2008年-世界发展银行全球_Exploring_Reform_Options_in_Functional_Assignment_81页_916kb

Summary of "EXPLORING REFORM OPTIONS IN FUNCTIONAL ASSIGNMENT" Final Report

Core Content

This report, prepared by Dr. Gabriele Ferrazzi in March 2008, examines the current framework of functional assignment in Indonesia and explores reform options to enhance its robustness, effectiveness, and stability. It outlines the challenges, issues, and opportunities for improving the distribution of functions between central and sub-national governments.

Main Findings

• Evolution of Functional Assignment: The framework has evolved through two reform rounds, becoming more detailed than many in developing and developed countries. It explicitly defines three modes of decentralization: devolved functions, agency tasks, and deconcentration tasks.
• Current Architecture: The framework is inconsistent in defining decentralization modes, particularly between constitutional, legal, and regulatory levels. There is confusion in funding and organizational structures, especially regarding the dual role of the governor.
• Legal Framework: The legal architecture for functional assignment is not well harmonized, leading to conflicts and ambiguity. There is a need for clearer legal definitions, especially in the organic law and government regulation (GR 38/2007).
• Financial Fit with Functions: The principle of "money follows functions" is not effectively implemented. There is a lack of alignment between the size of the General Allocation Fund (DAU) and Special Allocation Fund (DAK) with the actual cost of services. Minimum service standards (MSS) are not adequately costed or translated into expenditure norms.
• Criteria for Functional Assignment: While the criteria (externality, efficiency, accountability) are reasonable, they lack transparency and do not account for administrative capacity. Future applications should include detailed records of decisions.
• Concurrent Functions: The term "concurrent functions" is used in a way that differs from international practice, leading to potential misunderstandings. The report suggests either aligning with international standards or dropping the term.
• Formulation of Functions: The formulation of functions is weak, with ambiguous terms and lack of alignment with broader decentralization principles. Capacity building within the Ministry of Home Affairs (MoHA) is recommended.
• Obligatory Functions and Minimum Service Standards (MSS): While MSS has been clarified and socialized, there is still a lack of consensus on their scope and relation to obligatory functions (OF). Donor support for capacity building in this area is encouraged.
• Discretionary Functions: The current definition of discretionary functions does not align with international usage and is not effective in promoting regional autonomy. A more internationally recognized approach is recommended.
• Kecamatan Level Functions: The kecamatan level is underutilized and lacks clear guidance. Two options are proposed: maintaining the current system or granting kecamatan a more autonomous status.
• Village Level Functions: The village level has limited autonomy, with functions delegated by districts. Two options are suggested: maintaining the current model or expanding village autonomy through legal provisions.
• Organizational Expression: Current regulations restrict regional governments' ability to organize themselves. A new regulation (GR 41/2007) is unclear in balancing uniformity with local needs. Reorganization of ministries and clearer roles for deconcentrated units are needed.
• Special Regions: Aceh and Papua have special autonomy laws, but their functional provisions are unclear. There is a need to clarify how these laws interact with the general framework and to consider their implications for national unity.
• Territorial Divisions: There is concern that new or proposed regions may not be able to handle the functions assigned to districts/cities. Population limits may be necessary to ensure capacity. Special regions should be allowed to design their own territorial divisions.
• Process of Functional Assignment: The process has been inconsistent and poorly managed. A more systematic and inclusive approach is needed, involving a policy network of stakeholders and experts.

Key Recommendations

• Clarify Legal Framework: Amend the constitution and organic law to define decentralization modes and roles clearly, ensuring alignment with GR 38/2007.
• Strengthen Financial Alignment: Develop cost-based expenditure norms for MSS and ensure that donor funds are used in a way that respects functional assignments.
• Enhance Transparency: Create a record of decisions for functional assignment criteria to improve accountability.
• Reform Concurrent Functions: Either align with international definitions or remove the term to avoid confusion.
• Improve Function Formulation: Address ambiguities in terminology and ensure alignment with broader decentralization principles.
• Revise Discretionary Functions: Drop the current definition and adopt a more internationally recognized concept to support regional autonomy.
• Empower Kecamatan and Villages: Consider granting kecamatan and villages more autonomy or clearer mandates to improve service delivery.
• Support Reorganization: Encourage central government reorganization and clarify the roles of deconcentrated units and the governor.
• Develop Policy Networks: Establish a long-term policy network involving academics, researchers, and regional institutions to support sustainable reform.
• Evaluate Special Regions: Conduct a thorough evaluation of special regions like Aceh and Papua, with particular attention to their legal and territorial frameworks.

Implications for Donors

• Donors have supported various reform efforts, but their involvement has been inconsistent and fragmented.
• A more constant and pervasive approach is needed, including collaboration across donor agencies and sectoral projects.
• Donors should consider long-term investments in local policy networks to ensure sustainability and acceptability.
• Intermediaries, such as academics from favored institutions, may be useful in facilitating policy development, with donor support being hands-off and focused on capacity building.