Governance in the Rural Transport Sector

Download PDF
2 downloads 0 Views 1MB Size Report
Comment
governance in Pakistan especially focusing on the rural transport sector. This paper also ... Institutional framework for managing rural roads and transport sector .
TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITÄT MÜNCHEN

Beyond Roads : Governance in the Rural Transport Sector

Case study of Pakistan Raja Muhammad Nouman Amjad [email protected] 03646667

Abstract [The objective of this paper is to analyze the governance in the rural transport sector of Pakistan. The paper represents the broad overview of the structural arrangement of governance in Pakistan especially focusing on the rural transport sector. This paper also describes the problems which rural transport sector is facing after the devolution plan due to the non-compliance of key governance principles and their potential solutions considering the dynamic nature of governance with regard to configuration and objectives. Brief examples are also used for better understanding and strengthening of argument that how the key actors within the government can ensure the implementation of governance principles. There is a need to understand that governance is not simply dealing with the structure of government rather it’s a dynamic process acting as a steering force, creating a scenario of coordination and harmony among all the sectors of the country which are participating in country’s economic and social growth. The potential avenues for progress are presented in the last part of the paper considering the above mentioned fact about the governance.]

Contents 1 Introduction: Rural mobility in Pakistan .................................................................................... 3 2. Governance in the Rural Transport Sector and Core Governance Issues ............................. 4 2.1. Road development in Pakistan, a short overview ................................................................... 4 2.2 Financing of rural roads and its importance ............................................................................ 6 2.3. Institutional framework for managing rural roads and transport sector ............................ 7 2.3.1. Institutional framework and why it’s failing ........................................................................ 7 2.3.1.1. Weak institutions and ownership issues............................................................................. 9 2.3.1.3. Poor maintenance of present assets and no IMT ............................................................ 10 3.1. Not just roads: Improve transport services ........................................................................... 12 3.2 Improve stakeholders relationship and coordination ............................................................ 13 3.3. Public private partnership ...................................................................................................... 14 4. Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 16 Bibliography ........................................................................................................................................ 17

Figure 1 Development of Road Sector in Pakistan ............................................................................ 5 Figure 2 Local Governance System ..................................................................................................... 8 Figure 3 Map of Pakistan ................................................................................................................... 18

1 Introduction: Rural mobility in Pakistan Pakistan is located in south central Asia, bordered to the east, west, south and north by India, Afghanistan, Arabian Sea and China respectively (See annexes for map). About 70% of country’s active population is directly or indirectly related to the Agriculture thus making it an agriculture driven economy. The climatic and terrain variations in the different regions mark the variations in the types of crops grown, although the chief variation is due to the dry north and the wetter sub-tropical south. Agriculture contributes almost 21% to total GDP of the country, provides employment to the 45% population and also serves as input for agro based industry. (Khalid Zaman, 2012) In modern age, technology is imperative to every sector that is playing its part in country’s economic growth and agriculture is a pivotal pillar of Pakistan’s economy. So there is a need to accelerate the modernization of the agriculture by ensuring its linkage to the industry through the application of knowledge of Science, Technology and Innovation. Agricultural modernisation has long been pursued as a vital goal of Pakistan’s numerous policy statements. Indeed it has been categorically mentioned in the Five Years Pakistan Agricultural and Research Council plan (PARC) that improving technology and innovation is essential for achieving the broader goal of accelerating agricultural growth in order to meet the food security needs of the country. (Pakistan Agricultural Research Council (PARC), 2013, p. 1) One of the major dilemmas that the sector is facing is poor rather inferior transportation system. On a wider scale government is addressing the issue by ensuring the provision, development and maintenance of all types of transportation systems at affordable rates. The main aim is to improve the accessibility and connection of the rural production centres to the urban markets and vice versa.

