatility in revenue from fishing licences and the effects of global recession (AusAID, 2012: 7).

Kiribati’s political economy is dominated by the public sector. The central and local state provides income for about two thirds of all formal sector employees and accounted, in 2010, for approximately 50% of the GDP (ADB, 2010). Poverty levels are high, in particular in the informal settlements in urban areas, and the informal sector is crucial for the minimum sustenance of a large part of the urban population. Many of the MDGs (related to water and sanitation, and health), with the exception of education, are unlikely to be reached by 2015 and it is unlikely that Kiribati will achieve the target of halving poverty (ADB, 2010). According to the ADB Country Partnership Strategy 2010-15, major investment in infrastructure for water and sanitation projects in urban LGs is needed, coupled with a public sector reform aimed at improving performance-based public sector management and private sector development (ADB, 2010).

Despite having a stable government and regular local and national government elections (most recently in 2012), the ADB identifies a risk concerning the required political commitment to reforms, including strengthened budget management, state-owned enterprise reform, and asset management, and, one might want to add, the reform of the intergovernmental fiscal system with a focus on better resourcing LGs for their tasks. Other risks derive from those know of political economies largely driven by an aid rent, associated with lack of absorption capacity and opportunities of rent-seeking of parts on the political elites and lack of accountability. Anti-corruption legislation and institutions are said to be weak.

37 For further socio-economic details see Annex 7.2

Map 2: Kiribati

Source: CIA, The World Factbook

24



3.2 Kiribati LGs: Basic features and institutional framework38

Kiribati has 23 LGs, i.e. 20 ‘Island Councils’, and 3 ‘Urban Councils’ (Betio Town Council –BTC; Teinainano Urban Council – TUC and Kiritimati Urban Council -KUC). The oversight body is the Ministry of Internal and Social Affairs (MISA).

The members of the Councils, most of them elected in regular LG elections39

are composed according to the figure below. Beyond the formal LG system with its Councils, each village maintains its traditional governance system (Mwaneaba system), with senior elders of each family as heads of the meeting house (Inatonga, 2012).

Figure 1: Kiribati- Composition of LG Councils

Members Number Selection criteria

Elected members 231 regular LG elections (every 3 years)

Special Members 23 seat reserved for te Unimwane*elderly person

Ex-Officio Members 42 for elected MP becoming member of the Council

Nominated Member 32 nominated by recognized (local) associations

Source: CLGF; * the traditional meeting house of the village elders, see: Whincup, 2010

A directly-elected mayor heads each Council. Often, especially in the two Tarawa councils (BTE and TUC), the mayor exercises his function on a part-time basis, holding other responsibilities in the national government

40 which also

continues to pay his salary for this function. The Council offers him an honorarium and sitting allowance only. He has a kind of ‘double subordination’, to the Government as well as to the electorate. The same is true for senior staff in his ‘executive’, seconded (and paid for) by the national government (MISA) to the 23 LGs, including the Clerk, the Accountant and Assistant Accountant as most important positions, required by law. They also receive an allowance for housing, office stationery and ferry travel between the main and the outer islands. They are jointly recruited by the mayor and the MISA and accountable to both of them. Thus, the council also represents the central government, and therefore, is responsible for policy-making, projects, and regulations in those areas for which the legislation bestows functions to the LGs. The Councils wield considerable decision making powers through their authority to issue licences, setting prices for public services, fares for public transport and rates for the head tax, etc., and as such , are in a position to enhance or delay government measures.

The Local Government Act of 1984, amended in 2006, attributes a very wide array of functions to the Kiribati LGs, notably for the areas of agriculture, livestock, and fisheries; buildings, town and village planning; education; forestry and trees; land; famine and drought relief; markets; public health; public order, peace and safety; communications and public utilities; and trade and industries. Representatives of government, Councils and DPs interviewed all converge in the opinion that the number of LG functions needs to be drastically reduced (interviews). A review of the Local Government Act to that effect has been undertaken in 2006, but the new draft legislation has not been promulgated by the Kiribati Parliament, although major stakeholders, including MISA accepting, in principle, the draft legislation.

41

According to the Secretary of MISA, the far-reaching implications of the draft LG Act need to be studied further (within the framework of a working group of which KiLGA is part) and regulations need to be drafted. For both, TA and funding is needed.

38 This section is largely based on information provided by CLGF on their website 39 Although competing ‘political party’ platforms exist, together with individual candidatures, political parties in the Western sense (with

organizational structure, members and programme) do not exist in Kiribati. 40 e.g. the Mayor of BTC holds a senior post in the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Agricultural Development 41 Interviews with the Secretary of MISA, and the Mayors of TUC, BTE and the KilGA’s EO.

25



3.3 Issues and challenges

3.3.1 LG revenue and expenditure42

The following table gives the share of the annual government budget allocations to the Kiribati LGs.

Table 1: Kiribati- Local Government Financing as % of Total Budget (2012)

Item AU$ %

Total Budget (2012) 102,854,457

Support grants 1,200,000 1.17

Salaries for seconded LG staff 837,200 0.81

Total 2,037,200 1.98 Source: own calculations, based on figures provided by MISA

The percentage is low given the range of tasks the LGs in Kiribati have (see section above). The rule governing in intergovernmental relations of ‘finance follows function’ appears to be ignored. The percentage is also low in comparative terms. For example, Mozambique, for which the GDP per capita is only about a fifth of that of Kiribati, transfers more or less the same percentage of its budget to its local (municipal) governments. And the support grants to the Kiribati LGs are considerably less than their own-source revenue generated by three Urban Councils alone. The sum of own-source revenue collected by the two town councils on Tarawa, TUC and BTC, in 2012, totalled approximately 1,400,000 AU$.

43 The following table shows Kiribati’s LG’s own-source revenue and their relative weight

in the budget.

Table 2: Kiribati Local Government – Sources of revenue (2012), in % of total revenue *

CODE CATEGORIES Mean % of Budget (Urban Councils)

Mean % of Budget (Island Councils)

1100 TAXATION 0.41 4.80

Airport tax (rural councils only)

Basic Rate / Head tax

Seaport tax (rural councils only)

1200 LICENCES/ FEES 57.94 10.23

Motor vehicles

Driving licenses

Business of all types

1300 Government Grants/ Transfer (1.242 million AU$ annually) 6.24 38.54

Portion of GT are conditional for specific purposes:

(i) Rural councils: road maintenance, living quarter maintenance, office stationeries, ferry service to remote islets & wage subsidy

(ii) Town / Urban Councils: wages subsidy only

1500 Commercial Activities 29.49 24.08

Hire of council buildings & assets

Service charges/ garbage collection (Town and Urban Councils only**)

1600 Others/ Miscellaneous 5.92 22.35

TOTAL 100.00 100.00

Source: MISA * No details available for line items in the main codified categories. ** Excluding service charge deducted by government from civil servants’ salaries (see below) and salaries for seconded staff.

42 This section is largely based on information provided by CLGF and the Senior Local Government Auditor in MISA 43 According to their mayors, BTC and TUC in 2012, collected approx. 600,000 AU$ and 800,000 AU$, respectively (interviews). No information was available concerning own-source revenue for Kiritimati Town Council and the Outer Island Councils.

26



The table shows, as stated above, that the main source of revenue of urban councils are licence fees, whereas the Islands’ Councils collect relatively little own-source revenue, and rely much more on transfers. Tax revenue is hardly collected in Urban Councils, although they are entitled to a head or poll tax, the rate of which they can decide (interview). Exceptions are Island Councils, which receive a part of the revenue associated with the embarkation/ disembarkation of vessels and aeroplanes. Taxation of land and property, and property transaction is not foreseen. The mayors interviewed , however, show an interest in exploring this latter resource potential and in learning from other countries, where these type of taxes play an important role in local revenue generation.

The table also shows that the LGs depend to a very high degree on their own resource mobilization efforts, the urban councils considerably more so than the Island Councils, both focussing on non-fiscal revenue from licensing. In the specific case of the fee for rubbish collection which is automatically deducted from the salaries of civil servants and transferred to each of the Urban Councils, amounting to about 20,000 AU$ annually per council. MISA is reconsidering this collection modality and the rate practised, presently elaborating a proposal to downscale the fee level (interview). Its arguments are that, firstly, the collection modality and the fee are unjust because they burden only civil servants, with the non-civil servants evading collection because of lack of own effort by the town councils. Secondly, it does not see any service provided by the Council. Thus, in their opinion, the quality and coverage of a public service is not commensurate with the fees charged to the user. This relationship, sometimes called the ‘Wicksellian Link’

44, appears

to be deficient in Kiribati’s LGs. Any citizen of and visitor to Kiribati can see, that, for example, solid waste management in urban areas is highly deficient, although some progress has been made (see section 3.3.2 below).

Looking at the expenditure side of the LG budgets, the following figure shows that most of the revenue, i.e. above 70% for both the Urban and Island Councils is spent on salaries, allowances and deductions for social insurance, followed by spending on administrative costs. Hardly anything is spent on investment, services and maintenance of assets, with a certain exception of solid waste management, which absorbs most of the non-recurrent spending.

45

Figure 2: Kiribati Local Government expenditure by categories, 2012 (in %)

Source: MISA

44 Named after the Swedish economist Knut Wicksell, 1851-1926. 45 www.clgf.org.uk, Country Profile Kiribati

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Salaries (for Council staff

only)

Allowances Councillors& committees

Admin. Expenses Transports, Electricity, Rents

& Leases etc

Maintenance of Councils Assets

Commercial Expenditures

Transfer Payments (eg:

contributions to Provident Fund)

Urban Councils Island Councils

http://www.clgf.org.uk/

27



The analysis above may provide some informed evidence for an argument in favour of a LG reform in Kiribati. Not only does ‘finance NOT follow function’ but very little is spent on infrastructure and provision of the most important public services in the Kiribati urban areas, where are large part of the population lives.

3.3.2 Delivery of local public services

The analysis of the previous section shows that the principle raison d’être of the existence of a local government – ts overarching goal, namely the effective provision of public goods and services – cannot be fully met. The country’s LG appear to rather have the function of ‘employment creation’, but much less so, the effective delivery of public services. This is why a few well-informed interviewees fundamentally question the reason for having a local government at all (interview). Several other interviewees suggest that the Councils’ staff and functions need to be drastically reduced and their resource envelope increased, coupled to an effective and efficient management of their resources, plans, budgets and assets, as well as, capacity building for that purpose.

Under these structural circumstances it is difficult to improve on service delivery, if not simultaneously coupled to a renegotiation of the resource endowment and catalogue of LG functions, the gradual reduction of LG staff and capacity building around projects of service delivery, in the words of one interviewee, the path ahead for the Kiribati LGs ‘is to provide less services but those more effectively’ (interview).

From the perspective of a town council in Kiribati’s capital island, the strategic priorities include improved services, as well as, capacity building and resource generation (via markets, including a supermarket). The example given below is taken from TUC’s strategic plan, 2013-2016 (TUC, 2013). Its priorities are ranked and result from an approach which emphasized citizen’s consultation, as well as a SWOT analysis of the council and its administration. The planning priorities of TUC are:

1. strengthening the capacity of TUC; 2. improving water supply; 3. improving the public transport system; 4. design and construct access roads; 5. improving solid waste management; 6. improving the environmental conditions ( hygiene and cleanliness); 7. establishing local markets; 8. setting up sport and recreational facilities; 9. improving and constructing fishing passages; 10. setting up a big shopping mall in Bairiki.

The priorities are similar to those for BTC, the second urban town council of Tarawa Island. TUC sees these priorities as a means to address the major problems unique to the urban areas, which in the case of TUC, accommodate 30% of Kiribati’s total population: ‘congested homes or squatters, lack of open and “fresh” spaces, shortage of “clean” water, polluted air and lagoon, high rates of crimes (especially among youth), dangerous driving, lack of nutritious foods, high cost of living’ (TUC, 2013: 2). According to interviewees, other problems issues may be added, such as addressing water-borne diseases, control of stray dogs and road maintenance (interview).

In the understanding of the mayors of BTC and TUC, the highest priority (reflected on the list above), is increasing the financial and managerial capacity of the town councils. And they look at KiLGA to help them address this issue through advocacy, lobbying, capacity building projects, and generating international support (interviews).

From the author’s own point of view, sustained and effective, and cost efficient solid waste management and its financing by Kiribati’s LGs will remain a formidable task, despite the valuable support by government and DPs such as NZAid and JICA. The issue is a complex one, since the quantity and quality of solid waste and its disposal are a function of both the countries trade, consumption and investment patterns and the ‘carrying capacity’ population of its islands

28



(see Annex 6.4). The LGs bear the brunt of the downstream challenges of the matter (waste collection and disposal), without being in a position to influence the upstream factors of waste generation and without the necessary financial and managerial capacity. This may result in an uphill struggle not easily won. A holistic approach seems to be called for, looking at both upstream and downstream factors and involving communities, local and national governments as well as DPs. The KilGA appears to be well placed and with some capacity to provide a platform and facilitate the interaction of all stakeholders aimed at producing a national policy and strategy for solid waste production and management (see below).

3.3.3 Other challenges

‘The most commonly experienced and repetitive climate change-related events faced by the local communities of Kiribati are sea level rise, drought, flood and storm surge, crop and food decline. The two main barriers are poor or limited financial resources and communication amongst scattered islands in remote geographical locations in a big ocean’.

46 The government in collaboration with international donors is engaged in programmes and research to

nationally, regionally and internationally address this issue (see above). In the opinion of the source cited above, however, it is most important for LGs and MISA to have a better understanding of ‘what is really meant by climate change, what is the background information and how it is happening and who will be affected by the impacts of climate change’ (ibid).

3.4 LGs and International cooperation

In this section programmes of selected donors are reviewed, in as far as, actual or potential support to local councils in Kiribati and KiLGA is concerned.

The major Development Partner (DP) in the region, AusAID, which operates a High Commission on Kiribati, appears to have no specific project in support of LGs (and KiLGA) on the archipelago. Australian support to Kiribati, totalling 26.9 million AU$ (2012)

47 is based on the bilateral Kiribati–Australia Partnership for Development

48 agreement signed in

2009, which aims at supporting the implementation of the Kiribati Development Plan 2012–2015 with its overarching theme of : ‘Enhancing Aid Effectiveness to support economic growth’ and the vision ‘a vibrant economy for the people of Kiribati’.

49 The priority outcomes are defined by the partnership agreement as: i) improving basic education, ii)

develop workforce skills in areas of industry demand both domestically and abroad to decrease youth unemployment in Tarawa and the outer islands, and iii), improve growth and economic management by supporting reforms that improve public financial management, increase government revenues, reduce the cost of public enterprises and improve service delivery including through delivery by the private sector. In 2012, Australia agreed to add a fourth priority outcome, referring to the improvement of infrastructure services (access to telecommunications, sanitation services and road network). The last outcome area will certainly make a positive contribution to solving challenges faced by the urban town councils, however, as it appears, rather by default than design.

According to KiLGA’s EO50

, the organization would have liked to count on AusAID support for financing a two year Good Practice Scheme (GPS) for the KiLGA members, which had been designed and negotiated in collaboration with the Australian Local Government Association (ALGA). The project, estimated at approximately 1 million AU$, foresaw a two year cycle of institutional capacity building measures and training courses to be run by the Kiribati Institute of Technology (KIT) and a twinning scheme with Australian LGs, including exchange and study visits. According to the

46 Bouataake Tengkam, Local Government Officer in MISA; cited from: http://www.lgma.org.au/default/bouataake_tengkam 47 Of this, the country bilateral program manages $21.7 million. Regional and global AusAID-managed initiatives account for $4.5 million and other Australian Government Departments manage $0.6 million. 48 http://www.ausaid.gov.au/countries/pacific/partnership/Pages/kiribati.aspx 49 http://www.mfed.gov.ki 50 Interview with Rikiuana Takeke, 2/4/2013

http://www.lgma.org.au/default/bouataake_tengkam

http://www.ausaid.gov.au/countries/pacific/partnership/Pages/kiribati.aspx

http://www.mfed.gov.ki/

29



source, the submission of the proposal to the AusAID delegation in Kiribati did not produce the desired results for reasons unclear to KiLGA.

51

The Suva-based AusAID Pacific Leadership Programme (PLP), established in 2008, however, sees the LGs and their associations as an important stakeholder in coalition building in PICs and has expressed an interest in exploring ways of issue-based cooperation with one or two LGAs in the Pacific, either directly via national country programmes or indirectly via regional programmes such as CLGF (Interview). The same interest exists on the part of KiLGA (interview). For further details on PLP the reader is referred to section 2.4 above.

Like AusAID, NZAid also maintains a representation in Kiribati. Its aid to Kiribati as part of the Pacific Region is defined by the three year Strategic Plan: Development that Delivers (2012-2015)

52, coupled with the New Zealand Aid

Programme's Sector Priorities 2012-1553

, which provides sector-specific guidance in the delivery of the strategic plan priorities. Measuring results is emphasized in both.

