Report on Urban Programmes that have benefitted Tanzania

Transcription

1 Cities Alliance Project Output Report on Urban Programmes that have benefitted Tanzania Tanzania State of the Cities Report P This project output was created with Cities Alliance grant funding.

2 TANZANIA CITIES NETWORK (TACINE) Tanzania State of Cities Report Project Phase I Attachment II: REPORT ON URBAN PROGRAMMES THAT HAVE BENEFITED TANZANIA 10

3 Background Numerous studies have expounded on the subject of implementing urban development projects with varying viewpoints. Donor funding organisations such as World Bank i, OECD ii and UNHabitat iii have sponsored various evaluation studies and scholarly publications on establishment criteria for success in urban development projects. Such studies tend to give advice by means of lessons on the main consideration and criteria in formulation and funding urban development projects. The scale they operate is generally national as they draw comparative experiences from many least developed countries. The other category of literature on the subject comes from publishers whose point of concern is the failure in implementing urban development plans, particularly master plans and detail planning schemes. Their writings tend to target national policy makers and theoreticians iv. The third group of writers on implementation of urban development projects focuses on the sector-specific development interventions such as housing, education and institutional reforms etc v. These tend to write for all actors i.e. donors, central government policy makers, agencies, local authority and theoreticians. However, their focus is more sector specific institutions. In all three categories of discussion, the focus which is apparently lacking is that targeting primarily the urban local authorities. Special feature of these authorities is that they are not dealing with specific sector only, as the case with donors or national institutions. As provided by the Section 17 of the Local Government (Urban Authorities) Act No. 8 of 1982, they are supposed to carry any development projects in a manner they seem suited and conducive for speedy and correct realization of the project objectives. Thus, project implementation is largely influenced by the capacities and dynamics within the urban authorities themselves. This Report attempts to contribute to the filling of this knowledge gap on assessing implementation of urban development projects from the perspective of urban local authorities themselves. This perspective apart from facilitating internal learning among technocrats, will also facilitate identification of important components in assessing development situations in cities themselves. Such components will feed in the ongoing process of establishing guidelines (indicators, tools and institutional procedures) for the preparation of Tanzania State of Cities Report. Defining components of the project assessment under study The purpose of the Report is not a comprehensive evaluation of the projects. Rather, it was a qualitative study of the level at which the project objectives have been met, or are likely to be met in case of ongoing project. This is similar with Dales vi definition of effectiveness evaluation, i.e. targets on project effects and outputs vis a vis set objectives. Dale further establishes four analytical categories in assessing or evaluating projects which are; relevance, effectiveness, impact, efficiency, sustainability and replicability. Relevance refers to the degree at which the project has addressed or is addressing problem of high priority. In the case of this assessment, relevance was not 11

4 fully considered because the projects had already been decided and information of background and rationale for such decision was not available, although question was asked on the source of idea for the project. Effectiveness assesses the extent at which the expected effects and output were attained. This element was central to this evaluation albeit in qualitative manner. Impact looks into project overall consequences. Efficiency refers to the amount of output created and their qualities in relation to the resources invested. Impact and efficiency were not considered in this assessment due to resource constraints. Sustainability refers to the maintenance or argumentation of the positive achievements of induced by the evaluated programme or project after the scheme has been terminated. This element is sometimes called mainstreaming of project s good-values post initial funding-phase. Sustainability was a central element in this assessment. Replicability, which refers to the feasibility of repeating the project in another context, was not assessed in this study. Therefore, the study focused primarily on effectiveness and sustainability of the projects. The indicator used to measure project s effectives is the project success level, which was a comparison of project objectives with attained outputs. The reasons for the discrepancies in each project were also inquired. For sustainability, the indicator used was the level of incorporation of the desirable project values (methods/approaches and activities) in the mainstream planning, budgeting and operations of the urban authority. Establishing criteria for assessing project implementation As stated above, the goals of assessing implementation of urban development projects vary depending on the primary audience (target institution) of the assessment, hence, there are multiple criteria for the assessment or conditions that authors believe are crucial for project success. Discussion on the factors hereunder is based on crossexamination of the factors established by the three writers on the implementation of urban development projects in developing countries, namely, Choguill vii, Foster viii and Paul ix. One of category of factor pointed by Choguill is organisational factors. It refers to the level of coordination among involved institutions, agreement on the goals and level of consensus among planning and implementing actors. Paul expands this element by elaborating that for the project successfulness to be ensured, the design of the project should call for interaction among the actors and beneficiaries. From the Paul s perspective, the project has to categorically focus on the needs of the institutions. Foster concretises the argument by stating that in case of donor funding projects, there should be a consensus between the donor, central government agencies and the local community, which includes the respective urban local authority, which has to invest in its political will (a factor discussed separately in Choguill conceptualization). Cultural understanding as separate factor relates closely to the articulation of needs for the 12

