It is not surprising that the multiplicity of municipal service problems, and the varying perspectives on these problems, lead to an assortment of objectives and priorities, each relating to the agenda, status and capacity of the stakeholder. In order to determine whether a partnership is successful or is meeting the service needs of the municipality, it is necessary to define the needs that will be addressed, and agree objectives. Objectives that are described in terms of one selected goal, such as 'improved efficiency', provide only a limited description of what the stakeholders in a municipality hope to achieve. Objectives will respond to both strategic and practical concerns, and will be expressed in different terms. They also change over time, and often change as capacity increases. Objectives will vary across the stakeholder groups: the urban poor (as consumers or informal service providers), municipal administrators and politicians, government representatives, and external agents (such as donors and NGOs). There is never just one municipal objective, and it is unlikely that one solution could meet the requirements of all the stakeholders.
In order to present the possible range of municipal service objectives, a framework (illustrated in Box 3.1) attempts to assemble a range of possible objectives from a range of stakeholders. At the top of this framework is the key objective of urban governance - to create a better place in which all may live. The more specific objectives of potential stakeholders are grouped into sectors such as:
• economic objectives (to improve efficiency and generate urban economic growth);
• financial objectives (to create capital investment or transfer risk);
• political objectives (to represent constituents and maintain power over the allocation of resources);
• physical/environmental objectives (to improve the quality of the urban environment);
• social objectives (to improve livelihoods and create greater equity in service provision); and
• institutional objectives (to improve local capacity to manage and govern the city).
Most importantly, this framework includes the specific social or livelihood objectives of poor households and individuals: better access to affordable services, less time spent collecting water, fewer water-borne and faecal-borne diseases and improved access to and security of employment. It also includes the objectives of external agents: e.g., the donor objective of sustainable, equitable, environmentally sound development and more accountable, transparent forms of local government; and the NGO objective of more equitable services for the poor.
While this broad range of municipal objectives may be ambitious and somewhat idealistic, this comprehensive approach helps municipalities to recognise and prioritise objectives. Through it, it is also possible to see that many past initiatives have focused on only some of these municipal objectives. By stressing the need for increased capital investment and improved efficiency to meet the environmental and physical objectives of service delivery, effort has generally been biased towards economic and financial objectives. Traditional forms of PPPs have prioritised such objectives over the social, political, and institutional objectives that are nevertheless equally important aspects of sustainable service delivery.
Box 3.2 Why Involve the Private Sector in Service Delivery? |
A Mayor's Perspective |
When I campaigned for the position of Mayor of Kathmandu, Nepal, I promised the people that I would rebuild and revitalise the city. Much has been achieved, but there is more to do. Despite the constant efforts of Kathmandu Metropolitan City (KMC) the challenge must involve all of us, and in this regard the private sector, formal and informal, has a role to play. KMC has recognised this and has recently adopted a policy to promote public-private partnerships. This was an important decision. Let us consider why. |
Nepal is still a rural country, with over 80% of its population living in scattered settlements, many of which are remote and difficult to access. Population continues to increase at 2.5% per annum and yet suitable land to feed the increasing number of mouths is critically short. The result - migration to urban areas on an unprecedented scale. In 1991 city population was approximately 420,000, but today it exceeds 750,000. In the last 10 years city population has increased at 6% per annum or more, and the demand for urban services has sky rocketed. |
Who is to provide these services? Previously this was the responsibility of central government, when the country was a monarchy, but following restoration of multi-party politics in 1991, the government has pursed a policy of decentralisation whereby municipalities are progressively required to take on the thankless task of managing urban areas. The task is enormous and it is true to say that most municipalities in Nepal operate in a state of permanent crisis. Kathmandu is no exception. As soon as we repair a road, a drain, a burst water-pipe or a street light, another just around the corner requires attention. Our infrastructure is old and inadequate, and is in need of constant maintenance. And to make matters worse, more people arrive day by day demanding new services in areas that were once fields and will soon become concrete jungles. 'Ke garne' (What to do)? |
We soon realised that our pitiful budget and meagre staff resources were not enough to meet the challenge. All around us people are building houses, companies are constructing offices, development is going on. Why should not these same people invest in the very services that they demand? Why not encourage them to share the burden that the public sector alone cannot bear? There is no shame in this. Municipalities cannot do everything. We should manage of course, but this does not mean that we have to provide all the services ourselves. Instead, we should be like the conductor of a large and varied orchestra, whose musicians hail from all sectors of society. The challenge is to decide which piece of music to play, to ensure that all the instruments are in tune with each other, and that the flute can still be heard above the strident tones of the brass. |
In 2000, the Council of Kathmandu Metropolitan City approved a 'Private Sector Participation: Private-Public Partnership Policy of KMC'. This was a landmark decision and the foundation stone for a new era of urban management in the capital city. In accordance with this policy, the private sector is already actively engaged in the provision of urban services and the impact can be seen in marked improvements to the quality and efficiency of the urban environment. In recent years the private sector has: |
• taken over management of the bus terminus and will soon invest in expansion of the facilities; • landscaped and managed open spaces around the town as part of a policy to beautify the city; • collected the garbage through innovative schemes, often operated by local user groups on a self-sustaining basis; • managed parking on a systematic basis and collected fees; • started the collection of vehicle registration fees; and • assumed the management of pedestrian bridges with a commitment to build more for the benefit of pedestrian safety in an environment in which the number of motor cars is increasing day by day. In addition, PPP modalities are currently under negotiation to: • manage markets; • construct and operate an abattoir; • construct and operate a solid waste composting and transfer station; • repair and maintain KMC's fleet of vehicles; • operate a trolley bus service, as an extension to the existing service; • construct and operate an underground car park and shopping centre in the heart of the city; and • construct and operate a cultural centre. |
Thus far, experience has been positive. Mutual confidence between the public and private sector is growing, and I anticipate that in the future more and more services will be managed as PPP ventures. I believe that the lessons learned in Kathmandu can be, and are being, applied elsewhere in Nepal, and are applicable to other countries in Asia. |
Keshav Sthapit, Mayor of Kathmandu Metropolitan City |