54 With a resource envelope of 37 million NZ$, NZAid supports

Kiribati in four areas, notably airport development, workforce skills development, sustainable urban development and performance improvement in the public sector, the latter particularly relevant to Kiribati’s LGs.

55

Contrary to other DPs, the agency has an explicit focus on LGs, by design: its Sustainable Town Planning Project (STP) (up until 2010), and since 2011, NZAid supports a solid waste management project within its Urban Development component (MFAT, 2012: 38) cooperating with the LGs of South Tarawa and the Ministry of Environment and Lands. The project entails support for construction and maintenance of landfills, TA and the supply of technical means and equipment, etc., for collection, separation and recycling of solid waste (plastics, electronic and scrap material), as well as, capacity building and sensitization of school children, teachers and women. It includes a private-public partnership (PPP) approach with regard to the introduction of the ‘green bag’, sold to households by a private enterprise, which it collects and deposits in the landfill. The effectiveness of the project is said to be increasing dramatically, although visual evidence in South Tarawa suggests that there is a continued uphill struggle concerning collection, recycling and depositing solid waste. The major challenges faced by the project were identified as:

The low capacity of LG staff in effectively planning, budgeting and monitoring rubbish collection and waste operations. The low level of institutional capacity of Council staff is recognized as a valid and major concern both by MISA (interview) and the visited town councils themselves. A performance-based management approach with corresponding training is a suggested solution (interview, MISA);

The low level of collection of solid waste management fees, associated with a perception by the citizen that the quality of waste management service is not correspondent to the level of fees. Except for the automatic deduction of the fee from the salaries of civil servants (‘service charge’), few citizens pay the rubbish collection fee (see previous section).

KiLGA is seen as a positive development to give voice and lobbying power to the LGs (interview

56). If it manages to

address the LG’s weaknesses it is considered a worthwhile enterprise. According to the personal opinion of a senior NZAid staff member, the councils would need the capacity building support of KiLGA in three areas, notably, i) financial management (planning and budgeting, revenue collection and accountability, ii) identifying (and possibly rewarding) ‘champions’ in urban management, and iii) exposure of urban council staff to good international practice (via study visits).

The Japanese Agency for International Cooperation (JICA) does not cooperate directly with the Kiribati LGs, although it also supports waste management in outer islands via a cooperation agreement with the government. There is a certain

51 Attempts by the KiLGA leadership to arrange for a meeting between AusAID representatives with the consultant during his fieldwork in Kiribati failed. 52 http://www.aid.govt.nz/webfm_send/448 53 http://www.aid.govt.nz/webfm_send/432 54 http://www.aid.govt.nz/about-aid-programme/how-we-work/policies-and-priorities 55 http://www.aid.govt.nz/where-we-work/pacific/kiribati 56 Personal opinion of the interviewee.



http://www.aid.govt.nz/about-aid-programme/how-we-work/policies-and-priorities

http://www.aid.govt.nz/where-we-work/pacific/kiribati

30



overlap with the NZAid project (e.g. use of green bag), and there are regular coordination meetings. Expatriate TA is occasionally provided within the project, with spin-off benefits to the island council staff. Other cooperation areas include support to the health sector (medical information system) and support for vocational training and Japanese language classes in the Marine Training Centre. A specific project in which the island councils are involved (by default) is aimed at supporting fishermen’s need of ice for freezing/ preservation of their catch.

In the opinion of the representative of the agency, the functional divisions of service provision between local and central government needs a clearer definition, given the smallness of the country and government, where the distinction between local and national is blurred (Interview). KiLGA was unknown until the time of the interview.

The EU is represented in Kiribati through the National Authorizing Office (NAO) based in the Ministry of Finance and Economic Development. Its support to the country under the 10

th EDF (2008-13) is defined in the Country Strategy

Paper (CSP) and focuses on the Outer Islands, where two areas are supported: water and sanitation57

, and renewable (solar) energy.

58 Both programmes collaborate, by design, with the island councils and communities as ‘entry points’,

rather than primary beneficiaries or implementing partners. A new funding facility, EU-MDG, will benefit Kiribati’s Kiritimati (Christmas) Island and will be implemented by the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC).

In the view of the interlocutor at NAO, LGs in Kiribati and their association are important stakeholders in development programmes. KiLGA is considered a Non-State Actor (NSA) given its legal status as NGO. As such, and in a medium-term perspective it may eventually be eligible for EU ‘non-focal funding facility’ in support of NSAs (likely to represent up to 10% of the total EDF volume), especially if it manages to become a dynamic part of a strong and vibrant Kiribati National Association of NGOs (KANGO). The organization, to some extent donor-driven, is rather dormant at present, after the ending of its external support, including from the EU.

UNDP has no representation in Kiribati, however with the Suva-based UNDP Office supporting projects in Kiribati. In the recently elaborated UN Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF), 2013-17 for the Pacific region, local governments are subsumed under Outcome Area V (Governance and Human Rights) with the objective reading: ‘regional, national, local and traditional governance systems are strengthened and exercise the principle of good governance, respecting and upholding human rights, especially women’s rights, in line with international standards’ (UNDP, 2013: 30). In the case of Kiribati, the consultations resulted in suggested activities which coincide with those under Output Area 2 (Gender Equality), with the following planned outputs (UNDP, 2013: 41):

1. Capacity of government strengthened to promote gender equality, women’s effective participation in political, economic and legal processes, at national and sub-national level;

2. Improved advocacy for creation of a protective environment for women and children, and constructive involvement of special interest groups including families, youth and people/ children with disabilities;

3. Capacity of government and civil society, and partners enhanced to prevent and respond to violence, exploitation and abuse of women, children and vulnerable groups, and,

4. Enhanced local government capacity to deliver governance and coordination services especially at the sub-national level.

According to UNDP staff interviewed, the on-going programme aimed at strengthening the parliament, its secretariat and local councils in democratic practice through capacity building on roles and responsibilities, is likely to continue beyond 2013. The publication on the profiles of 22 Island Councils, a formidable instrument for planning and budgeting, is imminent (interview).

57 The Kiribati Water and Sanitation Programme (KIRIWATSAN) is implemented by UNICEF with 3.4 million Euro for the first phase (2008-14) and

the same amount allocated for the second phase, presently in preparation. 58 Implemented by the Kiribati Solar Energy Company (KSEC) up to 2014, with a budget of 4.1 million Euro. It aims at providing 6 secondary schools with energy around the clock.

31



3.5 The Kiribati Local Government Association (KiLGA)

3.5.1 History, objectives and activities

KiLGA was formed in 2011 through an initiative of the mayors of urban councils, and formally founded in 2012, with its Constitution approved in 2012. It has the status of an NGO. CGLF, NZAid’s Sustainable Towns’ Programme (STP), and ARIAL (via VNG-International and FSPI) contributed technically and financially to its formation and early activities, notably in capacity building. ARIAL’s website has been a useful tool, too (interview). Initially perceived by both members of government and parliament as a platform for politics challenging the established political power relations and, therefore, met with suspicion, mistrust and outright rejection (several interviews), the organization has known how to build alliances and to win the confidence not only of all its members, but also the national government and rally them behind its cause, as expressed in its vision and mission statements:

‘To be the promoter and provider of quality Local Government services and networks in Kiribati and the Pacific’ (Vision), and ‘The Kiribati Local Government Association is a forum of local government, an important player and equal partner in development, that focuses on the capacity building of its members for the delivery of quality services to their local communities through effective advocacy, lobbying, partnerships and negotiations with all its partners and stakeholders’ (Mission) (KILGA, 2012).

Hosted at their office at BTC (whose mayor is the elected KiLGA president), and effectively managed by the EO and his assistant on a day-to-day basis, KilGA has had a remarkable take-off phase. Not only has it been able to produce and disseminate its Strategic Plan and Dialogue Action Plan, various reports and press-releases on meetings and visits, and a regular newsletter, it has also provided technical and methodological support to its members, e.g. in the field of strategic planning. One can possibly argue that KILGA’s 23 member councils get value for money through their membership, for which they pay an annual fee of 1,000 AU$. The contribution is deducted by government from the transfers to the councils and paid into KiLGA’s account.

The two documents of strategic importance, the Strategic Plan 2012-14 (KiLGA, 2012) and the Dialogue Action Plan (KiLGA, 2013) aimed at lobbying international support are systematically elaborated and well presented.

59 The

challenges affecting the day-to-day operations of the association’s members which KILGA seeks to address and lobby donor support for, are identified as follows (KiLGA, 2012):

a. Limited financial resources and persistent deficit annual budgets. b. Lack of natural resources and economic constraints. c. Overpopulation, over-crowing and urban drift; urban drift affects the urban areas, where resources and space

are constrained, and the rural areas where taxes and fees collections are considerably reduced. d. Unemployment and related social problems such as ainen matawa (teenage prostitution), teenage drinking,

juvenile delinquency and others. e. Lack of capacity of Council staff and Councillors themselves. f. Climate Change affecting economic and social welfare, e.g. saltwater intrusion into freshwater sources

associated with increased salinity, bwabwai (sewage) pits and erosion. g. Need for investment and grants by external investors and donors and credit financing facilities. h. Need for infrastructure development to support economic and social progress e.g. roads, sea walls,

causeways, wharfs, and airfields. i. Poor communication and transport – between members, and with other partners.

59 In the opinion of the author, both can be improved by including considerations on the financial perspective/ sustainability of the organization and on fundraising.

32



The Action Plan seeks to engage partners, i.e. national government and DPs, in support of projects towards realizing KiLGA’s strategic objectives through funding, technical collaboration and assistance, as well as, regional/ international cooperation and exchange of experiences. Topical issues for which support is sought include institutional capacity building (including training of mayors and council staff), financial management and sustainability, improved working and communication conditions and reform of the LG legislation.

3.5.2 Perspectives

Given the youth of the organization it is difficult to make predictions. However it is evident, that solid groundwork has been laid, both in organizational terms and with regard to the mandate of its members and confidence of national stakeholders, including government. The strategic documents referred to above obviously reflect the needs and priorities of its members. But addressing all the identified priorities might be overambitious, both in terms of management capacity and available resources. As we have seen in the previous section, donor programmes are not necessarily focussed on LGs, and if so, rather by default than by design, and own resources are scarce, and will become scarcer with the exit of ARIAL funding in June 1013. KiLGA thus, is in a need to further prioritize its activities, concentrating on the most crucial areas which affect its members. Its budget constraints and funding gaps would need to be identified, as well as a fundraising strategy defined, e.g. on the basis of the Action Plan.

The evolving change of the aid paradigm by major donors in the Pacific, referred to in previous sections of this report aimed at promoting a dialogue involving neglected or marginalized local and national elite groups might provide an opportunity for lobbying of support. KiLGA, as an NGO which bundles the interest of LGs and communities in Kiribati and lobbies with government and agencies, to address the most crucial issues affecting them appears to be well placed and sufficiently organized to be potentially eligible for support from DPs. The potential interest of AusAID’s PFP in collaborating with one or two of regional LGAs has already been mentioned. Furthermore, the EU is said to have intentions to increase funding for NSA in the forthcoming 11

th EDF. KiLGA with its NGO status would be eligible,

especially if it contributes to KANGO’s revitalization.

Providing a role and forum for facilitating national and regional dialogue on issues and policy matters does not at all contradict its statutes and programme and thus, the mandate of its members. Although, it would be important to select fewer issues which are of relevance to its members, national government and CSOs, and the communities and civil society as a whole. Such issues could be, for example, solid waste management (see above and Annex 6.4), the implications of the effects of climate change on Kiribati’s LGs, and the potential for Local Economic Development (LED) of the Kiribati island economy. All three topics would obviously need to take the country’s vulnerability to the effects of climate change and globalized economic dynamics into consideration.

60

Concerning LED, attention is also drawn to the promotion of Local Development through the mobilization of both public and private resources for development, for example within the UNCDF framework and Practice for Local Development and financial inclusion (see Annex 6.5). The Pacific Financial Inclusion Programme (PFIP) (supported by UNCDF, AusAID and EU) and based at the UNDP Pacific Centre in Suva, Fiji, could provide an entry point. UNCDF’s framework is, however, much wider. For example, the organization runs, together with UNDP, a programme supported by the EU and AusAID in Solomon Islands which improves the sub-national (provincial) governments’ capacity to provide public services through a performance-based investment grant.

61 Already its first phase demonstrated

considerable success and quick gains (Weimer et al., 2012).

KiLGA’s main mandate, however, remains serving its members. In the short run, they expect KiLGA to address and resolve the following three most urgent issues, highlighted by various interviewees:

60 On island economies and their environmental and ecological vulnerability see, for example: Bass & Dalal-Clayton, 1995; Pellinga & Uitto, 2001. 61 Provincial Government Support Programme (PGSP), for details, see: http://mptf.undp.org/factsheet/fund/JSB00

http://mptf.undp.org/factsheet/fund/JSB00

33



The reduction of the wide range of legally defined functions the LGs are charged with, via a review of the Local Government Act;

The improvement of the productivity and effectiveness of the LG administration and staff through a combination of reform (reducing the over-dimensioned size of staff through a freeze in recruitment

62), the

introduction of performance-monitoring mechanisms and measures of institutional capacity building and training;

The review of the intergovernmental financial system in favour of local governments’ resource base, together with improved financial management practice. This may include the examination of ways to enlarge the LG’s own resource base by transferring certain tax sources (e.g. vehicle tax) to the LG’s jurisdiction, and/ or to introduce a LG tax on property and property transaction. The LG’s interest should be taken into consideration in the new programme to reform Kiribati’s fiscal system and improving revenue collection, supported by AusAID.

63 At least the introduction of IT and revenue related software in the LG revenue departments should

be considered, together with training of LG tax collectors.64

3.6 Conclusions

The case study of Kiribati’s LG has shown that not much has changed since the 2008 diagnosis in the PIC mentioned in section 2.5. Notable exceptions are the emergence of KiLGA and its support to some of its members, as well as, a better understanding of the intergovernmental (fiscal) relations. In general, however, the Kiribati case study has confirmed the earlier diagnosis that the under-resourced LGs are still in transition and largely neglected in aid assistance programmes. Kiribati’s LGs continue to face considerable challenges concerning institutional, legal, resource and financial issues which affect their capacity to effectively and efficiently deliver public services in quality and sufficiently wide coverage.

On the other hand, there are few donors at present, which directly and by design, support LGs in Kiribati. Thus, the Councils and KiLGA need to aware of the existing funding gaps for the implementation of their strategic plan which might need to be reviewed. Addressing the financial sustainability of KiLGA’s members and, thus, that of the organization itself is major priority. However, opportunities for generating external support exist, with regard to traditional partners such as NZAid, and related to a focus of donor programmes on urban services and infrastructure. Emerging or new donor policy lines approaches aimed at supporting NSA and promoting dialogue and political settlements between national and local elites also provide opportunities for advocacy, lobbying and communication in favour of LGs. KiLGA with its solid mandate and, hitherto, good track record is well placed, well organized and with sufficient leadership quality and capacity to not only serve its members in the most urgent reform arenas, but to also lobby for the cause and support of LGs in Kiribati, in the regional and international arenas.

62 Already practiced by the BTC mayor. 63 http://www.ausaid.gov.au/countries/pacific/kiribati/Pages/initiative-tax-improvement-reform.aspx 64 See also the recommendation of a recent case study on fiscal matters in Kiribati. http://kieranholmes.com/caseStudies/caseStudies_kiribati.html

http://www.ausaid.gov.au/countries/pacific/kiribati/Pages/initiative-tax-improvement-reform.aspx

http://kieranholmes.com/caseStudies/caseStudies_kiribati.html

34



4 Local Government in Vanuatu

4.1 Vanuatu: the macro context65

Vanuatu, a former French-British Condominium (‘New Hebrides’), independent since 1980, consists of about 80 islands, 65 of which are inhabited. Vulnerable to volcanic activity (on some of the islands), tsunami and the effects of climate change, about one quarter of the country’s rapidly growing population

66 of approximately 261,565 (2013) lives in urban

and peri-urban areas, notably in the capital, Port Vila on Efate Island, and Luganville on Espiritu Santo Island. Approximately half of the population lives below the poverty line, depending on agriculture and tourism, the two sectors combined employing about 70% of the labour force, but contributing only to about one third of the GDP. Construction and the service sector (including financial off-shore investment)

67, together with tourism and aid inflows

are the drivers of the economy, making Vanuatu with an average growth rate of more than 5% during the past decade, one of the fastest growing economies in the Pacific region. On the other hand, it is highly dependent on the inflow of aid, which supports approximately half of the annual budget of around 107 million US$ (2010), as well as on the economic health of its major economic and trading partner, Australia.

Poverty levels are particularly high in the peri-urban areas and slums of Port Vila and Luganville, as well as in rural areas, and on remote islands, where the majority of the population lacks access to basic services (basic healthcare, water and sanitation, electricity and reliable transport). Despite the widespread incidence and a lower HDI position than Kiribati (Position 124 out of 187), Vanuatu is likely to achieve many of the MDGs (exceptions: eradication of poverty, gender equality and environmental sustainability) (GoV, 2010).