5 project, although it is more relevant in donor funding projects. In this study, institutional coordination and consensus in planning goals is examined through assessing partnership in planning and implementation of the project, while articulation of local needs and local political will were assessed through observation of the originality of the planning idea, the level of council s team coordination and level of participation of various departments in the project. Another category as identified by Choguill is resource factor and funding source, which refers to the level of availability of monetary and qualified personnel. In the case of local authorities as expounded by Foster, resource factor encompasses also issues of budgeting and partnership in funding (matching fund). In one hand, allocation of budget for matching fund or for sustaining the project after the elapse of the donor funding by the urban council is an indication of their political support, but on the other hand, this adds extra burden on the budget of the councils. In this study, resource factor was captured by assessing the responsibility of local authorities in various projects and in accessing the challenges that the projects faced in course of implementation. Another factor is the focus area of the project and approaches taken. Choguill refers this as technology in its wider sense. Paul is specific that project that focus and uses approaches that build local capacity to plan and implement are likely to be successful than those that focuses on higher technological standards and improving standards of facilities in the target communities. Foster explicitly states that projects have tendency to focus on physical assets and tangible results than soft elements that are difficult to justify or to measure results quantitatively, which contributes to the failure of many development projects. The bias in the project focus may lead to some pertinent areas that are crucial to the city development to be marginalised simply because their results are not easily measurable. For this study, the focus of the projects was assessed by examining the projects in light of the UNHabitat conceptualization of the three essential E s of urban development namely Economy, Ecology and Equity x. TACINE xi have expanded the three Es into five thematic areas, which are productivity, inclusivity, sustainability, governance and safety. Therefore, in this study project thematic area was an indicator of the focus of the project. To conclude on the conceptual discussion, the preceding discourse establishes that there are three important considerations in implementing urban development projects. First is a consensus among the project stakeholders (implementing actors, mandated institutions and beneficiaries) on the focus area and goals of project. Second is instituting the project in a suitable organisational structure that fosters partnership in project design (planning) and implementation with other line agencies, private sector and popular sector. The third factor is availability of technical and financial resources during initial phase and latter during mainstreaming of project good values. Presence of 13

6 the three pre-requisite factors are like to see projects meeting their objectives (ensure project effectiveness) and sustains the inertial and good values emerging from the project experiences. Figure 1 represents the discussed relationship. Figure 1: Relationship in success factors for implementing urban development projects the study context, methods and tools Tanzanian Cities Network commissioned the study in attempt to generate important considerations that have to be included in the guideline for the preparation of the Tanzania State of the Cities Report (TzSoCR). Six urban centres are initially to be involved in the preparation of the TzSoCR namely, Arusha City, Dar es Salaam City (which has four councils), Mbeya City, Mwanza City, Tanga City and Zanzibar Municipality. The study approach involved breaking down of the indicators discussed above into specific elements of the questionnaire (see-appended questionnaire). The questionnaire was designed for face-to-face interviews between researchers and heads of departments and coordinators or previous coordinators of various projects in respective urban councils. The questionnaire was tested in Dar es Salaam City Council 14