However, despite these policy making and big statements, the ground reality tells us the different story that is no way near to the dreamed future and the stated primacies of the government, depicting a fine difference in the policies on paper and their implementation in reality. The aim of this paper is to focus on the governance in the rural transport sector of the country, majorly rural areas (to avoid conflict with other transportation related issues) by analysing the governance framework in the above mentioned context. This paper also gives a broad overview of roles, interests, relationships and influence of various stakeholders that affects the performance of sector itself. “Governance sometimes refers to coordination of a sector of the economy or of industry (Hollingsworth et al., 1994), and sometimes to the process through which a government seeks to proactively 'steer' the economy (Gamble, 2000). In either of' these manifestations, governance is still being considered in a dynamic man net seeking to understand how actors, public and private, control economic activities and produce desired outcomes”. (Peters, 2000, p. 23) Chapter 1 is for introduction that explains why the rural road sector is important for Pakistan’s economy and rural mobility. Chapter 2 deals with the financial management, intuitional and policy issues that affect the road sector of Pakistan’s rural areas in the governance context. Chapter 3 is for potential avenues of progress by considering the facts of improved accountability, cross sector linkage, Public-Private Partnerships and incentives for the increased involvement of the private sector.

2. Governance in the Rural Transport Sector and Core Governance Issues 2.1. Road development in Pakistan, a short overview The development of road network in Pakistan can be traced back to the British colonial period with most of the network serving the colonial interests. The major development in the road network was started in 1970 making it a backbone of the transport industry (figure 1). About 90% of the passenger traffic and 96% of freight movement is dependent on the road transport. Yet it is not sufficient for the fulfilment of the economic growth of the country because the

road density is just 0.32 km/sq. km which is on the low side as compared to the other countries with developed transport system. (Pakistan Economic Survey 2007-08, 2008)

Figure 1 Development of Road Sector in Pakistan (Pakistan Economic Survey 2007-08, 2008, p. 226)

The trend to develop highways and motorways has led to the ignorance of the other transportation modes vital for the sustainability, moreover the much required small road linkages to the rural areas are also not being prioritized by the governments and thus most of the rural areas lack links to the newly developed highways and motorways. According to the survey conducted in 2008 it is estimated that about 60-65% of the people living in the villages with agricultural areas have poor accessibility to the urban markets due to lack of availability of meaningful transportation system. The same survey reveals that one in every five villages composing of the 15% of the population is still not accessible by proper roads; most of the roads in rural areas are not paved and thus are not suitable for motorized vehicles, as a result the agriculture produce has to be transported on old means of transportation such as bullock and horse carts etc. The situation further aggravates by the lack of affordable transport service in three out of ten villages creating an environment of social, educational and political exclusion. (Essakali, December 2005)

2.2 Financing of rural roads and its importance Rural roads are often known as ‘step-child’ of infrastructure because rural roads get the least attention in the network. The financing problem often is the root cause of it and is closely related to the management and ownership issues in the context of governance. The trend of building urban highways and motorways while giving less low priority to rural roads in terms of funding has been a particular challenge for political electorate and policy makers. The allocation of funds for the development and maintenance of rural roads are often traded off with the other projects due to the budget constraints. Moreover, lack of decision making tools within the government departments, absence of public-private partnerships, no prioritization and inefficient monitoring tends to worsen the case of management of funds for rural road sector. This involves two core issues of the governance. 1) Maintenance of rural roads and their ranking according to their importance 2) Management and allocation of adequate funding Unnecessary political interference and misuse of power by the bureaucracy at district level is the main cause of the first issue. As mentioned earlier the funds for the road sector are mostly used for other purposes. Furthermore, in areas where the funds are correctly used for the development of rural roads the output is far from desirable because of a number of factors which include lack of understanding of the dynamics of the situation, corruption at various levels of the administrative hierarchy, venality in tender awarding process . Moreover integration of transport sector with others is not a common practice in rural areas of Pakistan and an absence of holistic, transparent and multi-disciplinary planning process further deteriorates the situation. There is a serious need to carter this situation because the lack of integration is not only causing harm to the economy but also results in serious accessibilityi issues.