Politically, the country has gained more stability since the 2004 elections, having witnessed 16 changes of government in the 13 years period prior. In a Westminster-style democracy, sometimes described as a foreign imposition on Vanuatu (Cox et al., 2007: ii), since 2004, elections are held regularly for the national (unicameral) parliament with 54 members as well as for the provincial councils for a mandate of four years. They are directly elected by the first-past-the-post system in single-member constituencies, contested by a myriad of political parties, often an expression of the ‘Big Man system’. Local government elections (municipal and Area Councils) are elected at a date close to the national and provincial elections. Traditional leaders, the Council of Chiefs (Malvatu Mauri) and Kastom play an important role in day-to-day political, social, legal and economic life (Forsyth, 2009), leading to a rejection of development initiatives if they do not fit inside custom and tradition or are not endorsed by traditional leaders (GoV, 2010: xiv). Aid agencies have successfully sought to include the traditional leaders in their aid programmes in support to governance (AusAID, 2007).

According to the ADB country strategy, ‘political stability and a commitment to market-oriented reform have inspired Vanuatu’s main partners to increase their aid allocations’ (ADB, 2009b: 2). Nevertheless, also linked to the large inflow of ‘aid rent’, the political economy can be characterized as a patrimonial system largely based on rents and rent-seeking by certain political and economic elites. This would explain why Vanuatu has been characterized as an inherently unstable, fragmentary political economy in which certain parts of the national, local and traditional elites are excluded from political settlements, leading to infighting and unstable coalitions (Cox et al., 2007). These authors have described Vanuatu as a case of ‘unfinished state building’ (Cox et al., 2007), in which major challenges to good governance (corruption, cronyism, etc.) prevail, a point also reflected in the DP’s risk mitigation strategies. Other risks include vulnerability to economic shocks, vulnerability to climate-induced extreme weather and variability, and natural disasters exacerbated by climate change (ADB, 2009a).

65 This section draws heavily on GoV, 2010, ADB, 2009a and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/nh.html 66 The estimated annual population growth rate of 2.6% is one of the highest in the region. 67 Vanuatu is considered a tax haven. See: Lal, 1998.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/nh.html

35



Map 3: Vanuatu- Provincial governments

Source: CLGF

4.2 Vanuatu LGs: Basic features and institutional framework

Vanuatu’s political administrative system has three sub-national tiers: provinces, municipalities and Area Councils. Oversight over the local government rests with the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA) and its Department of Local Authorities (DLA). This institution is also host to the government’s Training Centre for public servants working at the national and sub-national government levels. And the DLA executes donor support and capacity building programmes

in the field of decentralization and local governments, including the provision of technical assistance (see section 4.4. below).

The six provinces, administratively autonomous and governed by an elected Provincial Council and chairman, and an executive have functions of planning, budgeting, service provision (pre-school and primary education, primary healthcare, regional planning, roads, solid waste management, cemeteries, parks and tourism) and regulation in local matters (e.g. tourism, agriculture). Their revenue base is limited, depending mostly on transfers from the government, typically for recurrent expenditure (salaries). The Council approves the annual budget for the province and monitors expenditure. The annual grant each province receives was increased in 2012, from 33 million VT on average to just below 40 million VT (see next section). Key administrative and management functions (Secretary, Planner, Accountant) of the executive are exercised by seconded civil servants, appointed and supervised by the Public Service Commission (PSC), but institutionally subordinated to the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA) and its Department of Local Authorities (DLA). The provincial

government is advised by the provincial Malvatumauri (Council of Chiefs) in matters of Kastom and language (Ni-Vanuatu).

Each province is comprised of various islands (see Map above):

Figure 3: Vanuatu’s Provinces

Name Main Islands

Malampa Malakula, Ambrym, Paama

Penama Pentecost, Ambae, Maewo

Sanma Espiritu Santo, Malo

Shefa Shepherd group, Efate

Tafea Tanna, Aniwa, Futuna, Erromango, Aneityum

Torba Torres Islands, Banks Islands Source: DLA

The second tier is represented by the three municipalities Luganville, Lenakel and the capital city Port Vila, corresponding to the urban areas of the Provinces of Sanma, Tafea and Shefa, respectively. The most recent municipal council elections took place in 2011 (Luganville) and 2012 (Lenakel, Port Vila), respectively. The municipalities hold functions similar to those of the provincial governments. All three municipalities have their own revenue base (mainly property tax, licence, planning and user fees), but only Lenakal and Luganville receive additional annual transfers from the government (5 million VT each), whereas Port Vila must generate its own fiscal resources, having had its central government transfers of 4 million VT withdrawn in 2010 (interview). Similar to the provincial governments, technical and administrative staff (Town Clerk, Planner, Accountant) subordinated to DLA is seconded to the municipality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vanuatu_Provinces.JPG

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malampa_Province

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penama_Province

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanma_Province

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shefa_Province

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tafea_Province

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torba_Province

36



The third tier, the 72 Area Councils of rural Vanuatu are composed of members not elected by universal suffrage, but selected by the communities with the involvement of the Malvatumauri, representing community-based organizations (CBOs) and NGOs including churches, youth groups, as well as, local business interests. They are linked to the provincial government, which covers their small budget and is represented by an Area Council Secretary seconded by DLA. He is considered to be the community’s Chief Execution Officer (CEO), responsible for planning, finances and services (interview). As in the other tiers, the relationship between Area Councils and the Secretary may be of conflict, for reasons of an unclear understanding of the respective functions (interview). The Area Councils have no budget of their own but are involved in the elaboration of plans for their areas under their jurisdiction. The lowest tier is not self-sustaining and is not financially dependent on allocations by the provincial governments.

The government’s decentralization approach tries to combine elements of deconcentration (at provincial and Area Council level) and devolution (municipalities). It is based on the recommendations outlined in the report of the Decentralization Reform Commission (DRC) (GoV, 2001a; 2001b) and a body of legislation regarding decentralization and municipalisation.

68 The DRC and its reports were prompted by the recognition, that earlier attempts to

decentralize became bogged down. Corruption and mismanagement, as well as ‘politics and greed, have been the major contributors… in the downfall of the decentralization process’ (Nari, 2000:2).

Although the national development plan (Priority Action Agenda – PAA) (GoV, 2006; 2011) does not explicitly address decentralization with its three tiers, it is recognized by the Governments Comprehensive Reform (CRP) Programme that they are important for service delivery and consultation (GoV, 2004).

According to the Director of DLA, the government is at present inching forward in implementing the recommendations of the DRC by giving priority to deconcentration through the creation of the Provincially Based Government Departments (PBGD), aimed at annually, establishing one PBGD associated with a line ministry or sector, using the ‘whole of government’ approach.

69 In 2012, the Department of Lands and Territorial Affairs was deconcentrated

(interview). The government also emphasizes the strengthening of the Area Councils and the involvement of the community in planning and management of service delivery at that level, aimed at eventually encompassing all services in the long term. A draft legislation for Area Councils is in preparation, to be submitted to parliament in 2013. According to the Director of DLA, deconcentration to the lowest tier is a ‘huge beast’, taking into consideration that at present most of the Area Councils do not even have their own offices (interview).

4.3 Issues and challenges

4.3.1 LG revenue and expenditure

The following analysis is based on data provided by DLA on the past two fiscal years, which runs from 1st

of July to 30th

of June.

70 First, the Vanuatu Provincial governments’ revenue and expenditure are analysed, followed by an analysis of

the municipal budgets.

With regard to the provincial governments’ revenues, these depend largely on three sources of revenue: government transfers, taxes (on property) and non-fiscal revenue (business fees). The following figure shows the government transfers to provincial governments and the variation of their efforts in collecting own source revenue:

68 See bibliography: Vanuatu decentralization legislation, 1988, 1994, 2000 and 2001. 69 This approach corresponds also to AusAID’s approach to cooperation with its partners in the Pacific. 70 The author is indebted to Mr Pierro Willie, Senior Financial Official, for furnishing the data and clarifying issues on LG finances.

37



Figure 4: Provincial governments- Total revenue, transfers and own source revenue, 2012 (in VT)

Source: DLA

The variation in total resource endowment and own revenue collection is considerable, basically reflecting economic dynamics in the provinces and their institutional capacity to capture income, with transfers being more or less the same for all provinces (average of approximately 39 million VT in 2012). Government transfers make up 66% of all provincial revenue, as the following figure demonstrates.

Figure 5: Vanuatu: Provincial Government Revenue (average) by source, 2012, (in %)

Source: DLA

0

10,000,000

20,000,000

30,000,000

40,000,000

50,000,000

60,000,000

70,000,000

80,000,000

90,000,000

Shefa Sanma Taefa Penama Torba Malampa

Total Revenue Total Own source revenue Government transfers

Government transfer

66% Business Licence

5%

Taxation 8%

Fees 5%

Financial Revenues

9%

Admin - Civil Status

2%

Land Premium/Lea

se 1%

Other Income 4%

38



Financial revenues and taxes (on property) are the second most important source of income. Financial revenues are incomes derived from the shares of provinces in stevedoring companies

71 and from a produce cess (levy).

72 The

property tax, levied on land granted on a lease basis for 75 years and collected twice a year,. The rates vary with the localisation (urban, peri-urban, rural, etc.) of the property. No information on collection methodology was available. It was also not possible to get data on the tax effort in relation to the overall potential (e.g. quality and coverage of cadastre). Property taxes on municipal areas belong to the town councils (see below).

Business licences and ‘other fees’ represent a considerable part of the annual income. Business licence fees, collected annually, are based on the turnover of a business, with rates between 20,000 and 1,000,000 VT.

73 The author was not

in a position to establish who is responsible for collection or what sharing arrangements are in place, if any, given that licence fees are also the major source of the (central) government’s revenue. Apparently, while local government can alter the fees charged for various services, it has no authority over the level of taxes and the licence fees.

74

Comparing the composition of own-source revenue (by source) of a well performing province (Shefa Province) and a less well performing province (Penama), it becomes clear that the good performer taps much more into its fiscal (property tax) and non-fiscal (licences, fees and user fees) revenue base, whereas the poorer performer relies relatively more heavily on ‘other sources’ of revenue and, overall, on transfers (see above). This is evident from the figure below..

Figure 6: Own-source revenue, Shefa and Penama Province, 2012 (in VT)

Source: DLA

Regarding the provincial governments’ expenditure, an average of 51. 5 % of the total expenditure is spent on salaries. The operating costs typically include the cost for the recurrent purchase of services and goods, subsidies to the Area

71 For all northern provinces: Northern Island Stevedoring Company Ltd (NISCOL) and for Shefa: Ifira Wharf & Stevedoring Co ; 72 A certain percentage deducted from the total value of exports of copra and cocoa from Vanuatu Commodities Marketing Board (VCMB) and given to each province according to the quantities produced and exported. Cess is a British English and Irish English term for a (local) tax

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cess ) 73 http://www.doingbusiness.org/data/exploreeconomies/vanuatu/paying-taxes/ 74 http://www.clgfpacific.org/userfiles/1/files/Vanatu%20local%20government%20profile%202011-12.pdf

0

2,000,000

4,000,000

6,000,000

8,000,000

10,000,000

12,000,000

14,000,000

VT

Source

Penama

Shefa

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cess

http://www.doingbusiness.org/data/exploreeconomies/vanuatu/paying-taxes/

http://www.clgfpacific.org/userfiles/1/files/Vanatu%20local%20government%20profile%202011-12.pdf

39



Councils, to charitable organizations and religious denominations, and to youth and sports organizations. In all provinces relatively little is spent on investment for public services and their maintenance, for which the Local Governments are responsible. The expenditure pattern thus, is more consumptive than investment-oriented.

Again, considerable variations exist across the provinces, as the following table shows:

Figure 7: Vanuatu Provincial Government Expenditure, 2012 (in VT)

Source: DLA

Concerning the three municipalities, their main source of revenue are property taxes. Various sorts of other taxes and fees

75, including user fees for garbage collection and the use of the waste dump are also an important sources of

revenue for the capital city Port Vila, whereas Luganville’s second most important source are market fees. The following figure demonstrates the revenue by source for the two municipalities.

76

Figure 8: Port Vila and Luganville municipalities - Revenue by source, 2011/12 (in VT)*

75 Dog tax, death and marriage registration fees, planning fees. 76 The data for Lenakel provided to the author was incomplete.

0

20,000,000

40,000,000

60,000,000

80,000,000

100,000,000

VT

Provinces

Salaries Operating cost

0

20,000,000

40,000,000

60,000,000

80,000,000

100,000,000

120,000,000

140,000,000

VT

Revenue source

Port Vila

Luganville

Source; DLA; *The annual government transfer for Luganville is reflected in the figure, despite not being included in the data provided by DLA. VAT payments and receipts by the municipalities are not reflected in the figure.

40



The following table shows the spending patterns for the two municipalities.

Figure 9: Port Vila and Luganville municipalities - Expenditure, 2011/2012 (in VT)

Source: DLA; without VAT

The expenditure for salaries, plus, in the case of Port Vila, the mayoral expenses (subsidies, sitting and entertainment allowances, travel, etc.) exceed the recurrent cost for operations. Similar to the provincial governments, cost for investment and maintenance public services represent a small fraction of spending.

In concluding this section, two points can be made:

Firstly, similar to the case of Kiribati, the local governments in Vanuatu, both provincial and municipal, spend very little of their resources on public services, investment and maintenance (which are to be considered as the core business of any LG), for which they have comparative advantages over central governments in terms of effective resource allocation. In other words, their prevailing spending pattern appears to not fully correspond to their legally defined functions. There are certainly many reasons for such a spending pattern, some of which may have to do with the political economy of a local system of patronage and ‘decentralization of corruption’ (interview). It is not the purpose of this study to analyse this phenomenon. Other reasons may be linked to an unclear functional division, in practice, between government and local government concerning service delivery, enhanced by a pattern of cooperation with donors, which privileges interaction and cooperation with the national government.

But, secondly, the reason for Vanuatu’s LGs tilt toward spending on salaries and consumption rather than on investments, and the production and delivery of public services, may also be associated with the few resources they have available for executing their mission. While transfers are the main source of revenue for provinces (not for municipalities), the overall share of LG transfers in relation to the annual budget (expenditure) is very low, as in the case of Kiribati. The annual total transfers to the six provinces and the two eligible municipalities of altogether of 2.5 million (US$) represents only 1.22 % of the total annual national expenditure estimated at 207.4 million US$ (2012).

77

As is true for Kiribati’s intergovernmental fiscal system, ‘finance does NOT follow function’ for Vanuatu’s LGs. Therefore, a case can be made for an envisaged tax reform aimed at expanding the tax base (GoV, 2006), to include measures which strengthens the LGs’ resource base, commensurate with their functions. At present, the overall tax base of the country is rather small, without income, inheritance, property transaction tax, emphasizing non-fiscal revenue, with negative impact on small businesses (Schlegelmilch, 2010). A tax reform, which does not ignore the LG’s

77 This figure does not reflect the salaries government pays for the staff seconded to the LGs.

Port Vila Luganville

Mayoral expenditure 35,160,000 0

Operating cost 110,782,027 32,025,320

Salaries 104,097,973 34,785,176

0

50,000,000

100,000,000

150,000,000

200,000,000

250,000,000

300,000,000

VT

41



legitimate interest must, therefore, be well designed and legitimized, considering the crucial trade-off between tax burden and the effective and efficient provision of local public services.

4.3.2 Capacity for service delivery

The capacity to deliver the services under the responsibility of local governments appears to grow with the hierarchy level an LG occupies. In other words, provincial governments appear to be in a better position to invest in, and manage service delivery with some impact than, municipalities and Area Councils, the latter being without any capacity at all (interviews). Obviously, their relatively good installations, their HR resource endowment and technical capacity, together with the PBGDs, create better conditions for the provincial governments, which, therefore, should be able to perform reasonably well. As deconcentrated units of the government they also will have much easier access to resources from donor-supported sector and investment programmes.

However, without access to evaluation studies and monitoring reports the author is not in a position to validate this proposition. In the interviews, their insufficient capacity for planning, budgeting and M&E was highlighted as an impediment to their delivery of the services for which they are responsible. The other impediment appears to be the situation of prevailing conflict between councils and administration staff, which is said to go beyond their institutionally different functions, involving politics (interviews).

Similarly, regarding municipalities, one of the major challenges to municipal management and governance appears to be the unclear and conflicting relationship between elected councillors and mayors, on the one side, and seconded administrative staff including the Town Clerk on the other. This leads to transgressions of their respective roles and ‘clashes’ between them, often paralyzing municipal affairs (interviews). Another challenge is the politically and managerially dominant figure of the mayor and politically motivated meddling into municipal affairs by senior government figures, as well as, the institutionalization of municipal ad hoc committees by MIA (interviews). This state of affairs produces an institutional environment not conducive for the execution of the primary service delivery functions of the municipalities and opens opportunities for rent-seeking and corrupt practices (interviews). It also complicates the provision of technical assistance and capacity building to both council members and administrative/ technical staff (interview). The institutional framework appears to enhance, instead of reduce, the conflicts arising from two strands of loyalty and accountability: that of the council members to their electorate on the one hand, and that of the municipal seconded administration staff to MIA and DLA on the other.