7 (DCC) and the revised version was sent to the coordinators and head of departments well in advance. Interviewers were conducted with each project coordinator. There was no pre-selection of the projects, although projects/programmes that were coordinated nationally, such as those under TASAF or MEM, or those operated outside urban local authorities e.g. by national agencies, were not considered (see the appended list of projects). 86 projects were assessed, with an average of ten projects per council except for Zanzibar that had five projects. Most of projects selected dated from mid 1990s to date. Qualitative results were documented and categorised, which facilitated analysis of data in a statistical package (i.e. SPSS). Results and discussion The results of the study are categorised according to the conceptual elements discussed above, the study which are; the focus of the projects as per thematic area, resource factor and funding sources, organisation and partnership, project effectiveness and project sustainability. Focus of the projects as per thematic area The findings reveal that out of 86 projects, 35 focussed on inclusivity and servicing, 24 in improving city economy, 16 on environmental sustainability, nine on governance and capacity building issues, and one on safely and security issues (Figure 2). The apparent marginalisation on safety and security issues is quite notable. It was only in Dar es Salaam City Council, where the safer cities project had operated, where the safety related project was noted. The explanation given was, despite its importance there was no funding for safety projects in local authorities. In addition, it was noted that institutionally, safety issues have been operating from the offices of district and regional commissioners despite the fact that the local authorities are mandated by law (section 55 of the Local Government -Urban Authorities- Act No. 8 of 1982). The limited focus is also seen in area of governance and capacity building. As capacity is one of the crucial elements in the success of many development projects, low priority in governance and capacity building is undesirable phenomenon. 15

8 Figure 2: Distribution of projects by their focus in thematic areas It is worth pointing out that issue of productivity although taking second in the number has special character among urban development projects. Many projects taken by urban local governments have components in that involve expanding inputs to the councils coffers. For instance, plots provision services for bus stops, markets gardening or housing, while they cater for servicing they are actually projects that Councils undertake to generate revenue. By nature, most of these projects are small and are largely funded by the councils themselves. Some big ones are funded by loans like that of Mkapa conference centre and Mwanjelwa market in Mbeya. The focus towards generating revenue even in servicing related projects has a tendency to misdirect the goals of the project. As a result, the indicators for achievement become intermediate ones and not the ultimate ones. To give an example, most of the councils have plot provision projects. The ultimate goal of these projects would have been adequate shelter provision (housing and services) as well as guiding urban 16

9 development to sustainable city form. However, due to intermediate indicators of generating revenues, many councils end up generating plots that are not serviced. In some cases no efforts is made link plans with those of servicing agents. Plots are also provided in city peripheral without any consideration for other aspects of urban development such as employment (location of production centres) and transportation. For the same reason that councils focus on generating revenues, regularisation projects have been literally sidelines, despite most people in urban settlement living in unplanned settlements, only four regularization/property formalisation projects were discussed.. Although various reasons have been given for their sidelining, such as unclear legal procedure and politicisation natures of those projects, part of unstated reason is that these projects have high input costs and comparatively longer payback period. Evidently, the focus on revenue creation, particularly in land sector is unlikely to contribute to sustainable urbanisation. The lesson merging is the need to focus in ultimate goals for sustainable development. Resource factor and funding sources Data reveal that of the projects that were analysed, nearly half (40 projects) had their main part of the fund coming from the donor (Figure 3). Central government funded one-third of projects, while urban authorities themselves funded nearly one-fifth of projects. While noting that these data excluded many national wide projects such as those under TASAF or on fighting HIV AIDS and those education programmes, as well as those under sector agencies, they reveal a potential capacity of the local authorities to conceive and fund their own projects. Breaking down by donor, it was revealed that the World Bank is the leading donor, followed by DANIDA (Figure 4). Note has to be taken that this comparison of donors does not consider the values of the funds given. When linking thematic areas and funding source, it was revealed that donor-funding, while apparent in every thematic area, is the main source in projects related to governance and capacity building. On the same area of governance and capacity building, local government have been seen to be least interested in funding. This finding challenge the conception that donors generally are interested in tangible projects, although patterns might be different if the data is aggregated by donor 17