“Rural roads are the wealth of nations, a tool for social inclusion, economic development and environmental sustainability. If rural access is an indicator of poverty, then rural roads management may be a measure of governance”. (Plessis-Fraissard, 2011) 2.3. Institutional framework for managing rural roads and transport sector Before understanding the institutional frameworkii for rural roads and transport sector it is important to highlight the key governance principles in this context established by the government (past and present) and quoted in numerous reforms time and again. The principles are decentralization of power, bottom up approach for better accountability, maintenance of existing assets, responsiveness to public demand and integration of transport sector with others. These principles are universal but their implementation in Pakistan has never been successful specially when considering the rural transport sector. Many government plans were devised to address the issue of poor accessibility in rural areas but none of them could be implemented successfully due to lack of vision and knowledge with regards to the actual needs of the people living in the rural areas. The 2001 devolution plan was a historic step in Governance history of Pakistan which allowed the transfer of power along with management and ownership of the rural roads to the district government but even after 14 years the plan is still facing serious problems majorly due to financial and technical constraints. 2.3.1. Institutional framework and why it’s failing The highways are maintained by NHA (National Highway Authority), urban roads are managed by urban development authorities (C&W, LDA, CDAiii etc.) but when it comes to the rural roads sector no separate specialized department is made for it as in the case of urban roads and motorways. The development of rural roads is associated with “works and services” department which is often under budgeted and has to face a lot of other issues related to energy crisis and housing projects. Before the devolution plan communication and works department was responsible for the execution and maintenance of buildings, rural roads and other infrastructure. After the devolution workload was transferred to the district level partly and

partly remains with the provincial government. Under this plan EDO (Executive District Officer) is the head of “works and services” department (see figure 2) and he and his department is responsible for housing projects, energy development, transportation projects, roads and buildings rehabilitation. The local governance structure of Pakistan is given in figure 2. For detail of each department and its role see SNBP local government ordinance 2001iv.

Figure 2 Local Governance System (ANJUM, 2001) & (The SBNP District Government (Model) Rules of Business, 2001)

According to the study conducted by Japan Bank for International Cooperation in 2004 it has been estimated that there are around 50,000 km of irrigation department inspection paths and most of them are not opened to public. The 2001 devolution plan handed over the powers of

management and ownership of intra-district roads to local authorities but plan was never implemented due to the instability of economic conditions of the country, bureaucratic influence and inefficiency particularly in terms of education of local electorates. “Traditionally, planning for rural transport in Pakistan has been a top-down process managed by a conservative core of engineers in which the main decision making inputs have to come from local politicians and elites” (Essakali, December 2005). 2.3.1.1. Weak institutions and ownership issues One of the biggest flaws in 2001 devolution plan is its sudden imposition without proper preparations and study. Absence of any sort of role model in the past and a sudden shift of transport management to the local authorities, under-developed private sector and nonmobilized communities hassled to inefficient development of transportation system in rural areas of Pakistan. Ownership issues were always in the lime light in the early stages of the post devolution. There were some road classes in various areas (especially in the province of Sindh) which had no clear owner after the devolution. The evolving post devolution set up has led to unclear management responsibilities, diffused accountability and fragmented intuitional roles, neglecting the dynamics of the transport sector with no sole responsible institution having the clear overall picture of the ground reality. (Essakali, December 2005) In Pakistan culture and geography varies immensely within its five provinces. The province of Sindh and Baluchistan traditionally inherited the culture of Feudal Lords and despite of Government efforts and reforms the culture still remains intact in various areas. This has led to serious land dispute issues after devolution plan and has become a constraint in the development of transport infrastructure in those areas.

2.3.1.2. Lack of public participation Public participation is a key to success for any infrastructural project and an important pillar of governance. Lack of communication between the elected member of the parliament, Zila Nazim (Mayor) and its electorate is one of the biggest issues of less public participation in Pakistan. The scenario is worse in rural areas, deteriorating the decentralization process itself and consequently the whole idea of transferring of power to the grass root level is not able to serve its purpose. In most of the cases local communities indicate that their representatives were not able to convey to them any information about the future projects and their impacts. Moreover, in rural sectors of Pakistan the concept of Public Participation is a complex issue especially on district levels. The poor literacy rate accompanied by the conservative thinking, less women empowerment and feudal system never allowed this vital principle of governance to blossom in rural areas of Pakistan, depicting the clear absence of transparency and public participation in the decision making process. “The development of an integrated urban development concept these days without the mobilisation of participants in the realm of civil society is just as unimaginable as a lack of involvement of the affected parties during urban renewal processes”. (Frank, 2011)

2.3.1.3. Poor maintenance of present assets and no IMT Poor agency accountability, inadequate maintenance of assets and under budgeting remained one of the biggest issues in Pakistan rural transport development history. District councils have failed to manage the funds needed for maintenance mainly due to corruption and futile maintenance policy. According to one of the study conducted by international team (which team, please mention or say a team of international experts) it has been found that Pakistan only spent 1.5 to 2 percent of their investment cost for maintenance of rural road network that is below par according to any other country. (Essakali, December 2005).

