2010年-世界发展银行全球_City_Development_Strategy___Peshawar_Volume_2_Assessment_199页_10mb

Summary of City Development Strategy Peshawar

Core Content

The City Development Strategy (CDS) Peshawar outlines the challenges and opportunities in the development of Peshawar City District (PCD), focusing on the reorganization of local governance structures, institutional capacity, and the impact of devolution on municipal and sectoral functions. The strategy was developed in collaboration with the Cities Alliance, UNCHS, and the World Bank, aiming to improve governance, service delivery, and overall urban development in Peshawar.

Main Institutions and Structures

1. City District Government (CDG)

• Head of Government: The Nazim (Mayor) is the head of the City government.
• Legislative Arm: The District Assembly (DA) is the legislative body of the PCD, composed of the Nazims of all 92 Union Councils (UCs).
• Reserved Seats: 33% of seats are reserved for women, 5% for peasants/workers, and 5% for minorities.
• Total Seats: 132 in the PCD Assembly.
• Key Functions: Approving byelaws, taxation, development plans, and budgets; maintaining checks and balances over the executive; and electing oversight committees.

2. District Coordination Office (DCO)

• Role: Coordinates and supports all development agencies in the district and functions as the Secretariat for the District Nazim and the PCD Assembly.
• Functions:
  • Facilitates planning and budgeting.
  • Coordinates between the District and City governments.
  • Manages financial and administrative matters.
  • Supports HRD and monitoring and evaluation.
• Constraints: Limited capacity and resources, and a lack of formal support for the DCO's role.

3. Local Government Structures

• Union Councils (UCs): 92 UCs, each with 21 elected members, including the Union Nazim and Naib Nazim.
• Town Municipal Administration (TMA): Supports the elected Town Councils (TCs) in delivering municipal services.
• Town Councils (TCs): Represent the four towns of the PCD, with 33% of seats reserved for women and 5% for minorities and peasants/workers.
• New Agencies:
  • City Development and Municipal Department (CDMD): Responsible for macro-municipal services.
  • Local Government Commission (LGC): Oversees local governance.
  • Provincial Finance Commission (PFC): Manages financial matters at the provincial level.

4. Institutions of Law, Order, and Justice

• District Police: Part of the local governance structure, but with unclear mandates.
• Public Safety Commission (PSC): Elected by the DA, responsible for overseeing the District Police.
• Insaaf Committees and Musalhati Jirgas: Local mechanisms for dispute resolution.
• District Judiciary: Not clearly integrated with the DA.
• Challenges: Lack of coordination with the DA, weak oversight, and no formal mechanisms for integration with local institutions.

Key Challenges

• Weak Institutional Capacity: Many LG institutions lack the necessary systems, procedures, and awareness to effectively perform their functions.
• Resource Constraints: Limited financial and human resources hinder the ability of institutions to deliver services and manage responsibilities.
• Political Dynamics: The joint electoral ticket system for Nazim and Naib Nazim compromises the DA’s neutrality and ability to act as a watchdog.
• Marginalization of Certain Groups: Female, peasant/worker, and minority councilors feel underrepresented and lack support and privileges compared to other councilors.
• Unimplemented Devolution Provisions: Despite the LGO 2001, the devolution plan has not been fully operationalized, and many institutions remain underdeveloped.
• Lack of Coordination: There is no formal coordination mechanism between the PCD and provincial agencies, leading to inefficiencies and unclear roles.
• Inadequate Participation: Civil society organizations (CSOs) and the private sector have not been adequately integrated into the planning and decision-making processes.
• Institutional Conflicts: The devolution process has led to conflicts and competition for scarce municipal resources.

Devolution and Institutional Reforms

• The LGO 2001 marks a major shift towards decentralized governance, transferring many functions from the provincial to the district and local levels.
• Administrative Decentralization: Several provincial departments have been reorganized and decentralized to the district level, including the Works and Services (W&S) department.
• New Agencies: The creation of new institutions like the CDMD, LGC, and PFC is part of the devolution plan, but their roles and relationships with the PCD are still evolving.
• Grassroots Participation: The devolution plan aims to empower local communities through Citizens Community Boards (CCBs) and Neighborhood Councils (NCs), but these have not yet taken off due to lack of support and resources.

Institutional Weakness and Future Outlook

• Weak Governance: The PCD faces challenges in maintaining accountability, transparency, and effective service delivery.
• Need for Reform: Many institutions require urgent restructuring, review, and capacity building.
• Slow Implementation: The devolution process has been slow, with limited time allocated for preparation and many provisions not yet operationalized.
• Long-Term Process: Managing the transformation is expected to be a long and ongoing process, with the provincial government still playing a significant role in guiding the transition.

Conclusion

The CDS Peshawar highlights the need for strengthening local governance institutions, improving coordination between local and provincial bodies, and ensuring the inclusion of marginalized groups in decision-making processes. The strategy emphasizes the importance of community-based organizations and the role of the private sector in urban development, although these elements remain underdeveloped. The success of the devolution plan depends on addressing institutional weaknesses, enhancing capacities, and creating supportive frameworks for local governance.