10 Figure 3: Funding by donor among the analysed projects Figure 4: Funding source by project thematic area 18

11 Organisation and partnership As established in conceptual discussion above, one indicator in organisational category was the presence of agreement on the need and goals of the project. Meaning the stakeholders within the respective urban area were partners in conceiving the idea of the project. About a half of the projects, 44 projects originated from among the local stakeholders. When these data are correlated with thematic area, it was found that local stakeholders tended to give priority to projects dealing with servicing and productivity (Table 1). Table 1: Project idea by thematic area Source of project idea When extending the discussion to the partnership, the data revealed that there was very high level of partnership (74% in planning and design and 68% in implementation). This shows that urban local authorities tend to cooperate strongly with other actors in planning and implementing projects. Furthermore, the probability of partnership in implementation was slightly higher for project conceived from within than those conceived from without (Table 2). Table 2: Level of implementation partnership by the idea source Source of project idea Gover nance and capaci ty buildi ng Produc tivity/ econo my Sustain ability / environ ment manage ment Inclusiv ity/ servicin g safety and security other s Within LGA/urban area outside Total Partnership in implementation there was partnership there was no partnership Within LGA/urban area outside Equally, three quotas of the projects indicated adequate level of teamwork and internal coordination. This was crucial element in assessing the level of institutional memory for the councils. In the course of discussion, it was established that some of the projects tended to have parallel structures or had very weak link with the mainstream council activities. Some of cases that showed this behaviour include projects under sustainable cities programmes, USRPs and safer cities. For Sustainable Mwanza Programme, the Tot al 19

12 outside project coordinators are said to have repatriated all important project documents to the extent that the council has no documented memory of the project. A special consideration on organisational issues was given in the analysis of the institutional structure of Dar es Salaam City, where three municipal councils are working under and coordinated by the City. This examination was important, as similar institutional structure is likely to be adopted in future for the fast expanding cities. Twenty-four projects were examined in the city, from which coordinators of 14 projects thought that the institutional structure of in Dar es Salaam (relations between city council and municipal council) was not supportive of their projects. Five of these had extreme opinion that the DCC should be disbanded or dissolved. There was general feeling that project coordinators from the city councils were not respected by their counterparts in the municipal councils. The blame on the disfunctionality of the Dar e s Salaam institutional structure was directed to the law that established Dar es Salaam City Council (Urban Authorities Act No 9 of 1999) that it did not explicitly state the power relations between the city and municipal councils. Project effectiveness Data reveal that according to the opinion of the technocrats, 80% of the projects had reached their objectives by more than 50%. Thus, most of the projects are regarded successful. When project effectiveness was compared with the ideas` originality, it was found that project infectiveness is more associated with locally conceived projects than with project conceived from outside. This phenomenon underscores the need to focus on the capacities of the technocrats in the councils. Twenty five per cent of the projects that had no adequate coordination were failure compared with 17% of those of which had adequate coordination. In partnership, 29% of the projects that had limited partnership in planning had problems meeting their objectives compared with 15% of those that had adequate partnership in planning phase. 20

13 Figure 5: Main suggestions for improving project effectiveness The picture painted by these statistics is that project effectiveness is strongly linked to the level of organisation and availability of consensus among the interested parties. When examining the challenges to the project effectiveness, it was found that, number one challenge was funding and availability of material resources. Low level of stakeholders awareness and consensus as well as the constrained autonomy of the urban councils due to the interference from central government institutions were also among the dominant challenges in improving project effectiveness (Figure 5). 21