Box 1 A case of Muzaffargarh City In Muzaffargarh, a small city in south Punjab, local authorities have recognized intermediate means of transport and its value for rural/village areas. In 2009, a city district Government provided funds for wheel barrows, carts and 3 wheelers (known as rickshaws, operating on CNG) in rural areas on the subsequent plea of locally elected member and its electorate. Significant improvements have been observed within 2 years in village transport. A survey was conducted by a team of graduates dealing with the subject of rural development in Pakistan in 2011 to assess the situation and it has been observed that accessibility issue has been significantly improved. The rough increase of 20% has been found in school going children especially girls along with the increase in accessibility to the health care and markets. (City District Goverment Muzaffargarh and Gender Studies department PU, 2011)

Beside these factors poor construction techniques, inadequate regulations and no intermediate means of transportation are also the main causes for weak governance for rural transport sector in Pakistan. Although there is still a wide room for improvement but this example shows us that how government policies, positive interference, public participation and better understanding of the situation contributes to the prosperity of the local people. This could be taken as the role model for the different rural areas of Pakistan with slight modifications according to the need but sadly even after 6 years, despite its success in Muzaffargarh, other areas were not able to follow the footprints and the main reasons for that are same as mentioned above with corruption and non-compliance of Governance principles as the core issues.

3. Potential Avenues for Progress and Recommendations The following section of the paper deals with the potential recommendations to address the above mentioned core governance issues in Pakistan’s rural transport sector. 3.1. Not just roads: Improve transport services “It is not just the amount of transportation infrastructure that is imposing, it is its diversity, the ways in which it is used, and public attitudes towards it” (Button, 2006). According to a report published by CIET 49.4% of the population in Pakistan was dissatisfied by the roads and 7.8% have no access to road. (Anne cockcroft, 2004). According to the GIS analysis only 30% of rural population in Pakistan lives within 3-4 km of major roads that can be used for communication and delivering of products produced by agriculture to the market. Considering the fact that every one out of five villages have no accessibility to roads and total number of villages are 198,000, almost 4000 villages have no access to roads, while others have poor connections, thus it can simply be concluded that transportation infrastructure is direly needed in those areas. To improve the road accessibility to the agricultural lands in rural areas requires infrastructure but as we are aware of the fact only infrastructure provision is not enough because it is not a sustainable solution. Just by providing roads where needed with no other measures will not do any good in improving the mobility index in rural areas of Pakistan. In fact mobility needs an appropriate combination and balance between necessary infrastructure and improved transport facilities at affordable rates. IMT is this regard is the best example which needs to be implemented in other rural areas of Pakistan. So rather than simple expansion of road system, due importance should be given to develop various other means of transport (public and private) for ensuring the provision of significant social and economic benefits to the rural population.

3.2 Improve stakeholders relationship and coordination “What determines the importance of stakeholder-organization relationships? The notion of “paying attention to key stakeholder relationships”. (Freeman, 1999, p. 235) The devolution plan has significant effects on the roles and relationship among the different stakeholders in the context of governance. After the devolution plan and decentralization of power the roles of different sectors have changed and accountability criterion between the districts, provincial and federal government are reshaping since then. But as mentioned earlier the plan is still facing problems especially regarding ownership and accountability criteria. At present, the sector is in the state of confusion because some roads come under the domain of both the provisional and district government thus not enabling district government to play its part efficiently and in some cases both governments are in the state of denial regarding the ownership. Besides ownership issues the relationship between the stakeholders especially between the Nazim (Politically elected Head of Tehsil/District) and DCO who is the administrative head of the District (District Co-ordination Officer,) are often the bone of contention. This also applies to the transportation and road sector in which political head and administration are not on the same platform in most of the instances. In many cases the funds issued by the district government to the Tehsil (sub-division of a district) for infrastructure and maintenance were ill-used and in other cases funds were never released by the administration due to the conflicts between the Tehsil and district. This often causes the manipulation and misuse of power followed by political campaigns against administration whereas the administration uses its bureaucratic influence threatening the whole system to collapse. The relation between the district and Tehsil needs to be improved. There should be a third party accountability system for better relationship between the sectors. For any foreign funded programs joint venture system, consisting of the member committee of each sector should be