As can be deduced from the previous section, urban development and service delivery notably in Port Vila (population of approximately 42,000) and Luganville (population of approximately 15,000) , the two main urban centres of economic growth and development in Vanuatu, is a major challenge, given the concentration of up to 40% of the urban population living in their peri-urban areas and informal settlements. From the ADP perspective, ‘legislative and regulatory structures for planning and development in Port Vila involve a number of ministries and local government agencies and overlapping responsibilities, capacity gaps, and fiscal authority need to be addressed’ (ADB, 2009a: 11). Under these circumstances a clearer separation of functions at different levels, and the definition of exclusive, competitive or cumulative responsibilities could benefit

A third challenge lies in the effective, transparent and accountable management of the local governments’ periodical planning, budgeting and accounting exercises. Especially financial management appears to be deficient.

78 This point

was raised by virtually all interlocutors in Vanuatu, stressing the urgent need for training and capacity building in this field.

A fourth aspect, probably not of lesser importance, is the limited financial resources the Vanuatu LGs have for executing their function. Most resources are used for financing recurrent expenditure to the detriment of investment

78 An analysis of the LG budgetary data provided by DLA shows partially weak classification of revenue and expenditure and what appears to be the absence of a unified budgeting and accounting framework, notably at municipal level.

42



in and maintenance of public goods and services. The case for a tax reform which considers LGs resource needs was made above.

4.3.3 Other Challenge: effects of climate change

The above-mentioned climate change, as well weather and ocean related risks, does not only affect the country as a whole, but local governments and communities in particular. From the point of view of the Principal Physical Planning Officer in DLA, sea level rise, extreme weather events and coastal erosion are the major challenges which require conceptual and planning answers. Climate change related issues should, therefore, be integrated into land use and foreshore and waterfront planning policies, especially for the urban areas, considering their high population concentrations. This should be coupled with a more realistic distribution of funding for mitigation measures in favour of these areas whose local governments are those primarily responsible for guaranteeing access to well-maintained public services for the citizen.

79

4.4 Vanuatu LGs and international cooperation

The issues of fiscal and financial management, as well as, reporting merit special attention. This, however, is not to say, that the potential role and responsibility for service delivery at local government level, especially in urban and peri-urban areas is not, at least implicitly, recognized (interview).

Australia is by far the largest of Vanuatu’s development partners, followed by the USA and New Zealand. According to the DAC survey on monitoring the implementation of the Paris Declaration, a large extent of aid to Vanuatu is not recorded in the national budget and not aligned to national plans.

80 A project-wide, respectively, sector-wide approach

(SWAp) dominates international cooperation. Although most of the donors supporting Vanuatu address the issues of service delivery, capacity building and infrastructure development in their programmatic documents and multiannual aid frameworks, few had and have a specific programmatic focus on LGs and decentralization with few exceptions. The cooperation environment is considered to be challenging, with politics, capacity gaps and reporting issues affecting aid delivery and the production and monitoring of impact at national and local government levels (interviews). Legislative and regulatory structures for planning, programming and budgeting for infrastructure development and service delivery in areas under the jurisdiction of local governments (i.e. provincial, municipal, Area Councils) involve a number of ministries and local government agencies with overlapping responsibilities, capacity and communication gaps.

AusAID’s bilateral Partnership Programme with Vanuatu has no specific focus on LGs. It is based on the Governance for Growth (GFG) programme (2006-16) a ten-year joint initiative of the Vanuatu Government (through the Prime Minister’s Office and Ministry of Finance and Economic Management) and the Australian Government (through AusAID). It aims at identifying and removing obstacles to economic growth and service delivery in Vanuatu. The programme provides technical assistance, flexible and incentive financing and other assistance to support Vanuatu’s economic reform priorities. LGs are not explicitly defined as stakeholders in its economic governance component, although the component seeks to use and strengthen Vanuatu government systems in delivering support for strong public sector institutions and processes, and to promote greater transparency and accountability of government service delivery to the citizens of Vanuatu (AusAID, n.d.). Up to 2012 AusAID apparently was open to consider institutional and capacity building support and possible grants to LGs within the GFG programme, but with a shift offocus, away from government/ governance towards the productive sectors and infrastructure, and with a certain ‘disillusion’ concerning management and impact of its programmes at local level, this window of opportunity was closed (interview).

AusAID’s support to urban development is coordinated with the ADB’s Country Partnership Strategy 2010-2014 (ADB, 2009b). The urban development project aims at improving and sustaining basic services in urban areas and improved

79 http://www.lgma.org.au/default/jeffrey_josiah_kaitip 80 http://www.oecd.org/dac/effectiveness/Vanuatu%204.pdf

http://www.lgma.org.au/default/jeffrey_josiah_kaitip

http://www.oecd.org/dac/effectiveness/Vanuatu%204.pdf

43



living conditions in the capital, Port Vila, and its peri-urban areas including its informal settlements. The project is also linked to the Pacific Regional Infrastructure Facility (PRIF) managed by the Pacific Island Forum Secretariat (PIFS). The focus is on sanitation, drainage and roads

81, using a participatory and consultative approach to planning and involving

government agencies both the Port Vila Municipal Council and the Shefa Provincial Government. The involvement of both sub national governments is necessary as the former’s jurisdiction does not cover all peri-urban areas. Assistance for capacity building is part of the project. It is not clear, however, where the institutional ownership for the project and the associated responsibilities for implementation, reporting and the monitoring of the impact lie.

The US-financed Millennium Challenge Compact (MCC) also seeks to address infrastructure, by supporting a) civil works for the reconstruction or construction of priority infrastructure on eight islands, covering roads, wharfs, airstrips and warehouses, and b) institutional strengthening efforts in the Public Works Department. Neither the provincial nor municipal governments with their deconcentrated, respectively devolved, functions appear to be part of the programme design, which may raise the issue of maintenance of infrastructure and services. The scope of work has been reduced with funding covering only two road projects on two islands and limited institutional capacity building, apparently due to ‘unforeseen economic circumstances’.

82

The EU’s Country Strategy Paper (CSP) for Vanuatu and the funding provided through the 10th

EDF with a total volume of 21.6 million Euro focuses its support to Vanuatu on economic growth and employment including human resource development, and, training and capacity-building, with a view to extend public services and improving urban and rural basic infrastructure.

83 In line with the Paris Declaration, the activities are complemented by budget support as a

delivery modality, although infrastructure projects may also be financed via the PRIF, co-financed by the EU, the ADB, Australia and the World Bank.

The newly emerging UNDP programme in Vanuatu is based on the premises that a) the LG systemis a hybrid system, strongly influence by traditional authority, especially in land questions, b) the people of Vanuatu have respect for democracy, although ‘the present democratic and administrative structure is failing them’ (interview) and that, c) the local state is absent, except though the presence of schools and health posts (interviews). The UNDP programme, thus, implicitly takes up the conclusions of a power and change analysis, which suggests that ‘… most ni-Vanuatu have little contact with the state. The six provincial governments are under-resourced and largely unable to deliver services outside the provincial headquarters. There is little coordination between the provincial administrations and central government departments. The 62 Area Councils, the lowest formal level of government, have only a single employee each, and are active mainly in tax collection. The provincial structure is commonly seen as artificial and ineffective’ (Cox et al., 2007: v). According to the UNDP staff interviewed, the programme will focus on the (elected) Area Councils where it aims to strengthen the communities’ resilience to effects of climate change and to build the capacities of Local Development Committees in matters of food security, disaster management and interaction with traditional leadership, elected Council members and the formal government institutions, represented by the Secretary of Area Council.

84 Thus, it hopes to contribute to increased peoples’ capabilities to make choices and find local solutions to the

most imminent challenges.

The Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) also has been recognizing the importance of strengthening LGs in Vanuatu, since the time of government’s Comprehensive Reform Programme (CRP) of the 1990s which aimed at decentralized service provision in all six provinces. The agency’s portfolio, annually updated and agreed upon with the Department of Strategic Planning, Policy and Aid Coordination (DSPPAC) in the Prime Minister’s Office, foresees projects which have a bearing on local governments, notably in Component (3) of the bilateral programme (JICA Training and Dialogue Programme), which is coordinated with the Vanuatu Public Service Commission.

85 Thus far, the

beneficiaries have been limited to personnel from Port Vila (Efate Province) and Luganville (Espiritu Santo Island in

81 http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/pub/2012/VAN.pdf 82 http://www.mcavanuatu.gov.vu/about_mca.html 83 http://ec.europa.eu/development/icenter/repository/summary_vu_csp10_en.pdf 84 According to DLA, he/ she is also seen to be the Chief Executive Officer (CE) of the community (interview). 85 The other components are (1) JICA Volunteers, (2) Technical Cooperation, (4) Grants and (5) ODA loans for the four priority areas education, health, environment and rural infrastructure.

http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/pub/2012/VAN.pdf

http://www.mcavanuatu.gov.vu/about_mca.html

http://ec.europa.eu/development/icenter/repository/summary_vu_csp10_en.pdf

44



Sanma Province), given that the more remote islands have disadvantages regarding effective communication with the agency via the Internet. The training subjects have included community-based development (e.g. public administration, tourism) and capacity building for rural ITC as well as solid waste management for LGs. Area Council secretaries have been included for the first time in 2012/13. The LG-focussed training component is complemented by Technical Assistance in the area of solid waste management within the framework of the Project for Promotion of Regional Initiative on Solid Waste Management in Pacific Island Countries, 2011-2015 (J-PRISM)

86 and the Promotion of the

Grace of the Sea Project in Coastal Villages, 2011-2014 (JICA, 2012).

A good relationship exists with LAAV, which helped JICA indentify candidates for training (interview). In the opinion of the interlocutor, however, this recently established association needs to demonstrate its efficiency and potential as facilitator for training, fundraiser and as coordination forum of different LGs levels, government, donors and NGOs, notably in support of provincial governments. As a priority it should consider capacity building and training for Area Council secretaries, for LGs’ and communities’ needs assessments, and identification of planning priorities, as well as, the interaction and communication with provincial governments. This way the organization with its clear mandate would grow into a much needed local government platform.

NZAid is exceptional in that it has had an LG focus from 2000 onwards, throughout the region (see section 2.4). In the case of Vanuatu this has more or less consistently included cooperation with, and technical support to, the DLA in the MIA, starting, from 1999 onwards with the Rural Skills Training Programme (RSTP) up to the Rural Economic Development Initiative – REDI (2000-2009).

87 TA has been provided on a number of occasions to DLA for implementing

recommendations of the Decentralization Review Commission’s on decentralization policy and strategy, and to the municipality of Port Vila and to Area Councils for capacity building (training workshops) in planning and tourism development.

In 2011, NZAid changed its business approach, with strengthened M&E and reporting requirements for the programmes (e.g. annual assessments on outputs and impact) and a preference to coordinate projects and activities with the Prime Minister’s Office and other donors with a focus on urban/ local development, like ADB (see above). In this approach LGs are not defined as privileged stakeholders a priori, and the new approach has apparently also affected, at least to some extent, the cooperation with DLA, which, in the past, was considered somewhat top-heavy and without effective M&E systems at LG level (interview). According to the interlocutors at the NZAid Office, this does not, however, mean an end to NZAid’s interest in supporting LGs in Vanuatu. In fact, they attribute a potential to LAAV in promoting the cause of LGs in providing better services to the urban and rural citizens. There is an explicit interest in supporting LAAV seen as a valid and necessary nationwide LGs dialogue platform, especially if the organization maintains its mandate and credibility as interlocutor of LGs (and remains neutral in Vanuatu politics) and if it manages to include the traditional authorities, i.e. the Malvatumauri (Council of Chiefs) in matters on urban land and its use.

Finally, the CLGF has been active since 2000 in supporting Vanuatu’s LGs, particularly through capacity building and provision of TA to DLA and the municipality of Port Vila. This included the provision of an advisor for the reform of the municipality of Port Vila, the revision of the regulatory framework, as well as, training for town clerks and councillors, all in the light of Vanuatu’s decentralization reform and the recommendations of the DRC. The planned capacity building and reform outcome of the CDLF support has been difficult to achieve, particularly with regard to the local LG administration, and less so, for town council members. The LGs continue to have serious challenges, notably in financial management and monitoring of plans and budgets. Apparently, municipal accounts were not produced during two years, and never audited (interview) The main obstacles identified were a) the institutional framework defining roles and competences between the administrative functions (town clerk, accountant and town planner, as seconded public servants) and the elected members of the council (mayors, councillors) which promotes conflicts instead of containing them, b) the power and prominent role in decision-making, planning and budgeting of the mayor (a kind of ‘executive municipal president’) bestowed upon him by the institutional framework, and c) conflicts between MIA and the

86, it also includes Kiribati (see section 3.1) 87 Jointly financed with AusAID, and consisting in a planning tool linked to a demand-driven grant scheme targeting provincial governments, the programme was said to be fraught with lack of impact, as well as reporting and governance issues. Insiders consider it a ‘failure’ (interview).

45



municipal government with ‘politically motivated interference’ in municipal affairs (by the former), leading to the occasional suspension of council and instability of municipal governance (interview). According to one interviewee, the way ahead for CGLF’s capacity building approach is a focus on management around pertinent LGs services and issues (e.g. markets, waste management, etc.), which would include all management aspects, from procurement and maintenance of investment, day-to-day operations, revenue collection and accounting, and, monitoring of impact and public satisfaction of the services provided. The need for transparent and efficient accounting and reporting, especially by the municipal administration, has repeatedly been stressed (interview). The role of LAAV in capacity building for that purpose is not necessarily seen in a positive light, given that DLA may outsource its own responsibility to an entity whose role is that of a facilitator and not an implementer of capacity building programmes.

4.5 The Local Authorities Association of Vanuatu (LAAV)

4.5.1 History, objectives and activities

The LAAV is a young organization, with its constitution approved only in February 2012. Its legal status is that of a charitable (non-profit) organization, which represents the interests of all Vanuatu LGs, i.e. six Provincial Government Councils and three Municipalities. The Area Councils are also members via their association with the Provincial Governments (interview). The political drive for the establishment reflected the interest of its members, but the main ‘push’ for its establishment appears to have come from DLA (interview). The organization’s small office, hosted by the Provincial Government of Shefa on Efate Island was established in June 2012.

In its first year of its existence, the organization suffered a setback by seeing itself forced to change its CEO. The present CEO has exercised its functions only since December 2012. The relationship between the LAAV Office and DLA appears to be lacking a clearer definition with regard to communication, functions and division of labour. LAAV envisages establishing a protocol of cooperating with DLA.

The nine LAAV members (provincial and municipal governments) contribute with an annual membership fee of 100,000 VT each to LAAV’s annual budget. Further funding, ending in June 2013, comes from ARIAL, via VNG-International and FSPI. There are plans under way to automatically deduct the membership fee from the annul government transfers to the LGs.

Given its brief history the LAAV leadership is still in the process of consolidating the organization. The tools available on the ARIAL website for self-assessment, SWOT analysis and strategic planning have not yet been put to use. ARIAL-funded training for the development of Advocacy, Lobbing and Communicating Strategies for LAAV have been conducted in the last quarter of 2012 and a first edition of a quarterly newsletter has been produced in 2013.

Its draft Corporate Plan 2012-14 needs completion and consultation with the LAAV members, as well as, final approval. Following the organization’s objectives defined in its constitution, it aims to focus on the following fields of activities:

1. Sharing Ideas and Cooperation 2. Lobbying, Advocacy and Promotion 3. Local Government and Performance 4. Developing Financial Sustainability 5. A Sustainable Association.

4.5.2 Challenges and perspectives

Given its hitherto fragile youth, LAAV’s challenges appear formidable. However, the leadership of the organization is aware of these and the dilemmas associated with addressing them. Resources are needed to produce useful and

46



effective services for LAAV’s members and the latter need to learn to recognize the value-added the organization provides for them.

Of course, firstly, resource issues dominate the concerns. The organization’s resources appear insufficient at present to implement its strategic plan for 2012-14. Financial support is needed, as well as, technical support for organizational development, and the shaping and operationalizing of LAAV’s interaction with its members and DLA. To enhance its income base, LAAV pursues two options: a) to cooperate with donors on defined issues relevant to its members, and lobbying for financial support, and b) generate its own income through commercial activities in the interest of its members (e.g. purchasing of stationary in bulk and sale to LAAV members at competitive prices).

A second challenge relates to the institutional relationships of LAAV with both its members and Government (DLA). Concerning the former, some of them are seen to lack commitment to LAAV’s cause, whilst a sense of neglect and ‘unresponsiveness’ is said to characterize the relations between DLA and LAAV (interviews).