14 Figure 6: Associating challenges with project effectiveness When comparing the level of effectiveness with the opinion of the technocrats (Figure 6), data reveal that projects that failed to meet their objectives are those that starved for resources, and there was no adequate participation of the stakeholders. This data tend to challenge the popular belief that lack of local political will is among the major challenge for successes of projects. One has to be cautious that the question of capacity was not pointed out by technocratic as the major area of concern as the study was partly a kind of self-assessment. Project sustainability Data reveal that one-third of projects could not or were unlikely to be sustainable. Major sustainability challenges include inadequate funding and lack of political support from within the councils. Each of these factors affects a quota of the project among those, 22

15 which are unlikely to be sustainable. The effectiveness of the project has no bearing on the will of the Councils to sustain the good project values (Table 3). This phenomenon was underscore several times by respondents that while the project might be effective, many fail to be sustained because of the lack of funding and political support. This happens because councils fail to allocate budget to sustain many good values of even very successful projects. Table 3: Probability that the project is mainstreamed and effective Opinion on success level attained for the effective projects for the ineffective projects probability that the project is mainstreamed mainstreamed not mainstreamed Conclusion In the review of the projects it is evident that much strides is being made by the urban local authorities through various development projects to contribute to sustainable urban development in the country. The higher percentage of effective project proves this. The question that needs to be tackled is, why this has not contributed to the sustainable urbanization (considering the graveness of urban development challenges in the country)? The project focus on short-term objectives and not ultimate goals was seen as one of the reason for the discrepancy, which leaves us with the question on how can we ensure focus on development outcomes not only intermediate results? The same challenge applied for sustainability, which despite many projects referred to as sustainable by the technocrats, this has not resulted in sustainable urban development. The question is why so? It is even more challenging that some of the effective projects have not been mainstreamed. Lack of funding/integration of requirements to sustain effective project in Council budget was seen as one of the reason for mainstreaming failures. Considering the large amount of resources allocated for starting up projects, how are we going to ensure that cities are assessed by their ability to have political commitment to the allocated fund, and to institute mechanisms for increasing resources in the councils themselves. Another pertinent question is the 23

16 need for a mechanisms to have balanced distribution of resources in all thematic areas (including issues on safety). This links to the and the need to consider issues that have not come up from the projects such as cost recovery in projects planning and implementation. 24

17 References and notes 1Paul, S. (1987). Community Participation in Development Projects: the World Bank Experience: World Bank Discussion Papers (WDP) No. 6, Washington DC 1Foster, M. (2000). New Approaches to Development Co-operation: What can we learn from experience with implementing Sector Wide Approaches? ODI Working Paper 140. Overseas Development Institute 1Satterthwaite, D. (2001). Constraints on Aid Effectiveness: Reducing Urban Poverty; Constraints on the Effectiveness of Aid Agencies and Development Banks and Some Suggestions for Change. Environment & Urbanization : 16 (1). 1 Such publications include: Nnkya, T. (2008). Why Planning Does Not Work: Land Use Planning and Residents Rights in Tanzania. Mkuki na Nyota, Dar es Salaam; Materu, J. (1997), The Urban Planning in Tanzania: What should be the Strategic Role Urban Planning? The Journal of Building and Land Development. Vol. 4(1): 23-40, Amstrong, A. (1987), Master Plans for Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. The shaping of African City. Habitat Intl, Vol. 11 (2): Example of such studies include Therkildsen, O. (2000). ; Public sector reform in a poor, aid-dependent country, Tanzania. Public Administration & Development 20 : Dale, R. (2004). Evaluating Development Programmes and Projects. Sage Publication. London 1 Choguill C. (1994). Implementing Urban Development Projects ; a Search for the Criteria for Success. Third World Planning Review. 16(1) 1 Foster, M. (2000). New Approaches to Development Co-operation: What can we learn from experience with implementing Sector Wide Approaches? ODI Working Paper 140. Overseas Development Institute 1Paul, S. (1987). Community Participation in Development Projects: the World Bank Experience: World Bank Discussion Papers (WDP) No. 6, Washington DC 1 For details see the following UN Habitat documents, UN-HABITAT (2005), Local Economic Development Series on Promoting Local Economic Development through Strategic Planning; Volume 1-5. UN-Habitat, Nairobi; UN-HABITAT, (2009). The Global Report on Human Settlements: The State of African Cities 2008: A Framework for Addressing Urban Challenges In Africa. UN-Habitat, Nairobi; and UN-HABITAT, (2010) 25