made. Citizen participation especially women should be encouraged in decision making process as they constitutes the large proportion of the population and play a very significant role in agriculture development of the country. Engineering core should be free from any bureaucratic and political influence so that they can work independently according to the design and construction standards. It does not matter how good a policy and a system is on paper until and unless the participants and the stakeholders play their part effectively and the relationship between them is sustainable. The importance of stakeholders and their relationship is very well summarized by Ban Ki Moon (Secretary-General of the United Nations) “Building sustainable cities - and a sustainable future - will need open dialogue among all branches of national, regional and local government. And it will need the engagement of all stakeholders - including the private sector and civil society, and especially the poor and marginalized”. (Quoted from Ban KiMoon: United Nations Secretary-General (Modern World Leaders by Rebecca Aldridge)

3.3. Public private partnership Describing the importance of private sector in infrastructure growth, John Watts, British Minister for Railways and Roads (1995) said “There is growing recognition across the political spectrum that we must mobilise the resources of the private sector if we are to build the transport infrastructure of the 21st century. To rely on the already over-burdened public purse...will mean serious delays." Quotation Source (M J Witkiss, 1999, p. 4) Trend towards privatization and awarding of contracts to private contractors and consultants will create opportunities for private sector growth and involvement. But mostly these opportunities are short lived because they are created by donor-funded programmes and once the work is completed the labour based companies need to wait a long time for any future opportunity. Government have to play its part to strengthen the private sector to ensure the long term feasibility of road construction and maintenance. Build-Own-Transfer/Build-Own-

Operate-Transfer (BOOT) or Design-Build-Finance-Operate (DBFO) contracts can be useful in such cases.

Box 2 Learning from neighbours-An example of India Pakistan and India share almost the same geographical conditions along with other similarities especially in agricultural areas. India and Pakistan are facing the same problems in rural transport sector and about two decades ago the conditions in Indian and Pakistani rural areas were same. Lack of infrastructure, governance issues and mismanagement of resources were the most highlighted issues. But now the conditions are changing in India as Indian government has started paying their heed towards rural sector along with the other issues. Bharat Nirman Plan was set up to deal with the issue of building infrastructure in Agricultural areas of India. Under this plan National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NARBAD) had set up Rural Infrastructure and Development Fund (RIDF) in 1995. The main aim of this fund is to provide low cost funds to governments to commence the infrastructure projects in rural areas of India. But this has been done along with assuring the application of public-private partnership model to increase the private sector participation and creating the sense of ownership among them. Since then there are 758 public-private partnership projects amounting to $320 billion were approved by the government. Clive Harris, an infrastructure specialist at World Bank sustainable development department has declared India as the leading South Asian country in which private sector is contributing to the economic growth of the country. NARBAD along with other commercial banks have insured the development of Indian Rural Sector by successful implementation of public-private partnership model.

Source: (Raphael, 2012)

Pakistan should learn from its neighbours and have to rethink its policy of ignoring Private sector in the development of rural areas not only because it bridges the gap between private and public sector but also between rural and urban areas.