From the DLA perspective, LAAV is seen to need to concentrate is activities on capacity building for LGs in all areas, e.g. induction courses for elected councillors, as well as, technical training for LGs administration in management, planning and budgeting At present, LAAV surely cannot meet these expectations and, in the opinion of the author, it is doubtful, whether the LAAV should, in fact, assume such an exclusive and ‘weighty’ responsibility, given the breadth of its constitutional objectives and the fact, that DLA with its Training Institute for civil servants is institutionally much better positioned and endowed to engage in capacity building and training for Vanuatu’s LGs. However, the CEO of LAAV is quite aware that the organization he leads will, thirdly, need to address the issue of capacity building for its members and facilitate access to courses, exchange of experiences etc. The following key areas were singled out (interview):

Institutional and technical capacity of LG in financial management (accounting, reporting), planning, budget cycle management, M&E;

Sectoral and cross-sectoral infrastructure and public service delivery (investment, territorial and land use planning, procurement, maintenance, mitigation of climate change effects);

Local economic Development (LED) focussing on local ownership and production, and distribution value chains;

Accountability and transparency of LGs’ decision making and budgeting process.

Given the discrepancy between the comprehensive functions on the one hand, and the scarcity of resources of Vanuatu’s LGs on the other, LAAV surely will, sooner or later, need to address the issue of intergovernmental fiscal relations and its reform on behalf of its members. Since the challenge is the same as in other Pacific Island states (see Chapter on Kiribati), cooperation and the exchange of view with regional counterpart organizations is important.

Finally, as is evident from the previous section, donor agencies do see a (potential) role for LAAV as a facilitator of, and platform for, dialogue on issues of both national and subnational interest.

In conclusion, LAAV can be said to hold a potential for serving its members and the government by promoting and possibly implementing activities in their respective interest, with an emphasis on improved local government and governance. Given its youth, the organization will need to be able to count on financial, organizational and technical support to mature and grow to an institutional profile and capacity which enables it to respond to the existing demand for its services and facilitation.

Once better consolidated, LAAV may widen its scope and foster alliances, always on the basis of its mandate and status as an NGO, with other stakeholders, such as Malvatumauri, church organizations, CSOs, etc., with a focus on promoting a national debate on improving LG services and accountability, and the corresponding satisfaction of the communities and citizens – a topic also in the interest of Vanuatu’s DPs.

47



4.6 Conclusion

Similar to Kiribati, the case study on Vanuatu also confirms, by and large, the diagnosis for the PICs made in 2008, referred to in section 2.5. The decentralization strategy, launched in 2000 as a result of the DRC’s recommendations and aimed at strengthening Vanatu’s LGs and their administrative, technical and financial capacity to plan, budget and monitor local government services, has been inching forward without apparently producing the desired performance and impact. A mix of political, institutional and capacity limitations and governance challenges have inhibited the closing of the wide gap between the LG’s functions of providing services and their limited resources. The latter are largely used for financing recurrent expenditure rather than investments in infrastructure and services. Thus, Vanuatu LGs continue to be ‘LGs in transition’ (Hassal & Tipu, 2009). As in the case of Kiribati, Vanuatu’s LGs have been largely sidelined in donor-financed urban development and infrastructure programmes despite representing a legitimate and democratically legitimized stakeholder. Under these circumstances, LAAV, organizationally still in an early consolidation phase, will face an uphill struggle to see the aspirations of its members realized in the near future. Nevertheless, given its mandate and unique position to aggregate and potentially articulate community, area council, municipal and provincial government interests, LAAV has an opportunity to turn into a dialogue platform for the promotion of a debate on public sector and fiscal reform for service delivery, which takes the mandate of its members and the interests of their constituencies into consideration. Sympathies and potential support of donors are not needed to be made use of.

48



5 Conclusions and recommendations

5.1 General conclusions

Revisiting the diagnosis of Pacific LGs undertaken in 2008 (see Section2.5), the research for the present study on Kiribati and Vanuatu’s LGs and their emerging associations provides some evidence, that not much has changed in these cases during the past five years. The two case studies suggest that the LGs,

continue to reflect the inherited historical patterns and functions, and continue to be in transition towards more effective and autonomous entities charged with providing a wide array of basic services, and,

continue to adjust to the effects of rapid urbanization and to grapple with reflecting its consequences for land management, planning and provision of basic services, without the necessary full jurisdiction over the territory and institutions necessary for finding long term solutions.

The LGs studied confirm the wide gap between their tasks and the few resources they have to effectively and efficiently provide public services, and,

continue to appear as a junior subordinate to national authorities, not on equal footing in policies and programmes aimed at providing better public services, and tangible and meaningful reduction of poverty levels, especially in urban areas, and finally,

they continue to be neglected in aid programmes, with notable exceptions (NZAid, CLGF).

However, there have been some positive changes, too.

Firstly, data on intergovernmental relations is available, especially on fiscal relations. It helps to understand better not only the width of the aforementioned gap between mandatory tasks on the one hand, and the scarce resources on the other, but also the challenges of LGs in managing and balancing their resource base and expenditure patterns.

Secondly, in both Kiribati and Vanuatu the author found evidence of a sense of sharpened awareness of government officials and representatives of aid agencies concerning the potential role of LGs can play in contributing to addressing and resolving some of the major challenges of urbanization, such as solid waste management. There is also increased awareness about the need to strengthen the institutional capacity of LGs and their councils for better execution of their key functions in planning, budgeting, monitoring and accountability.

Thirdly, the past five years have seen the emergence of LG associations in both countries, aimed at serving their members, government and communities, in addressing the key challenges the countries face at LG level, especially service provision for a growing urban population, including the necessary institutional and technical capacity. Birthing difficulties notwithstanding, the associations, KiLGA (in Kiribati) and LAAV (in Vanuatu) have started designing and implementing strategies to substantiate their mission with concrete action and to lobby for national and international support.

A fourth point relates to a changing aid environment and paradigm shift, which recognizes weaknesses and failures of the dominant technical approach to development and stresses political processes and less exclusive approaches to address the major economic, political, environmental and developmental challenges the PICs face. This may provide a window of opportunity for the LGAs to project themselves as platforms for debate and dialogue in matters of local and national governance, development priorities and policies, distribution of resources, etc., involving national, local and traditional elites, and CSOs.

The overall conclusion, however, is that LGs, legitimate in their functions and institutional setups, and legitimized through regular elections, have largely been sidelined both in national policies, programmes and projects, as well as, in the international aid and assistance programmes, in their support. In other words, one important level of government is not, or only marginally, involved in addressing and resolving the capacity of the public sector to address and resolve

49



key problems of service delivery – the principle raison d’être of LGs. If the African saying that ‘a chain is only as strong as the weakest of its links’ can be applied to the public sector of the countries studied, then the LGs may be considered to be that – a weak link; a link crucially important for a good and stable relationship between the citizen, as taxpayer, consumer, voter, client and beneficiary of public services, and the government. This link is also weak in relation to the aid assistance, which, programmatically seeks to address the problems of urban development, but includes, if at all, LG rather by default than by design.

This is certainly true for the Pacific’s largest DP, AusAID. Despite its (partial) programmatic focus on ‘urban development’ and despite its claim of a ‘Whole of Government Approach’ to aid and international cooperation, LGs do not feature explicitly in its present aid programmes in Kiribati and Vanuatu. Exceptions are the Melanesian countries of PNG and Solomon Islands.

88 According to one interlocutor, suggestions made by AusAID officials in 2012 to consider

including support for subnational governments in other AusAID programmes in the Pacific were declined as being ‘of little overall relevance’ (interview).

5.2 Specific conclusions and recommendations

Based on the considerations above, a number of specific conclusions can be drawn, and recommendations made, aimed at national governments and donors. Their rationale is to strengthen the LGs’ role in contribution to addressing and resolving development issues and public service delivery in the Pacific, in general, and the countries studied in particular. The topics: public sector reform, service delivery, building of capacity, local development and institutional framework are addressed.

These general conclusions are followed by specific conclusions and recommendations for the LGs and their associations.

5.2.1 National governments and donors

With regard to public sector reform, including budgetary and fiscal reform, a case can be made to not exclude local governments. They represent an important part of the public sector and usually have well-defined functions which need redefinition, given their wide array. The interface with government responsibilities and exclusive, competitive and complementary functions need also be clarified. The guiding principle should be to attribute few key functions for LGs and see to it that these are effectively and efficiently executed, in an accountable and transparent manner, actively involving the citizens. Obviously, the LGs need to be adequately resourced under the assumption, that ‘finance follows function’. The basic idea is to put into practice the theoretical proposition of the Wicksellian link between the quality and coverage of public services, on the one hand, and a corresponding fiscal burden for the ‘tax citizen’, a precondition for maintaining, sustaining and expanding expansion of public services, on the other. This necessarily involves reviewing the endowment of public resources, available to LGs for their key functions, either by increasing transfers or broadening their own resource base, or both. As a consequence, LGs should not be excluded from becoming part of the on-going budgetary and taxation reforms, and capacity building to this effect. Both aspects will imply adjustments to the institutional and legal framework governing LGs, in their favour.

Concerning LG service delivery, the aforementioned guiding principle – ‘less LG responsibility for public services, and these more effectively executed’ – needs to be stressed. Their core business could include solid waste management, management and registration of land and construction, public transport and public infrastructure (markets). These are also most relevant for revenue generation. More complex tasks such as supply of water and electricity, construction of

88 In PNG, AusAID support to provincial and local governments is part of the ‘Effective governance’ component of the AusAID – PNG programme

(http://www.ausaid.gov.au/countries/pacific/png/Pages/effective-governance.aspx). In Solomon Island, AusAID is supporting, together with the EU,

the Provincial Governance Strengthening Programme (PGSP), implemented by the Ministry of Provincial Government and Institutional Strengthening (MPGIS) and UNCDF/UNDP (Weimer et al., 2012).

http://www.ausaid.gov.au/countries/pacific/png/Pages/effective-governance.aspx

50



roads, ports and jetties, should clearly occupy a secondary line in functional priorities. Contract-based partnerships with government and the private sector should be encouraged.

Lack of institutional capacity of Pacific LGs has been diagnosed as one of the main obstacles to improved LG performance. However, while the need of institutional capacity and technical capabilities of LG staff in the key areas such as planning and budget cycle management, taxation, procurement, financial management, accountability procedures, etc., are recognized, institutional capacity building goes beyond the mere technical and training aspects of LG staff. It involves organizational capabilities of the LG administrations (e.g. TOR for staff, workflows, etc.,), incentive and performance monitoring systems for their human resources, and above all, a capacity to retain qualified and capacitated human resources. And, of course, it involves capacity building for mayors and elected councillors (basic understanding of LG functions, checks and balances, leadership, communication, negotiation, etc.) in their interaction with LG administrations. Experience elsewhere has shown that issue-focussed capacity building produces better results. Good examples are the provision and management of markets which includes capacity building elements in all phases of the planning, construction, operation and maintenance of a market, such as (participatory) planning and public consultations procurement, financial management, revenue administration and control, maintenance, etc.

Opportunities and potential support for capacity building exist. A good example is the Decentralization and Local Governance Initiative (DeLog), supported by the Development Partners Group subscribing to the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, of which at present 27 bi- and multilateral DPs are members, including the EU, the World Band, the African Bank for Development (AFBD), UN Habitat, UNDP and UNCDF.

89 DeLog, which delivers its training courses in

collaboration with centres of excellence such as The Hague Academy for Local Governance and the European Centre for Development Policy Management (ECDPM)

90 appears to have no programme for the Pacific at present. Exchange

arrangements and mutual learning between regional LGAs across continents on matters in general, and LGs and LGAs associations of SIDS of could be part of a future programme.

91

Local Economic Development (LED) is another important key area for LGs, for the purpose of service provision, revenue generation, and employment creation. The potential of LED has been recognized as a major LG topic by CLGF. However, starting and maintaining viable LED processes is a complex and demanding subject matter, which requires a multitude of skills, links to private and public sources of finance and management capacity. Being new for most of the PICs the technical competence of, and cooperation with, experienced partners such as UNCDF is recommended. Its experience with PGSP in Solomon Islands, the Suva-based PFIP (supported by UNCDF, AusAID and EU), and the new UNCDF Local Development Finance Practice (LDFP)

92 could be entry points. The advantage of such an approach is that it

combines funding for local public services with the reform of the intergovernmental system of service delivery and fiscal relations, tangible outcomes (i.e. improved services) with improved planning, budgeting and management, as well as, capacity building management for all the key components.

Finally, for a more prominent and substantive role of PIC LGs in contributing to national development in line with their mandate, it is important that their legitimate interests are better articulated and communicated, and their voice better heard and understood. The existing and emerging Pacific LGAs such as KiLGA, LAAV and MIMA, and their plans to form a regional body, are important steps toward this end. In the opinion of a number of interviewees, these steps are necessarily to be complemented by an ‘opening’ of regional governments and bodies such as PIF to make the issues of regional governments their own. More concretely, it was suggested that the PIFS considered institutionalizing a specific

89 For further details on membership, training course, etc., see http://www.delog.org/cms/front_content.php. 90 http://thehagueacademy.com/; http://www.ecdpm.org/ 91 For example, the author is aware of an interest of the government and LGA of Cape Verde Islands in West Africa, to learn from decentralization

challenges and experience in the Pacific, in the context of the design of Cape Verde’s ‘second wave’ of decentralization, i.e. regionalization. 92 See Annex 7.5

http://www.delog.org/cms/front_content.php

http://thehagueacademy.com/

http://www.ecdpm.org/

51



PIF technical unit for LG matters. The experience of the All Africa Ministerial Conference on Decentralization and Local Development (AMCOD)93 might be relevant here forLocal Governments and LGAs.

There is no doubt, that the emerging LGAs in the Pacific have formidable challenges ahead in fulfilling their mandate and mission. Four main challenges can be identified, which, well-perceived and tackled, can be turned into opportunities for the LGAs to grow and mature.

The first challenge is organizational development for their consolidation as viable, well-managed and functioning, sustainable organizations accountable to their members. This requires a sober assessment of their own strengths and weaknesses, capacity building for strategic planning and management (including financial management), fundraising, and communication with members and the government departments in charge of LGs. A website and well-established ICT links to members may eventually complement the regular issuing of newsletters. Independent, proactive, competent and accountable leadership is crucial for the consolidation process. One of the first priorities is that of establishing good working relationships with DPs genuinely interested in promoting LGs, on the basis of negotiated strategies, projects, programmes and funding arrangements.

The second challenge, derived from their mandate, is the facilitation of the consolidation of their members, through capacity building programmes, lobbying, advocacy and facilitation of technical and financial support. In this context, consolidation may have three different, but interrelated dimensions:

The LGs need to have their intergovernmental status and rule more clearly defined. This implies the review, if not reform, of their size, scope, functions and resource endowment, taking into consideration the principle of ‘finance follows function’. It also implies a redefinition of the legal frameworks under which they operate. Such a consolidation process necessarily implies lobbying, negotiation, and striking deals with the national governments.

Consolidation means also promoting and investing in the growing of the technical capacities of LGs to plan, budget, manage, monitor, etc., for the purpose of their elemental tasks: producing, distributing and maintaining public services and goods, managing budgets and resources, and being accountable to the legislature and citizens. It involves investing in finding and utilizing partnerships with technical and training institutions in the Pacific and the wider region

94, notably in the advanced Pacific countries (Australia, New

Zealand), promotion of twinning and technical assistance arrangements with other LGs and LGAs, exchange programmes and the generation of funding, aid assistance, scholarships and internships for such purpose.

95

These activities mostly will have a technical focus (e.g. solid waste management, water and sanitation, adaption to climate change, land use and planning, etc.). Existing online courses on matters of local government and development should be explored, such as those offered by the DELNET, supported by the International Labour Organization (ILO).

96 Building institutional capacity and (technical) capabilities of LGs

eventually also means increasing the public space and liberty for making choices, e.g. concerning priorities in policies and programmes, ways to more effectively involve citizens and in negotiation strategies with national governments and donor agencies.

Finally, consolidation also implies differentiation. As we have seen in the analyses of the context in which the LGs in the region operate, certain types of LG, as defined in the legislation may be outright irrelevant in remote island and rural areas, where the absence of the absolute minimum in terms of settlement structure, population density, infrastructure and taxable economic resource base makes a conventionally defined LG a contradiction in terms. In other words, local governments should be confined to areas and territories where

93 AMCOD was born from the initiative of African Ministers in charge of Decentralization, meeting on the sidelines of Africities 2000 Summit at Windhoek, Namibia, and the AMCOD Constituent Assembly held in Yaoundé, Republic of Cameroon, in December 2003. Its primary mission is to

promote formal discussions among African countries centred on decentralization and local development. 94 E.g. DELGOSEA, a partnership for democratic local government in South East Asia (http://www.delgosea.eu/cms/) 95 See, for example the Centre for Local Government (CLG) of the University of Technology, Sydney (http://www.clg.uts.edu.au/index.html ) or the

Local Government Managers of Australia (LGMA) (http://www.lgma.org.au/) 96 http://www.delnetitcilo.net/en

http://www.delgosea.eu/cms/

http://www.clg.uts.edu.au/index.html

http://www.lgma.org.au/

http://www.delnetitcilo.net/en

52



the minimum of urban conditions exists for them to function reasonably well. The other areas should be left to other forms of government, including by local traditional elites.