18 Medium Strategic and Institutional Plan; Implementation of the Medium-term Strategic and Institutional Plan; Focus Area 2 UN-Habitat, Nairobi 1 TACINE, (2009) Tanzania Cities Network. Report on the Implementation of the Preparatory Tanzania. List of projects assessed No. City /municipal ity project 26 City /municipality project 1. Zanzaibar Waste management (sewer) Ausha UDEM 2. Zanzaibar USRP Ausha Street Names 3. Zanzaibar STP Ausha TSCP 4. Zanzaibar Jamhuri garden Ausha Revenue enhancement 5. Zanzaibar Green belt Ausha Schools 6. Tanga MACEMP Ausha Property formalization 7. Tanga Nguvumal i Ausha Master plan 8. Tanga Infrastructure improvement Ausha LGRP 9. Tanga solid waste management Ausha HIV/AIDS 10. Tanga wom pr Kinodoni Waste management 11. Tanga LED Programme Kinodoni STLT BNJ 12. Tanga UKEMI Kinodoni Street Names 13. Tanga TSCP Kinodoni Improvement of health centre 14. Tanga STP Kinodoni Revenue enhancement (GIS) 15. Tanga UDEM Kinodoni LGRP 16. Tanga SCP Ilala MACEMP 17. Tanga USRP Ilala Plot provision 18. Tanga TDFDP Ilala Revenue enhancement (GIS) 19. Tanga Revenue enhancement (GIS) Ilala LGRP 20. Tanga Plot provision Dar es Slaam Cities Alliance Tanzania 21. Mwanza UDEM Dar es Slaam Safer Cities 22. Mwanza LGRP Dar es Slaam Sustainable DSM Program 23. Mwanza HIV/AIDS Dar es Slaam Improvement of health centre 24. Mwanza Plot provision Dar es Slaam Strategy 25. Mwanza Property formalization Dar es Slaam Capacity Bldg (transport) 26. Mwanza Strategic Mwanza Programme Dar es Slaam Clean Development mechanism 27. Mwanza USRP Dar es Slaam Waste management Vingunguti

19 28. Mwanza TSCP Dar es Slaam Waste management Pugu 29. Mwanza Waste management Dar es Slaam DART 30. Mwanza Lake Victoria Management by CC Dar es Slaam City Abattoir City /municipality project No Dar es Slaam Ubungo Bus terminal 32. Dar es Slaam Crops Market 33. Dar es Slaam Machinga Complex 34. Dar es Slaam City Car Parking 35. Dar es Slaam Benjamine Mkapa Sec School 36. Dar es Slaam CIUP 37. Dar es Slaam City Radio & TV 38. Dar es Slaam DMDP 39. Mbeya Urban Aut 40. Mbeya Plot provision (5000) 41. Mbeya Mkapa Center 42. Mbeya Iganjo S 43. Mbeya Mwanjelwa market 44. Mbeya TSCP 45. Mbeya USRP 46. Mbeya SMBP 47. Mbeya UDEM 48. Mbeya HIV AIDS 49. Mbeya LGRP 50. Temeke Mbagala Road 51. Temeke BoreHole 52. Temeke LGRP 53. Temeke Plots provision 54. Temeke Schools building 55. Temeke Revenue enhancement (GIS) 56. Temeke Waste Management 27