4. Conclusion Understanding the dynamics of the governance is as important as understanding the dynamics of transport or any other sector. Plans, policies, stakeholders etc. all are the actors’ defining, shaping, making and affecting the governance process itself. The misfortune with the Pakistan’s rural transport sector is its noncompliance with the governance principles in structure and also in process. Polices and plans were devised but were never implemented effectively due to the non-comprehension of the dynamic nature of governance. Rural transport sector can’t be improved without improving the relationship between the various stakeholders, citizen partnership, finance management, integration of sectors and incentives to private sector through public-private partnership, which are now the part and parcel of sustainable governance. I would like to conclude my paper on the statement from the book “Governance, Politics and State” by Pierre and Peters “The creation of a more participatory style of governing does not mean that government is in reality less powerful. It does mean, however; that state and society are bonded together in the process of creating governance. If anything, the state actually may be strengthened through its interactions with society. The state may have to abdicate some aspects of its nominal control over policy, especially at the formulation stage of the process. On the other hand, it tends to gain substantial control at the implementation stage by having in essence coopted social interests that might otherwi.sc oppose its actions. The ultimate effect may be to create a government that understands better the limits of its actions and which can work effectively within those parameters” (Peters, 2000, p. 49)

Bibliography ANJUM, Z. H. (2001). New Local Government System: A Step Towards Community Empowerment? Anne cockcroft, N. a. (2004). Social audit of Governance and delivery of public services in Pakistan. CIET organization. Button, K. (2006). Transportation and Infrastructure. In J. P. B Guy Peters, Handbook of Public Policies. SAGE publications Ltd. City District Goverment Muzaffargarh and Gender Studies department PU. (2011). Women Empowerment in rural areas of muzaffargarh . Compare Infobase Ltd. (2015, March 17). Maps of the world. Retrieved from http://www.mapsofworld.com/pakistan/ Essakali, M. D. (December 2005). Rural Access and Mobility in Pakistan: A policy note. WASHINGTON, DC: THE WORLD BANK, WASHINGTON, DC. European Commission . (2015). Summaries of EU legislation . Retrieved from http://europa.eu/scadplus/glossary/single_institutional_framework_en.htm Frank, F. (2011). Public Participation in Urban Development Projects – A German Prospective. Public Private Partnerships in Planning and Land Development I. Freeman, R. (1999). Divergent stakeholder theory. Academy of Management Review, 24, 233-236. Khalid Zaman, M. M. (2012). The relationship between agricultural technology and energy demand in Pakistan. Energy Policy, 268-279. M J Witkiss, J. L. (1999). Public Private partnerships and the provision of rural transport services in developing countries . Transport Research Foundation Group of Companies. Pakistan Agricultural Research Council (PARC). (2013). Five Years PARC Business Plan (2013-18). Islamabad, Pakistan: Planning & Development Division (P&DD). Retrieved from http://www.parc.gov.pk/files/parc_pk/BP_FINAL-22-10-13.pdf Pakistan Economic Survey 2007-08. (2008). Ministry of Transport and Communications. Islamabad: Ministry of Finance Pakistan. Retrieved from http://finance.gov.pk/survey/chapters/14transport%20final08.pdf Peters, P. a. (2000). Different ways of Thinking Governance. In P. a. Peters, Governance,politics and the state. Plessis-Fraissard, M. (2011). Rural roads important to global development. Retrieved from World Highway website by Route One Publising Ltd: http://www.worldhighways.com/EasySiteWeb/HandleRequest/sections/worldreports/features/rural-roads-important-to-global-development/

Raphael, L. M. (2012, December). ROLE OF PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS IN RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE IN INDIA. Retrieved from http://www.mbaskool.com/businessarticles/finance/5513-role-of-public-private-partnerships-in-rural-infrastructure-inindia.html The SBNP District Government (Model) Rules of Business. (2001). Pakistan. Retrieved March 11 , 2015, from http://www.dtce.org.pk/DTCE/Data/Resources/SBNP_Local_Govt_Ordinance_2001.pdf

Annexes

Figure 3 Map of Pakistan (Compare Infobase Ltd, 2015) i

Accessibility to the health cares, schools, vet nary centres etc. The systems of formal laws, regulations, and procedures, and informal conventions, customs, and norms, that shape socioeconomic activity and behaviour (European Commission , 2015) iii Lahore development authority, Capital development authority) iv Sind/Balochistan/North-West Frontier/Punjab(SNBP) http://www.dtce.org.pk/DTCE/Data/Resources/SBNP_Local_Govt_Ordinance_2001.pdf ii