A third challenge is implicit in the challenges enumerated above: fundraising for the LGAs sustainability. The contributions of members will not be sufficient to guarantee long-term financial sustainability and may vary with the degree of their satisfaction with the services provided by their LGAs. Thus, the LGAs must invest and be creative in their fundraising and lobbying strategy, monitoring programmes and opportunities of key donor sympathetic to their cause (e.g. New Zealand, CLGF, and EU) and maintaining regular direct contacts and visits to their websites. Sources of funding for NGOs and NSA (e.g. by EU) also need to be monitored and explored.

Finally, in the course of this study, the opportunity for the regional LGAs to be part of a coalition for change and a platform for encompassing dialogue among national and local elites has been highlighted. Given their mandate and their potential to aggregate LG, government and communities’ interests, as well as, their legal status as NGOs, are seen to be factors which make them a privileged partner in the promotion of a more encompassing development dialogue. Therefore, the LGAs ought to be able to explore possibilities of cooperation with donors such as AusAID, which seek to promote platforms for such dialogue, through the PLP in this case. This would have to be done, obviously, with a mandate from LGA members, taking into consideration that this type of activity is not necessarily part of their constitution, unless defined as a lobbying and advocacy activity.

In conclusion, the analysis and case studies of Kiribati and Vanuatu suggest, that LGs and their associations may appear, at present, as quantité négligeable in addressing issues of development and public service provision. However, they have also shown that they play a legitimate and legitimized role, and represent a crucial link between citizen and the state which needs to be not only enhanced by reform and capacity building, and underpinned by additional resources to play that role more effectively, but also be supported in aid assistance programmes. The LGAs raison d’être and endeavour is about both.

6 Annexes

6.1 Terms of Reference

Short term expert

Proposed function Senior expert to develop a research document on “Local Government and the Donor Community in the Pacific”

Activity name and number Follow up on Activity 1.2.2. Train LGAs on the development opportunities.

Name of expert Bernhard Weimer

Aim of this assignment To draft a research document (approx. 30-40 pages) on the donor possibilities for local government and their representative organizations in Vanuatu, Kiribati and the Marshall Islands, exploring all donors, including but not limited to, multilateral (e.g. UN, EU, WB) to bilateral (e.g. AusAid, NZAid) to any available national donor funding, as well as interesting partnerships to be explored for these donor-funded projects (e.g. other LGAs, UCLGA-ASPAC, CSOs).

Activities to be performed 1. To supply VNG International with a preliminary list of contents.

2. To visit the relevant parties in Vanuatu, Kiribati and the Marshall Islands in order to draft this research (the LGAs, CLGF Pacific Project, the donor community, relevant national partners). Suggestions for relevant partners will be made by VNG International’s partner organization in the Pacific, FSPI.

3. To present VNG International with a draft of the research paper.

4. To finalize the research paper incorporating VNG International’s comments.

Outputs Research paper (30-40 pages)

Reporting requirements N/A

Minimum qualifications Qualifications and skills:

University degree or equivalent education in Public Administration, International- or European Affairs or Social Sciences

Excellent command of written and spoken English General experience:

At least 15 years’ experience working with donor funded projects

At least 15 years’ experience in drafting comprehensive research papers Specific experience:

Profound knowledge of local governments and their association

Profound knowledge of and experience in decentralization and local authorities and local government associations in the ACP Group of States

Approximate number of working days

25 days

Period of the assignment March/ April 2013

Place of the assignment Pacific (Vanuatu, Kiribati, and Marshall Islands)

6.2 Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Vanuatu – key features

Land Area

km2

Exclusive

Economic

Zone

(million

km2

No of Islands

(Inhabited)

Population

(2013 est)

Population

living in

urban areas

(%)

Population

Density

(persons/

km2)

GDP- PPP

(Million

US$), 2012

est

GDP per

capita -

PPP est

(US$)

Growth

rate in %

(2011)

Inflation

rate in %

(2012)

% under

poverty line

(latest year)

HDI position

(2012)

Parliamentary

sytem

Parliamentary

mandate

(years)

State

structureNo of govt

tiers

No of local

governments

Local Govt

associationOversight

Kiribati 726 200 33 (23) 103,248 40-50

12500

(urban

only)

624 5,900 3.0 7.7 38.0 (1996)121 of 187

countries

unicameral

46 members4 Unitary

2 (central,

local)

20 Island

Councils; 3

urban Councils

Kiribati Local

Govt

Association

KiLGA

Ministry of

Internal and

Social Affairs

Marshall Islands 181 200

2

archipelagic

island chains

of 29 atolls; 5

islands in the

North Pacific

69,747 72no info

available

170.7

(2010)3,200 5.0 9.5 20,0 (1999) n.a.

unicameral

33 members4

unitary;

constit.

govt in free

association

with the US

2 (central,

local)

33

municipalities

Marshall

Islands

Mayor

Association

MIMA

no info

available

Vanuatu 12,189 200 >80 (65) 261,565 26 19,660 1.237.000 4,900 4.3 3.0 - 4.0 15.9 (2008)124 of 187

countries

unicameral

54 members4 unitary

3 (central,

provincial,

municipal)

3 Municipal

Councils; 6

provincial

rural Councils

Local

Authorities'

Association

of Vanuatu

LAAV

Dpt of Local

Authorities.

Min of Home

Affairs

CIA Factbook, ADB, CFGF, UNDP

6.3 List of persons contacted

Date Name Function Organization Location Contact

26-Mar Albert Cereala Regional Governance Programme Officer, Researcher FSPI Suva/ Fiji [email protected] Andrea Motu Programme Assistant FSPI Suva/ Fiji [email protected]

27-Mar Kiribaiti Taoaba Regional Director CLGF Pacific Suva/ Fiji [email protected]

Feue Tipu Regional Governance Manager CLGF Pacific Suva/ Fiji [email protected]

Thierry Catteau Attaché, Nat Resources and Environment EU Delegation For Pacific Suva/ Fiji [email protected]

Malcolm Ponton Attaché, FSM, Palau, RMI, Nat Rources and Environment EU Delegation For Pacific Suva/ Fiji [email protected]

Helen Leslie First Secretary, Regional Development NZ Aid, NZ High Commission Suva/ Fiji [email protected]

Vamarasi Mausio Assistant NZ Aid, NZ High Commission Suva/ Fiji [email protected]

Rex Horoi Executive Director FSPI Suva/ Fiji [email protected]

28-Mar Brian Lenga Programme Development and Policy Analyst UNDP Suva/ Fiji [email protected]

Navin Bhan Programme Development and Policy Analyst UNDP Suva/ Fiji [email protected]

Solstice Middleby Councillor, Regional Development Cooperation AusAID, Australian High Commission Suva/ Fiji [email protected]

01-Apr Martin Tofinga Member of Parliament Parliament of Kiribati or Maneaba Ni Maungatabu Suva/ Fiji

Rikiauara Takeke Executive Officer KILGA Tarawa/Kiribati [email protected]

Rae Itinterunga Assistant to Executive Officer KILGA Tarawa/Kiribati [email protected]

02-Apr Romano Reo Mayor Betio Town Council Betio, Tarawa/Kiribati [email protected]

Semilota Finauga Senior Development Programme Coordinator NZ Aid, NZ High Commission Tarawa/Kiribati [email protected]

Fumio Kinoshita Volunteer Coordinator Japanese International Cooperation Agency (JICA) Ambo , Tarawa/Kiribati [email protected]

Rikiauara Takeke Executive Director KILGA Tarawa/Kiribati [email protected]

03-Apr Teriba Tabe Technical Assistant, EU-National Authorizing Office Ministry of Planning and Finance Tarawa/Kiribati

Michael Bootii Nauan Permanent Secretary Ministry of Internal and Social Affairs (MISA) Tarawa/Kiribati [email protected]

Ruoikabuti Tioon Mayor Teinainano Urban Council (TUC) TUC, Tarawa/Kiribati

Tekotaake Keariki Town Clerk Teinainano Urban Council (TUC) TUC, Tarawa/Kiribati

Takiakia Maatia Senior Local Government Officer Ministry of Internal and Social Affairs (MISA) Tarawa/Kiribati [email protected]

Teewaa Tonoeka Senior Local Government Auditor Ministry of Internal and Social Affairs (MISA) Tarawa/Kiribati [email protected]

05-Apr Lionel Gibson Deputy Programme Director Pacific Leadership Programme- AusAID Suva/ Fiji [email protected]

Mereani Rokotuibau Senior Programme Officer Pacific Leadership Programme- AusAID Suva/ Fiji [email protected]

08-Apr Job Boe Chief Executive Officer Local Authorities Association of Vanuatu (LAAV) Port Vila/ Vanuatu [email protected]

09-Apr Alima Garae Administrator Local Authorities Association of Vanuatu (LAAV) Port Vila/ Vanuatu [email protected]

Job Boe Chief Executive Officer Local Authorities Association of Vanuatu (LAAV) Port Vila/ Vanuatu [email protected]

Cherol Ala Director, Department of Local Authorities (DLA) Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA) Port Vila/ Vanuatu [email protected]

Pierro Willie Senior Financial Official, DLA Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA) Port Vila/ Vanuatu [email protected]

Richard D. Símbolo Programme Officer Japanese International Cooperation Agency (JICA) Port Vila/ Vanuatu [email protected]

Francis Herman (CXL) Director, Department of Local Authorities (DLA) Pacific Media Assistance Scheme (PACMAS) Port Vila/ Vanuatu

Colin Small Partner/ Consultant Aims 2 Gains Port Vila/ Vanuatu [email protected]

10-Apr Ginny Chapman First Secretary, Development New Zealand High Commission, NZAid Port Vila/Vanuatu [email protected]

Mikaela Nyman Development Counsellor New Zealand High Commission, NZAid Port Vila / Vanuatu [email protected]

Jimmy Nipo Development Programme Coordinator New Zealand High Commission, NZAid Port Vila / Vanuatu [email protected]

6.4 Kiribati: Solid Waste Management – towards a holistic approach (some personal considerations)

Bernhard Weimer

Sustained and effective , and cost-efficient solid waste management and its financing by Kiribati’s Local Governments (LG) remains a formidable task, despite the valuable support by government and DP partners such as NZ Aid and JICA. The issue is a complex one, as the quantity and quality of solid waste and its disposal are a function of the country’s trade, consumption and investment patterns and the ‘carrying capacity’ population of its islands.

The former is intrinsically linked to the adopted development model, its underlying international economic liberal trade regime, as well as, the associated mobility of people, money and commodities. As the seminal essay on Easter Island

97

demonstrates, the effects may not be conducive for small island states, such as Kiribati. Particularly the Tarawa urban areas appear to have reached the limits of the ‘carrying capacity’ of the island, not only in terms of population, but also in terms of consumer goods, packaging, vehicles, etc., and the waste these turn into.

The LGs, bear the brunt of the downstream challenges of the matter (waste collection and disposal), without being in a position to influence the upstream factors of waste generation and without the necessary financial and managerial capacity. This may result in an uphill struggle not easily to be won.

The monitoring of the waste recycling separation, rubbish collection, and the (exponential) growth of rubbish quantities deposited in landfills may indicate the success of LGs efforts at solid waste management, supported by NZAid (Interview). But is the production side of waste of all kinds (scrap metal, electronic waste, batteries, packaging, plastic etc.), i.e. the growth of the import of consumer goods, etc., equally monitored? In other words, are there holistic approaches to waste management, which also takes into consideration the quantity, and quality of imports of goods and commodities which determine the quantity and quality of waste and takes into consideration Kiribati’s Islands’ carrying capacity?

Can Kiribati be compared to a kind of supermarket which supplies goods to private, public and business consumers which all, sooner or later, turn into waste of different kinds, the management of which can be subsumed under a ‘waste disposal hierarchy’ established for any other commercial sector

98, as the following diagram shows?

99

Figure: Waste disposal hierarchy (according to Pitt)

Source: Baharum, n.d.

For addressing the challenge , e.g. through a policy and strategy on solid waste management, including its financing, a holistic approach seems to be called for, which looks at both upstream and downstream factors, financing of solid waste management and associated administrative and regulatory issues and which involves communities, local and national governments, as well as, Development Partners. If the comparison to a supermarket is relevant, four spheres

97 Diamond, Jared. Easter’s End, in: Discovery Magazine. August 1995: 1-6; 98 Baharum, Mohamad Rizal, n.d. Detemining key variables for solid waste management service delivery at shopping centre. The School of Built

Environment, Liverpool John Moores, Liverpool. http://www.ljmu.ac.uk/BLT/BUE_Docs/Baharum_M_GH.pdf, n 99 One might want to ad ‘re-export” as an additional dimension

http://www.ljmu.ac.uk/BLT/BUE_Docs/Baharum_M_GH.pdf

57



of influence or ‘trails’ are relevant for assessing risks and opportunities of solid waste management, according to the aforecited author and the literature used in his article. These are:

financial resource trail – business;

human resource trail – people;

physical resource trail – property; and

information resource trail – knowledge.

A major issue is the fiscal aspect of financing of solid waste management across the ‘waste hierarchy’. Various complementary fiscal models for generating funding for solid waste operations can be considered, apart from the levying of a rubbish fee presently being practiced selectively and with socially unjust implications.

100

The approach suggested here obviously needs some basic research for producing evidence to inspire the debate around the issue. It would probably also need a multidisciplinary analysis of the carrying capacity of Kiribati Islands, looking at demographic, economic, ecological, environmental, trade, energy, etc., factors. Such a study would be useful beyond the aspect of solid waste management, for all levels of government and the society at large.

Concerning the solid waste management strategy, insights and methodologies stemming from the analysis of supply chain might be useful. In this case, the supply chain would, inversely not be for goods/ commodities, but for valuable recyclable waste resulting from the consumption of those.

101

The KilGA appears to be well placed and endowed with some capacity to provide a platform and facilitate the interaction of all stakeholders aimed at producing a national policy and strategy for solid waste production and management. It probably would need technical support if it adopts a mission in promoting debate and policy formation on solid waste.

The debate of a policy / strategy could take into consideration some or all of the following factors:

Solid waste cycle: Upstream factors

Volume of imports of goods, merchandise etc. by category, durability, origin, and destination; purpose (e.g. consumption, investment, etc.)

Estimate volume of waste potential resulting from imports, in short, medium and long-term (by category, toxicity, recyclability, etc.)

Establishment of the ‘ownership’ of imports (and thus, solid waste potential) by sector (commerce, industry, transport, tourism, etc.) and type of owners (households, community, private, public, etc.);

Solid waste cycle: Downstream factors

Volumes of waste actually produced (by category, etc.)

Survey and assessment of places (private, public, etc., where solid waste is legally and illegally deposited)

Estimated cost of managing waste (depositing, recycling, re-exporting etc.), by volume and categories, etc.)

100 A fee for solid waste management (‘service charge’) is deducted from the salaries of all public servants and transferred to the Kiribati LGs. Other

social groups are not systematically covered by collection of the waste fee. The service charge is considered to high by MISA and is presently being

reviewed (Interviews). 101 Palaniappan, ChandiranMuthurathinasabapathy Ramasubramaniam, Solid waste recovery supply chain networks – Structure and Operations. Centre

for Logistics and Supply Chain Management, Loyola Institute of Business Administration, Chennai / India, 2012.

http://www.ifmr.ac.in/pdf/26thOct2012seminar.pdf


58



Frequency and quality of collection, processing , recycling, re-export of waste by category)

Institutional aspects

Responsibility: which government level for which type of waste?

Role of community?

What type, quantity and quality of resources needed for solid waste operations (uman resources, equipment , technology, etc.) at what level?

What are the resource gaps?

What type of M&E system (baseline, indicators, responsibility, etc)?

Civic education campaigns (target groups, etc.)

Periodically targeted clean-up and recycling campaigns (e.g. beaches), involving community and financed via ‘food for work’ or ‘income for work’ schemes.

Surveying and policing of compliance with solid waste regulations.

Legislative -Administrative measures

What administrative/ legislative measures to limit certain types of packaging (plastic)?

What measures to force/ incentivize retail and wholesale trade to take back packing and dispose/ re-export it?

Incentives for re-export of waste (by type) to countries/ sources of origin of imports.

Financing and financial management of solid waste operations102

levying of up front solid waste tax on all imports

special taxes on certain types of waste

levying of fees (current practice)

local government taxes on retail/ whole sale and business activities

fines for non-compliance with regulations

management of collection, administration and accounting for solid waste-related revenue management

cadastre of main producers of solid waste (by type)

Nandi/ Fiji, 12 /04/2013

102 For obvious reasons, the revenue (potentially) generated should be considered a revenue exclusively conditioned to the r use in expenditure related to solid waste operations.

6.5 The Local Development Finance Practice (UNCDF)

A: Concepts

Local Development

For LDFP, local development is about the improvement of the quality of life within a locality. This involves local governance and the decision-making process in a locality. Yet local development is a broader concept that goes beyond accountable local governance and decentralised service provision, and embraces other aspects. Local development is the sustainable improvement of the quality of life and security of livelihoods for all within the locality. It addresses the spectrum of: shelter and housing; food security; education and health; safe, aesthetic, resilient environment; citizen empowerment and representation; fulfilling and rewarding economic activity and even work-ife balance. These aspects of life are often targeted individually. Local development is about the spatial, institutional and economic linkages between them within a locality. It is when promoting one of these goals has a positive feedback on others within that locality. In today’s eco-sensitive world local development can reduce the carbon footprint of an economy. Countries pursue local development at all stages of their development.

Local Development Finance

The Local Development Finance Practice (LDFP) is a practice within the United Nations Capital Development Fund (UNCDF). Alongside the Financial Inclusion Practice (FIP) it operates according to the rules and mandate of UNCDF. The purpose of LDFP is to promote and accelerate poverty reduction through sustainable, inclusive and equitable local development.

Each project is designed according to specific development challenges, either at country or global level and the projects themselves may seem very different from one another. LDFP largely works with local public and private institutions, in particular local governments. Some work directly with local governments, others with national and local governments, others work on project finance, however they all incorporate the LDFP core approach. This means applying UNCDF’s mandate by investing seed capital combined with technical assistance in innovative financial systems and mechanisms that trigger increased flows of resources for local development.

B: LDFP Core Approach

60



C: Instruments and Areas

The following matrix gives an overview of the possibilities of combining the areas and the instruments of the LDFP approach:

Instruments The Local Development Fund - Fiscal grants (public sector)

Local Finance Initiative (private sector)

Cash Transfer (to individuals, e.g. scholarships)

Local Development Investment vehicle (e.g. remittances)

Are

as

Decentralisation and local governance

Climate Change and Food Security

Gender Social protection Local Economic Development

ICT for local development

D: Context

Obviously, the context and its thorough analysis are most important for preparing and implementing a successful LDFP programme. Such programmes have worked in countries that are at different stages of institutional development. Some are emerging from conflict, some are consolidating local institutions and others have already strong local institutions. Different tools and investments are relevant in each case. Some of the most successful LDFP programmes have rebuilt institutions and trust in local governance whilst also kick-starting local development. Early examples include Mozambique, Uganda and Cambodia. During 2010-2013 this tradition has been continued in Somalia, Solomon Islands and Nepal. Democratizing Myanmar will be another mark stone, from 2013 onwards.

Source: UNCDF, Bangkok Office

6.6 Local Government on Marshall Islands

6.6.1 Introductory note

As stated in the introduction, it was not possible to visit the Republic of Marshall Islands (RMI) during the research work for this study, for logistical and time constraints. Regrettably, this brief Annex on Marshall Islands, certainly does not do justice to the country and its Association of Mayors, one of the oldest in the Pacific. Nevertheless, some relevant information has been collected and analysed, mostly on the basis of desk research – a difficult undertaking given the scarceness of accessible literature on the subject. Considerable inputs to this section stem from Mark Dacombe, who has had the privilege to visit the country, to be involved in capacity building and conversation with government and MIMA leaders, within the ARIAL framework. The author is indebted to Mark for his valuable contribution.

6.6.2 Marshall Island: Macro context

The Republic of Marshall Islands (RMI) consists of 29 atolls (24 of which inhabited) and 5 single islands, with a land area of 181 km

2, mostly at sea level. Around 70% of the population, estimated at close to 70,000 inhabitants, are

concentrated in urban areas (the capital Majuro) and Ebeye, the second urban centre, at the Kwjalein Atolls, the latter hosting a US ballistic missile test site.

As a typical SIDS the RMI has particular development challenges arising from limited land space, dispersed population, high rate of urbanization and high cost of service delivery. As a result, many urban and rural Marshallese live in poverty; have poor health (including nuclear radiation-related diseases

103) and limited access to potable water,

sanitation services and electrical energy. Many of them are employed by the state and its public enterprises, and the US armed forces. Emigration to the US is often a way to escape poverty.

Climate change is a recurring theme quite understandably when one considers the highest point on Majuro is 3 metres above sea level and all freshwater for human use comes from the sky. Climate change potentially will have impacts, caused by: sea level rise, drought, storm surges, tropical cyclones, and epidemics as a result of natural hazards.

The RMI is freely associated with the USA, on the basis of a Compact of Free Association, which guarantees the inflow of annually 62.7 million US$ from 2013 to 2023, when the Compact ends. This main source of revenue will be substituted by a Trust Fund at present being set up, alimented by US funding via the Compact and RMI’s own revenue. The US is the RMI’s largest donor. The otherwise important DPs in the region play a significantly lesser (Australia) or no role at all (New Zealand). Japan and the Republic of China as well as the ADB are other important donors.

6.6.3 Local government

The system of Local Government is enshrined in the constitution (Part IX) and is governed by the Local Government Act of 1980 and the Local Government Fees and Taxes Act 1989. There are 24 local councils representing the inhabited atolls of the Marshalls. Traditional leaders play an important role both at LG and at national government level, where they form the Council of Iroij, the upper house of Parliament (Nitijela). Members of the Local Councils are elected and there is also provision for appointed or ex officio members of councils. The LG executive is headed by a mayor.

The national development strategy 2003-18, ‘Vision 2018’, recognizes the crucial role of LGs, for sustainable development and addressing the major challenges of the RMI, especially those of the Outer Islands (RMI, 2001: 36). The review of intergovernmental finances and taxation seeks to endow the LG with more resources and increase their allocation efficiency. The decentralization of functions such as formulating their own development plans, providing local public services (water and sanitation, health, primary education, energy, communication) and capacity building measures aim at empowering LGs and make them better equipped for their tasks (RMI, 2001: 48).

6.6.4 The Marshall Islands Mayors Association (MIMA)

MIMA is an NGO with its own constitution (‘by-law’), reviewed in 2004, that sets out its governance arrangements, practices and procedures. Each Council pays a membership fee.

103 Resulting from testing atomic bombs by the US Armed Forces in the late 1940s and 50s.

62



Founded in 1980, MIMA is probably one of the oldest LGAs in the Pacific. All 24 Mayors are currently members of the MIMA. MIMA holds an annual meeting lastingone week, which is usually attended by all Mayors (at the cost of their LG), weather and travel conditions permitting. What happens in practice is that the Mayors are working with their communities throughout the year and are generally well-connected to the issues and concerns of their people. The Mayors bring their issues to the annual MIMA Conference in the form of proposed resolutions. During the MIMA Conference week the Mayors are addressed by various NGOs, Government Ministries and business groups. They then address all of the resolutions. Those resolutions supported by MIMA are referred to the Leadership Conference. At the 2012 MIMA Conference there were in excess of 100 separate resolutions that were referred on to the Leadership Conference.

104 The proceedings of MIMA are held almost exclusively in Marshallese and so for non-speakers of the

language it is impossible to follow the detail. Unfortunately English translations of the proceedings are difficult to come by.

The Annual MIMA Conference is immediately followed by the Annual RMI Executive Leadership Conference, in which the Mayors raise and discuss issues of concern with the government. The Executive Leadership Conference is usually chaired by the President of the Republic. The fact that he devotes a whole week to it, I think, underscores the importance that the National Government places on the role of local government as a partner in the governance of the country and in the local provision of services. During the Leadership Conference the various Ministries attend for discussions on the MIMA resolutions that fall within their areas of responsibility. The Ministries make presentations on their priorities and programmes. MIMA resolutions that are supported by the Government are ultimately referred to the responsible Ministries for action.

The Ministry of Internal Affairs provides policy and operational oversight of Local Government. The Ministry officers work closely with the Chair of MIMA. The Director of Local Government and her small team of two, has been providing secretarial services to MIMA.

The following personalities are part of MIMA’s leadership:

Chairman of MIMA, Mr James Matayoshi who is also Mayor of Rongelap Atoll105

Deputy Chairman, Mr Anderson Kattil, Mayor of Lae Atoll

Secretary, Ms Rufina Jack, Mayor of Ailuk Atoll

Ms Daisy Alik-Momotaro, Secretary, Ministry of Internal Affairs

Ms Mabel Peter, Director of Local Government, Ministry of Internal Affairs

The conversations106

with these personalities confirm the strategic partnership between the LG and the national government and the key role in the delivery of services and the development of communities the RMI LGs have. Other pertinent issues are:

Their strong relationships with their respective communities;

The constraints on MIMA’s effectiveness by lack of resources to maintain consistent focus on its agenda. For example there is little follow up with Ministries between annual meetings on progress with implementing resolutions;

The lack of a MIMA strategic plan.

The headline issues on which MIMA is working with the Government are:

Enhancing local livelihoods and community resilience;

104 Personal communication by Mark Dacombe, who participated in the 2012 Annual MIMA Conference. 105 The Mayor is also known as an anti nuclear activist and leading lobbyist with the Nuclear Claims Tribunal to provide monetary compensation to

victims of nuclear bombs testing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Matayoshi. 106 By Mark Dacombe on the occasion of a working visit in the RMI and the Regional Conference of Pacific LGAs in Solomon Islands in 2012.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Matayoshi

63



Shipping services to outer islands;

Viability of the copra industry;

Energy security and a low carbon future;

Water security;

Community partnerships on projects that contribute to national objectives such as poverty reduction and climate change.

The President has created, within the Office of the President, an Office of Environmental Planning and Policy Coordination (OEPPC), to develop an integrated approach to addressing these issues. The RMI Government has developed a National Climate Change Framework and is developing a Joint National Action Plan.

The OEPPC has a strong focus on:

disaster risk management,

climate change adaption,

water security,

food security, and,

coastal protection.

They see the role of local government as being critical to effective management of climate issues in outer islands communities. They are also examining the local economic development opportunities that may be associated with addressing these issues. For example, the rollout of solar energy across the RMI has created the need for local maintenance capability. Diesel substitution on the outer islands provides the opportunity for local landowners to grow feedstock and the actual production of biodiesel provides jobs.

The OEPPC is looking to focus donors into these areas. They are seeking partnerships to address issues; for example Kiribati, RMI and Nauru have the same water issues, which opens up the opportunity for some joint work in that area. They are also seeking to work with research institutes such as the Oceanic Institute in Hawaii on various projects.

The Director of the OEPPC believes that for local government to fully participate there needs to some work on the capacity to do so. He has a vision for the use of education facilities that may be lying idle during vacation breaks to be used for summer schools and to bring people in from local governments and from communities for intensive training on ways to address the issues and take advantage of opportunities specifically around climate change and local economic development.

MIMA also sees itself being able to take on a more significant role in developing capacity within the local government sector now it is better resourced. One of the identified priorities is MIMA’s assistance to its members on financial management issues.

However, MIMA lacks at present, the financial resources and organizational structure to better perform its role in support of its members and government. In particular, it needs a national office, well-equipped and well-staffed, to be able to fully perform its functions in line with its constitution.

64



6.6.5 LG and International cooperation

In order to strengthen MIMA’s own capacities, the organization has requested support from the EU, via ARIAL and VNG-International for the establishment and equipment of a national office as well as the elaboration of a strategic plan.

107 The recent appointment of an Executive Officer is an important step forward also in regard to fundraising.

At present, MIMA does not seem to maintain a direct partnership with any international donor. However, the relationship between MIMA and the RMI Government and the way the parties operate is a good foundation for making the case for MIMA funding. With the support of a new Executive Officer, the on-going support of the MIA and the vision and commitment of the Director of the OEPPC – all operating within a framework that has coherence – appear to be preconditions for the emergence of a stronger role of MIMA and its members in addressing the most pertinent issues through projects and programmes to be funded by donors, with a high likelihood of success.

107 Letter to VNG-International, dated 12 August 2012, Re: Expression of interest in support of Strengthening MIMA.

6.7 Bibliography

ADB, 2009a. Country Partnership Strategy 2010-2014. Vanuatu. Manila: Asian Development Bank.. http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/pub/2009/CPS-VAN-2010-2014.pdf

ADB, 2009b. Vanuatu, Country Partnership Strategy 2010–2014 . Project Number: 26194. August 2009. http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/pub/2009/CPS-VAN-2010-2014.pdf

ADB, 2010. Country Partnership Strategy. Kiribati. 2010-2014. Manila: Asian Development Bank. http://www.adb.org/countries/kiribati/strategy

ADB, 2012. The state of Pacific towns and cities: Urbanization in ADB’s Pacific developing member countries. Manila: Asian Development Bank; Mandaluyong City: Asian Development Bank.

Alasia, Sam, 1997. Party politics and governance in Solomon Islands. State, Society and Governance in Melanesia. The Australian National University, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies. Discussion paper 87/7. http://ips.cap.anu.edu.au/ssgm/papers/discussion_papers/ssgmalasia.pdf

Alfaro‐Pelico, Raúl , 2012. Small Island Developing States and Climate Change: Effects, Responses and Positions beyond Durban.Area: Energy Programme and Climate Change. Working Paper 1/2012. Madrid: Elcano Royal Institute. http://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/wps/wcm/connect/ec147c8049e5f095a5aabf39d72a98ae/WP_Alfaro-Pelico_Small_Islands_Climate_Change_Durban.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ec147c8049e5f095a5aabf39d72a98ae

AusAID, 2007. Vanuatu Kastom Governance Partnership. Review Report. November 2007.

AusAID, 2012. Kiribati country case study. AusAID Pacific social protection series: poverty, vulnerability and social protection in the Pacific. Canberra:AusAID http://www.ausaid.gov.au/countries/pacific/rp/Documents/kiribati-case-study.pdf

Baharum, Mohamad Rizal, 2009. Determining key variables for solid waste management service delivery at shopping centre. Liverpool: Liverpool John Moores University.http://www.ljmu.ac.uk/BLT/BUE_Docs/Baharum_M_GH.pdf

Bass, Stephen and Dalal-Clayton, Barry, 1995. Small Island states and sustainable development: Strategic issues and experience. London: International Institute for Environment and Development. http://pubs.iied.org/pdfs/7755IIED.pdf

Bräutigam, Deborah; Fjeldstad, Odd-Helge, and Moore, Mick (eds.), 2008. Taxation and State-Building in Developing Countries: Capacity and Consent. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press/ Washington D.C.: American University, pp. 1-33.

Cambers, Gillian, n.d. Managing Solid Waste from an Island Perspective. Mayaguez: University of Puerto Rico. http://www.unesco.org/csi/smis/siv/inter-reg/waste.htm

CLGF, n.d. Country Profile: Vanuatu. The local government system in Vanuatu. http://www.clgfpacific.org/userfiles/1/files/Vanatu%20local%20government%20profile%202011-12.pdf

CLGF, n.d. Pacific Project Info Booklet. Suva, Fiji.

Commonwealth Local Government Conference Freeport, Bahamas, May 2009 http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/ojs/index.php/cjlg

Connerly Ed; Eaton, Kent; Smoke, Paul (Eds.), 2010. Making Decentralization work. Democracy, Development and Security. Boulder/London: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/pub/2009/CPS-VAN-2010-2014.pdf

http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/pub/2009/CPS-VAN-2010-2014.pdf

http://www.adb.org/countries/kiribati/strategy

http://ips.cap.anu.edu.au/ssgm/papers/discussion_papers/ssgmalasia.pdf

http://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/wps/wcm/connect/ec147c8049e5f095a5aabf39d72a98ae/WP_Alfaro-Pelico_Small_Islands_Climate_Change_Durban.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ec147c8049e5f095a5aabf39d72a98ae

http://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/wps/wcm/connect/ec147c8049e5f095a5aabf39d72a98ae/WP_Alfaro-Pelico_Small_Islands_Climate_Change_Durban.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ec147c8049e5f095a5aabf39d72a98ae

http://www.ausaid.gov.au/countries/pacific/rp/Documents/kiribati-case-study.pdf

http://www.ausaid.gov.au/countries/pacific/rp/Documents/kiribati-case-study.pdf

http://www.ljmu.ac.uk/BLT/BUE_Docs/Baharum_M_GH.pdf

http://pubs.iied.org/pdfs/7755IIED.pdf

http://www.unesco.org/csi/smis/siv/inter-reg/waste.htm

http://www.clgfpacific.org/userfiles/1/files/Vanatu%20local%20government%20profile%202011-12.pdf

http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/ojs/index.php/cjlg

66



Cox, Marcus; Alatoa, Hannington; Kenni, Linda; Naupa, Anna; Rawlings, Gregory; Soni, Nikunj, and Vatu, Charles, 2007. The unfinished state: Drivers of Change in Vanuatu. AusAID, April 2007. http://www.ausaid.gov.au/Publications/Documents/vanuatu_change.pdf;

di John, Jonathan, and Putzel, John, 2009. Political Settlements: Issue Paper. Governance and Social Development Resource Centre (GSDRC). http://www.gsdrc.org/docs/open/EIRS7.pdf.

Diamond, Jared. Easter’s End, in: Discovery Magazine. August 1995: pp. 1-6.

Dornan Matthew, 2012. Climate Change Adaptation in Pacific island countries: Donors, Big Men, Real Options. Articles from Development Policy Blog. http://devpolicy.org/climate-change-adaptation-in-pacific-island-countries-donors-big-men-real-options/

Duncan, Ron (ed.), 2011. The political economy of economic reform in the Pacific. Mandaluyong City: Asian Development Bank..

Eaton, Kent; Kaiser, Kai, and Smoke, Paul, 2011. The Political economy of decentralization reforms: Implications for aid effectiveness. Washington DC: The World Bank

ESCAP, 1999. Managing the Transition from the Village to the City in the South Pacific. ESCAP. http://www.unescap.org/huset/pacific/pacific1.htm

EU, 2008. The Country Strategy and National Indicative Programme Vanuatu, 2008-2013. 10th

EDF Programme of the European Commission, 2008-2013. http://ec.europa.eu/development/icenter/repository/scanned_

Forsyth, Miranda, 2009. A Bird that flies with two wings. Kastom and state justice systems in Vanuatu. Canberra: The Australian National University E-Press. http://epress.anu.edu.au/kastom _citation.html

Fraenkel, & Grofman, B., 2010. Introduction. Political Culture, Representation and Electoral Sytems in the Pacific Islands, in: Commmonwealth and Comparative Politcs, 43:3, 261-275

FSPI, n.d. FSPI Annual Report 2008-09. Suva/ Fiji, Foundation for the South Pacific Peoples International.

GoV, 2001a. Decentralization Review Commission. Report: Volume 2. Findings and Recommendations. Port Vila, June 2001. http://www.vanuatu.usp.ac.fj/sol_adobe_documents/usp%20only/vanuatu/drcvolume2.pdf

GoV, 2001b. Decentralization Review Commission. Report: Volume 3. Detailed consultations: raw data and information. http://www.vanuatu.usp.ac.fj/sol_adobe_documents/usp%20only/vanuatu/drcvolume3.pdf

GoV, 2006. Priorities and Action Agenda (PAA), 2006 – 2015: An Educated, Healthy and Wealthy Vanuatu. Department of Economic and Sector Planning. Ministry of Finance and Economic Management. http://www.ausaid.gov.au/countries/pacific/vanuatu/Documents/government-of-vanuatu-priorities-action-agenda-2006-15.pdf

GoV, 2010. Millennium Development Goals. 2010 Report for Vanuatu. Port Vila, Governemnt of Vanuatu. Prime Minister’s Office.

GoV, 2011. Government of the Republic of Vanuatu. Priorities and Action Agenda 2006 – 2015. 2011 Update: Re-committing to Reform to achieve “a Just, Educated, Healthy and Wealthy Vanuatu”. DRAFT. October 2011

Grebe, Eduard, 2013.A Review of Melo, Ng'ethe & Manor "Against the Odds: Politicians, Institutions and the Struggle Against Poverty" (London: C. Hurst & Co., 2012), Developmental leadership Programme -DLP.

http://www.ausaid.gov.au/Publications/Documents/vanuatu_change.pdf

http://www.gsdrc.org/docs/open/EIRS7.pdf

http://devpolicy.org/climate-change-adaptation-in-pacific-island-countries-donors-big-men-real-options/

http://devpolicy.org/climate-change-adaptation-in-pacific-island-countries-donors-big-men-real-options/

http://www.unescap.org/huset/pacific/pacific1.htm

http://ec.europa.eu/development/icenter/repository/scanned_

http://epress.anu.edu.au/kastom%20_citation.html

http://www.vanuatu.usp.ac.fj/sol_adobe_documents/usp%20only/vanuatu/drcvolume2.pdf

http://www.vanuatu.usp.ac.fj/sol_adobe_documents/usp%20only/vanuatu/drcvolume3.pdf

http://www.ausaid.gov.au/countries/pacific/vanuatu/Documents/government-of-vanuatu-priorities-action-agenda-2006-15.pdf

http://www.ausaid.gov.au/countries/pacific/vanuatu/Documents/government-of-vanuatu-priorities-action-agenda-2006-15.pdf

67



http://www.dlprog.org/news-events/review-against-the-odds-politicians-institutions-and-the-struggle-against-poverty.php?utm_source=CC&utm_medium=reviewlink&utm_campaign=Review1

GuV, 2004. The Vanuatu Comprehensive Reform Program Summit. Luganville, Santo, Monday 11 October to Tuesday 12 October 2004. National CRP Summit Communiqué

Hassall, Graham, 2010. The Commonwealth Local Government Pacific Project: Seeking ‘Most significant change’ Commonwealth Journal of Local Governance Special Issue March 2010.

Hassall, Graham; Kaitani, Mili; Mae, Paul; Tipu, Feue, and Wainikesa, Laiasiasa, 2009. Background Report on Local Government and Traditional Systems in Pacific Island Countries. CLGF/ UNDP/ FSPI Programme. http://www.clgfpacific.org/userfiles/3/file/Microsoft%20PowerPoint%20-%20Professor%20Graham%20Hassall.pdf;

Itonga, Natan, 2012. Kiribati Country Report, 2012. Secretariat of the Pacific Community. 24th

Council of Pacific Arts and Culture. Honiara, Solomon Islands, 27-29 March 2012. Agenda item 14. Country Report Kiribati. SPC/24CPAC/ March 2012.

JICA, 2012. Japan International Cooperation Agency, Vanuatu Office. Statistics as of August 2012.

Khan, Mushtaq H., and Jomo, Kwame Sundaram, 2000. Introduction. In: M. Khan and K.S Jomo (Eds.) Rents, Rent-Seeking and Economic Development: Theory and Evidence in Asia. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 1-20.

Khan, Mushtaq H., 2010. Political Settlements and the Governance of Growth-Enhancing Institutions. University of London, School of Oriental and African Studies. http://eprints.soas.ac.uk/9968/1/Political_Settlements_internet.pdf

KiLGA, 2012. Strategic Plan 2012-2014. Approved by the KiLGA General Meeting, 20 March, 2012, Betio, Kiribati. Kiribati Local Government Association.

KiLGA, 2013. Action Plan for Dialogue between KiLGA and its Development Partners. Betio, Kiribati. March 2013.

Lal, Renée D, 1998. The Tax Haven Industry of Vanuatu. The cost and Benefits of the Industry. Journal of South Pacific Public Law. Working Paper 6 of Volume 2, 1998. http://www.vanuatu.usp.ac.fj/journal_splaw/working_papers/lal2.

Laws of Kiribati, 2007. Law № 2 of 1984. Local Government Act (incorporating amandments to 26 January 2007, including amendments made by the Local Government (Amendment) Act 2006 (not yet in force).http://www.pacific.clgf.org.uk/images/campaign/54/file/Kiribati%20Local%20Government%20Act.pdf

Laws, Edward, 2012. Political Settlements, Elite Pacts and Governments of National Unity. A Conceptual Study. D evelopment Leadership Programme. Background Paper 10. http://www.dlprog.org/ftp/info/Public%20Folder/Political%20Settlements,%20Elite%20Pacts,%20and%20Governments%20of%20National%20Unity.pdf.html?utm_source=N%26E&utm_medium=RPDownload&utm_campaign=PolSet

Laws, Edward, 2013. Governance, Politics and Development in the Pacific. DLP Background Paper 14. Development Leadership Program. www.dlprog.org;

Le Borgne, Eric, and Medas, Paulo, 2007. Sovereign Wealth Funds in the Pacific Island Countries: Macro-Fiscal Linkages. IMF Working Paper.Fiscal Affairs Department. December 2007.

LG New Zealand, 2002. Local Government Partnerships to enhance development and reduce poverty in the Pacific. A Proposal. Local Government New Zealand. August, 2002. http://www.lgnz.co.nz/library/files/store_001/lgpartnership-proposal.pdf



http://www.clgfpacific.org/userfiles/3/file/Microsoft%20PowerPoint%20-%20Professor%20Graham%20Hassall.pdf

http://eprints.soas.ac.uk/9968/1/Political_Settlements_internet.pdf

http://www.vanuatu.usp.ac.fj/journal_splaw/working_papers/lal2.

http://www.pacific.clgf.org.uk/images/campaign/54/file/Kiribati%20Local%20Government%20Act.pdf

http://www.dlprog.org/ftp/info/Public%20Folder/Political%20Settlements,%20Elite%20Pacts,%20and%20Governments%20of%20National%20Unity.pdf.html?utm_source=N%26E&utm_medium=RPDownload&utm_campaign=PolSet

http://www.dlprog.org/ftp/info/Public%20Folder/Political%20Settlements,%20Elite%20Pacts,%20and%20Governments%20of%20National%20Unity.pdf.html?utm_source=N%26E&utm_medium=RPDownload&utm_campaign=PolSet

http://www.dlprog.org/

http://www.lgnz.co.nz/library/files/store_001/lgpartnership-proposal.pdf

http://www.lgnz.co.nz/library/files/store_001/lgpartnership-proposal.pdf

68



Manor, James, 1999. The political econmy of democratic decentralization. Washington D.C.: The World Bank.

Moore, Mick, 1998. Death Without Taxes: democracy, state capacity and aid dependence in the fourth world. In: M. Robinson and G. White (eds.) The democratic developmental state: politics and institutional design. Oxford Studies in Democratization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Nari, Russell, 2000. Comprehensive Reform Programme in the Republic of Vanuatu: a major challenge – through the eyes of a ni-Vanuatu. Paper presented at the Pacific Update on Solomon Islands, Fiji and Vanuatu. Asia Pacific School for Economics and Management. Update Papers. June 2000. http://www.vanuatu.usp.ac.fj/sol_adobe_documents/usp%20only/vanuatu/Nari.pdf

Noble, Cameron; Pereira, Natalia, and Saune, Nanise, 2011. Urban youth in the Pacific: increasing resilience and reducing risk for involvement in crime and violence Suva : UNDP Pacific Centre : Pacific Island Forum Secretariat.

North, Douglass; Wallis, John; Weingast, Barry and Webb, Stephen (eds), 2011. The Shadow of Violence – the Problem of Development in Limited Access Order Societies. New York: Cambridge University Press.

MFAT, 2012. Development in the Pacific. Partnership in Progress. New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT), Aid Programme.

Overton, Jon, 2009. Reshaping Development Aid: Implications for Political and Economic Relationships. in: Policy Quaterly, Vol 5 Issue 3, August 2009. Victoria University of Wellington. http://igps.victoria.ac.nz/publications/files/0a6a1623d23.pdf

Palaniappan, Chandiran, and Muthurathinasabapathy, Ramasubramaniam,2012. Solid waste recovery supply chain networks – Structure and Operations. Centre for Logistics and Supply Chain Management, Loyola Institute of Business Administration, Chennai, India. http://www.ifmr.ac.in/pdf/26thOct2012seminar.pdf

Pelling,Mark, and Uitto, Juha I., 2001. Small island developing states: natural disaster vulnerability and global change. Environmental Hazards 3, pp. 49-62. http://www.tc.umn.edu/~blume013/pelling_Uitto_sm_islands.pdf

PIFS, 2011. Pacific experiences with modalities relevant for Climate Change Finance. Suva, Fiji. Pacific Island Forum Secretariat. http://www.forumsec.org/resources/uploads/attachments/documents/Pacific%20experiences%20with%20modalities%20relevant%20for%20Climate%20Change%20Financing,%202012.pdf

PIFS, 2012. Pacific Regional MDGs Tracking Report. Pacific Island Forum Secretariate.

Ray, Binayak, 1999. Good governance, administrative reform and socio-economic realities A South Pacific perspective. International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 26 No. 1/2/3,pp: 354-369.

RMI, 2001. Vision 2018 - Jepilpilin Ke Ajukaan. The Strategic Development Plan Framework 2003-2018. The Republic of Marshall Islands. Ministry of Finance. Majuro, 2001.

Saldanha, Cedric, 2004. Strategies for Good Governance in the Pacific. in: Asian-Pacific Economic Literature, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 30-43, November 2004. Austral Foundation. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=614123

Schlegelmilch, Kai, 2010. Options for promoting Environmental Fiscal Reform in EC Development Cooperation. Country case study Vanuatu. http://www.foes.de/pdf/2010-09-29%20Vanuatu%20-%20FINAL.pdf

Shie, Tamara Renee, 2007. Rising Chinese Influence in the South Pacific: Beijing's “Island Fever”, in: Asian Survey Vol. 47, No. 2 (March/April): pp. 307-326.

http://www.vanuatu.usp.ac.fj/sol_adobe_documents/usp%20only/vanuatu/Nari.pdf

http://igps.victoria.ac.nz/publications/files/0a6a1623d23.pdf


http://www.tc.umn.edu/~blume013/pelling_Uitto_sm_islands.pdf

http://www.forumsec.org/resources/uploads/attachments/documents/Pacific%20experiences%20with%20modalities%20relevant%20for%20Climate%20Change%20Financing,%202012.pdf

http://www.forumsec.org/resources/uploads/attachments/documents/Pacific%20experiences%20with%20modalities%20relevant%20for%20Climate%20Change%20Financing,%202012.pdf

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=614123

http://www.foes.de/pdf/2010-09-29%20Vanuatu%20-%20FINAL.pdf

69



TUC, 2013. Teinainano Urban Council (TUC), SouthTarawa, Kiribati. Draft Strategic Plan, 2013-2016.

UNDP, 2013. United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) for the Pacific Region 2013-2017. UNDP office Apia/ Samoa and Suva/ Fiji

Van Zyl, Albert, 2010. What is Wrong with the Constituency Development Funds? IBP Budget Brief, Year 03, No 10, 2010. International Budget Partnership http://internationalbudget.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/brief10.pdf

Vanuatu decentralization legislation, 1988, 1994, 2000 and 2001. (http://www.pacific.clgf.org.uk/pacific-local-government-legislation/).Vanuatu Municipalities Act (1988).pdf Vanuatu Municipalities Amendment Act (2001).pdf, Vanuatu Decentralisation and LocalGovernment Act (1994).pdf, Vanuatu Decentralisation Amendment Act_No41_(2000).pdf; Vanuatu Physical Planning Act.pdf

WB, 2000. Pacific Regional Strategy. The World Bank Report No. 20370 – EAP. May 2005. http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2000/09/09/000094946_00051605332588/Rendered/PDF/multi_page.pdf

WB, 2005. Regional Engagement Framework FY 2006-2009 for Pacific Islands. The World Bank. Report No: 32261-EAP. http://www.sprep.org/att/IRC/eCOPIES/Pacific_Region/97.pdf

WB, 2012. Pacific Futures: World Bank Discussion Note. Sydney. World Bank Pacific Department.

Weimer, Bernhard; Bøttern, Phillip W., and Roughan, Paul, 2012. Mid-Term Review. Provincial Government Strenghtenigg Programm (PGSP), Solomon Islands. Government of the Solomon Islands, UNDP; UNCDF. February, 2012. http://www.uncdf.org/sites/default/files/Download/SOLOMON_PGSP_MTE_0412.pdf

Whincup, Tony, 2010. Te Mwaneaba in Kiribati. The Traditional Meeting House of Kiribati: ‘A Tale of Two Islands’. in: Shima: The International Journal of Research into Island Cultures, Vol. 4(1), pp. 113-129. http://www.shimajournal.org/issues/v4n1/k.%20Whincup%20Shima%20v4n1%20113-130.pdf

http://internationalbudget.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/brief10.pdf

http://www.pacific.clgf.org.uk/images/campaign/54/file/Vanuatu%20Municipalities%20Act.pdf

http://www.pacific.clgf.org.uk/images/campaign/54/file/Vanuatu%20Municipalities%20Amendment%20Act%202001.pdf

http://www.pacific.clgf.org.uk/images/campaign/54/file/Vanuatu%20Decentralisation%20and%20LocalGovernment%20Act%201994.pdf

http://www.pacific.clgf.org.uk/images/campaign/54/file/Vanuatu%20Decentralisation%20Amendment%20Act_No41_2000.pdf

http://www.pacific.clgf.org.uk/images/campaign/54/file/Vanuatu%20Decentralisation%20Amendment%20Act_No41_2000.pdf

http://www.pacific.clgf.org.uk/images/campaign/54/file/Vanuatu%20Physical%20Planning%20Act.pdf

http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2000/09/09/000094946_00051605332588/Rendered/PDF/multi_page.pdf



http://www.sprep.org/att/IRC/eCOPIES/Pacific_Region/97.pdf

http://www.uncdf.org/sites/default/files/Download/SOLOMON_PGSP_MTE_0412.pdf

http://www.shimajournal.org/issues/v4n1/k.%20Whincup%20Shima%20v4n1%20113-130.pdf

report lga-pacific final 210513

Documents

development maputo

vanuatu source

vt vanuatu vatu vanuatu

exchange rates local

new zealand dollar new

australian dollar australia

vng international nassaulaan

united states dollar